He scored but apart from that he didn't do much

[horsechoker]

Are modern fans too cynical now?

Complaints like these seem to be common place on here. Do footballers have to play excellently in all aspects to avoid criticism?

Have fans always nitpicked or is this something recent?

 

[Acrobat7]

Don’t we already have enough Ronaldo threads?

 

[horsechoker]

Don’t we already have enough Ronaldo threads?

Apart from those have we talked about him enough?

 

[Spoony]

No. It's something that was always levelled at Lineker, thesedsays it seems to be Cristiano Ronaldo. Oh shit another C Ronaldo thread.

 

[DWelbz19]

The chad G/A appreciator vs the virgin Eye Test fan

 

[Lay]

From what i recall, poachers always got criticism. Inzaghi was constantly criticised for doing feck all but scoring

 

[horsechoker]

No. It's something that was always levelled at Lineker, thesedsays it seems to be Cristiano Ronaldo. Oh shit another C Ronaldo thread.

Not just CR7 but also gets thrown at Rashford, Bruno, Cavani, Messi, Lukaku, Kane.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Pippo Inzaghi

 

[Pogue Mahone]

From what i recall, poachers always got criticism. Inzaghi was constantly criticised for doing feck all but scoring

Gah. Beaten to it by seconds!

 

[Plant0x84]

I’d say yes, absolutely they are. There seems to be an expectation that ever player has to have a flawless match every game and that’s just not realistic. It’s as if some forget the players are human, and usually quite young too.
There’s also no time for ‘he need to work on this aspect of his game’ or ‘he needs to improve here’ only for ‘he’s shite, sell him/sack him/kill him’. It’s ridiculous and gets very tiresome.

 

[Schmeichel's Cartwheel]

If anything it’s the opposite. Ronaldo did nothing all tournament but scored 3 pens & granted 1 very good goal against Hungary and everyone has been talking about him being great.

Rashford drops horrible performances on a weekly basis but might pop up with a goal & you see people putting him in team of the season.

 

[Dancfc]

It's because having a striker who does little all round work or worse effectively playing with ten men for 89 minutes is detrimental to a team even if he scores in the other minute. Even more so now given most managers rely on heavy duty off the ball work.

There's a decent portion of examples of teams improving once they drop/sell their fox in the box type player (United/RVN, Bayern/Gomez the two prime examples).

 

[Spoony]

Not just CR7 but also gets thrown at Rashford, Bruno, Cavani, Messi, Lukaku, Kane.

Not sure about the ones you've mentioned. Inzaghi was another though.

 

[Selbourne]

Hello there you Lukaku followers

 

[Spoony]

Pippo Inzaghi

You beat me!

 

[tomaldinho1]

Just agenda posters who want to 'prove' something that can't ever be proven - you can always downplay or hype up a footballer's contributions given they can never do everything themselves. Tends to spill into the Ronaldo/Messi threads more than most which, when you think about it, is crazy given the success they have had means it's more ridiculous to try and downplay it.

I'd also question how much any of us posters really understand a strikers' role in a team - half the caf seems to think that running a lot means a striker presses well but the striker who doesn't waste his energy when there's no point but scores more is somehow the inferior player...Inzaghi is the perfect example, his role was essentially to beat the offside trap and finish off moves in the box and he was an absolute goal machine but apparently that counts against him.

 

[Bole Top]

it depends on whether the team suffered from his overall shit/silent game more than they gained from that single goal.

put it like this:

"he scored but missed 5 great chances so now we're out on aggregate"

I mean, it's possible to somehow score in the end while ruining every attack for 90 minutes. Lukaku and Rashford were often criticized here because of that.

 

[horsechoker]

Just agenda posters who want to 'prove' something that can't ever be proven - you can always downplay or hype up a footballer's contributions given they can never do everything themselves. Tends to spill into the Ronaldo/Messi threads more than most which, when you think about it, is crazy given the success they have had means it's more ridiculous to try and downplay it.

I'd also question how much any of us posters really understand a strikers' role in a team - half the caf seems to think that running a lot means a striker presses well but the striker who doesn't waste his energy when there's no point but scores more is somehow the inferior player...Inzaghi is the perfect example, his role was essentially to beat the offside trap and finish off moves in the box and he was an absolute goal machine but apparently that counts against him.

There are some set-ups that require the striker to do more than finish but in the right set-up the striker can have fewer responsibilities.

Moreover if the team aren't creating, the striker has to either drop deeper to try and make things happen or wait for a chance to come his way.

We see this happen with the likes of Kane who drops deep and ends up in the wrong places on the pitch for England.

I suppose there are the Firmino and Benezema types who don't score a lot but do a lot for the team.

 

[Eugenius]

RvN vs Henry

 

[altodevil]

Only morons boil ability down to goal-scoring. You can't quantify how many potential goals were lost by playing a tap-in poacher over a hardworking creative player.

 

[Wedge]

If the striker is scoring and winning us games I couldn't care less.

 

[JPRouve]

There are some set-ups that require the striker to do more than finish but in the right set-up the striker can have fewer responsibilities.

Moreover if the team aren't creating, the striker has to either drop deeper to try and make things happen or wait for a chance to come his way.

We see this happen with the likes of Kane who drops deep and ends up in the wrong places on the pitch for England.

I suppose there are the Firmino and Benezema types who don't score a lot but do a lot for the team.

Do these set ups lead to consistent team success? Or just the individual success of the striker?

 

[Adam-Utd]

Depends really.

If he did nothing all game then scored a goal out of nothing then it's worth it.

If he did nothing all game then scored a tap in 2 yards out and didn't help the team since - no that's not really worth it.

Obviously scoring goals in football is the most important thing, but if the poacher types aren't getting chances then you'd be better off with somebody more involved.

 

[FrankDrebin]

Immobelle seems to be getting a fair amount of praise recently and fair play because he deserves it but he doesn't necessarily involve himself in the teamplay or build up of Italy's attacks.

Same as Lukaku.
He's there to be a focal point of Belgium's attack. Keep the back four on their toes by being a ever presence uptop and stretching them about.
And to be honest I don't want Lukaku involved in the build-up of a attack if he were asked to come deeper.

I wish Kane would stick to being a forward who cuts down on coming deep for example.

 

[Paul_Scholes18]

My dad really dislike Cavani for doing nothing apart from scoring. Although I personally like his movements that open up space for himself and others.

 

[Ronaldo's ego]

You can’t love this version of Ronaldo and bash Lukaku.

 

[Withnail]

My dad really dislike Cavani for doing nothing apart from scoring. Although I personally like his movements that open up space for himself and others.

Cavani's all round game and link up play is generally good, isn't it?

 

[Spoony]

Cavani's all round game and link up play is generally good, isn't it?

Yes.

 

[Rado_N]

My dad really dislike Cavani for doing nothing apart from scoring. Although I personally like his movements that open up space for himself and others.

That’s an absolutely mental take from your old man.

 

[Fortitude]

I hope the irony of this thread is not lost as RVN was moved along to make way for Ronaldo's growth for the same reason as Ronaldo is criticised now for being a forward who <insert OP>.

The Lion King foresaw this. The Circle Of Life is complete!

 

[Physiocrat]

Some have mentioned RVN here now whilst he didn't do that much on his own he held the ball up well and linked with the rest of the team. Someone like Inzaghi on the other hand wasn't very good at that and could only score and be offside.

 

[horsechoker]

I hope the irony of this thread is not lost as RVN was moved along to make way for Ronaldo's growth for the same reason as Ronaldo is criticised now for being a forward who <insert OP>.

The Lion King foresaw this. The Circle Of Life is complete!

The thing is Madrid moved him on and haven't replaced him properly, people are also saying the same about Portugal but is there someone to replace him? (Bruno? Jota?)

It worked out for us with RVN because we had a future Balon d'or winner waiting in the wings, other times teams get rid of a star and don't replace their contribution

 

[Spoony]

RVN was far more involved after his first season. His link up play outside the box was very good.

 

[tomaldinho1]

There are some set-ups that require the striker to do more than finish but in the right set-up the striker can have fewer responsibilities.

Moreover if the team aren't creating, the striker has to either drop deeper to try and make things happen or wait for a chance to come his way.

We see this happen with the likes of Kane who drops deep and ends up in the wrong places on the pitch for England.

I suppose there are the Firmino and Benezema types who don't score a lot but do a lot for the team.

Exactly - it's all about team setup and it's almost counter intuitive but the less a striker like Kane is involved, the more dangerous they normally are. Kane comes too deep for England but then we have no one as out and out rapid as Son (maybe Rashford but he doesn't start) so he really needs to stay further forward.

I hope the irony of this thread is not lost as RVN was moved along to make way for Ronaldo's growth for the same reason as Ronaldo is criticised now for being a forward who <insert OP>.

The Lion King foresaw this. The Circle Of Life is complete!

He was moved on because he was causing off field issues but Ronaldo wasn't competing for his position. RVN actually did a lot off the ball for us but he wanted wingers who would deliver into the box and the game was moving on, don't think it really works as a comparison here.

 

[Vidyoyo]

Thing you have to remember about the caf (and everywhere else tbh) is that you only get responses if you say something:

1 - Funny
2 - Controversial

So the more controversial the better, I'm afraid.

And anything humorously controversial gets bonus points.

 

[horsechoker]

Thing you have to remember about the caf (and everywhere else tbh) is that you only get responses if you say something:

1 - Funny
2 - Controversial

"why would you say something so controversial, yet so brave?"

 

[Vidyoyo]

"why would you say something so controversial, yet so brave?"

Stop. I'm trying to impress Pogue

 

[Fortitude]

The thing is Madrid moved him on and haven't replaced him properly, people are also saying the same about Portugal but is there someone to replace him? (Bruno? Jota?)

It worked out for us with RVN because we had a future Balon d'or winner waiting in the wings, other times teams get rid of a star and don't replace their contribution

I personally don't think there's an issue with how Ronaldo plays, he's just a generic forward now, but it means other parts of the team have to take on his workload and supply him. There's nothing particularly wrong with that, but it doesn't fit with most modern concepts where it's probably even preferred to have a forward who can do everything but score (let's use Firminho as an example), over a forward who can't do much but score. Portugal don't have great forwards to pick from so they should adapt and modify to what they have and work out how to better utilise him whilst he's still a top class forward.

Btw, another example of splendid cohesion vs. raw goal output would be the old Saha vs Ruud discussion. In that instance, I think most are going to go the Saha route for the benefit of the whole than the Ruud one, so it is a circumstantial discussion, really.

 

[Stacks]

Only morons boil ability down to goal-scoring. You can't quantify how many potential goals were lost by playing a tap-in poacher over a hardworking creative player.

Who said any goals are lost? There are so many phases to getting a goal that its pointless to quantify something that you cannot even begin to calculate.

 

[Spoony]

He struggled with Ronaldo but most strikers would have said the same...they prefer playing with players who will always be consistent, at that time Cristiano must been a nightmare to play with, those bizarre stepovers and what not made it impossible to time runs.