Hazard has never had a season as productive as Sterling's, and he has been part of title winning squads.This is just utterly ridiculous.
Sterling is great and has become one of the top 5 attacking players in the Prem alongside Salah,Aguero and Kane but Hazard is still number 1
I wasn't necessarily saying that scoring tap-ins is a bad thing, more so highlighting that without the Sterling stimulus package Kane would be returning from the international break dry. I mean, he's even getting charitable penalty donations. I'm sure he'll be renewing his subscription.If scoring tap ins is padding numbers we can remove a great deal of Sterling's then, can't we?
Every other goal he scores is a tap in.
Think this is a tough one. Sterling has improved a lot under Pep and has become ridiculously good, especially in terms of movement.Hazard has never had a season as productive as Sterling's, and he has been part of title winning squads.
Sterling has been better this season, but I agree if you take into consideration Kane's consistency over the last 4-5 years I would find it difficult to rate Sterling above Kane.I haven't signed into RedCafe for a while, so just seeing some posts.
Raheem Sterling is not better than Harry Kane, no way. Kane is a better, more effective, more consistent, more reliable footballer. Ask any manager in world football who they would prefer in their team.
Hazard has never had a season as productive as Sterling's, and he has been part of title winning squads.
I wasn't necessarily saying that scoring tap-ins is a bad thing, more so highlighting that without the Sterling stimulus package Kane would be returning from the international break dry. I mean, he's even getting charitable penalty donations. I'm sure he'll be renewing his subscription.
Sterling's statistics were pisspoor before last season and Pep Guardiola.Hazard has never had a season as productive as Sterling's, and he has been part of title winning squads.
So Kane is out here mooching off of Sterling, you mention one decent pass to Sancho and all of a sudden “neither is totally outperforming the other”? More damage control and creative writing. Good to see you back on your job.Kane is dropping very deep for England right now and actually playing a pretty selfless role, just like vs. Spain where he was MOTM despite not scoring. His performances have been excellent.
How about when Kane played a defence splitting pass vs the Czech Republic, allowing Sancho to tap it across for an easy Sterling goal?
Right now they're both complimenting each other excellently .. Neither is totally outperforming the other.
Young player in consistency shocker? Who would have thought!Sterling's statistics were pisspoor before last season and Pep Guardiola.
Replace Hazard by Sterling in that Chelsea team and It's a miracle if he hits 10 goals 10 assists.
Hazard on that City team on the other hand? He'd be setting some records.
So when other players do it, it's their credit, when Sterling does it, it's “the system!! The system!!!!”? What is it then, oochie wally wally or is it one mic?Comparisons with Hazard are too much. Yeah he's more productive but that's due to the system he's playing in. How often do you see Sterling arriving at the back post for a tap in that someone else created? Whereas with Hazard he's dropping deep/wide to find the ball and try and make something happen because no one else on the team is capable of creating anything. He's also singled out by the opposition with teams often putting 2 men on him at all times while Sterling is afforded the luxury of more space due to the fact you can't try and single out any one City player due to the attacking talent they have on the pitch at all times.
Sterling isn't even the best player in Manchester never mind the entire league. He is a great player though, no doubt about it.
Nothing ridiculous about it.This is just utterly ridiculous.
Sterling is great and has become one of the top 5 attacking players in the Prem alongside Salah,Aguero and Kane but Hazard is still number 1
It works both ways.Comparisons with Hazard are too much. Yeah he's more productive but that's due to the system he's playing in. How often do you see Sterling arriving at the back post for a tap in that someone else created? Whereas with Hazard he's dropping deep/wide to find the ball and try and make something happen because no one else on the team is capable of creating anything. He's also singled out by the opposition with teams often putting 2 men on him at all times while Sterling is afforded the luxury of more space due to the fact you can't try and single out any one City player due to the attacking talent they have on the pitch at all times.
Sterling isn't even the best player in Manchester never mind the entire league. He is a great player though, no doubt about it.
So Kane is out here mooching off of Sterling, you mention one decent pass to Sancho and all of a sudden “neither is totally outperforming the other”? More damage control and creative writing. Good to see you back on your job.
Yeah, get the ball to Hazard mostly in deep areas where he still has a ton of work to do.It works both ways.
You could say Hazard benefits from Chelseas system i,e get the ball to Hazard.
Not sure about that point. City's tactics is such that the goal threat comes from everywhere and no single player is likely to have exceptional stats like say Salah last season. Even Aguero might fail to reach 35 goals despite City being on course to 170 goals in all compets. In contrast, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal and Chelsea are quite dependent on 2-3 goalscorers, almost everything goes through Liverpool's front 3 or Kane and Son or Hazard. City are not like this. Therefore, to explain Sterling's stats with City's system might be misleading.Yeah, get the ball to Hazard mostly in deep areas where he still has a ton of work to do.
There's no chance in hell Sterling would have the same stats playing for Chelsea with Jorginho/Kante/Kovacic/Willian/Pedro. None whatsoever.
Playing alongside genuine top class creative and attacking players can only boost a player stats wise. Hazard benefits in that he's able to shine on the ball more side he's given more of a burden than Sterling, but that's it.
Sterling's movement off the ball is exceptional (best in the league IMO) so he benefits hugely from the fact that City have so many players capable of picking him out and also providing world class runs. It's so hard to pick up any one player because they're all sensational off the ball.
If he played for Chelsea he would get man marked, picked out far less often, and as a result he simply wouldn't score or assist as much. He'd see more of the ball but he's not exactly much of a threat from outside the box and the Hazard role wouldn't suit him.
Yet here you are typing damage control dissertations and fiction novels because the harsh reality is stressing you out.You're so far up Sterling's arse that you've reached a point where it's absolutely pointless debating the subject with you. It's tiresome.
Kane played very well in both qualifying games, anybody with eyes could see that. Vs the Czech Republic he was our biggest creative outlet all game and his hold up play was invaluable and allowed Sancho/Sterling to make clever runs either side of him.
But yeah whatever he was 'mooching' and that's it. And his goal was an easy tap in whereas Sterling's deflected goal and tap in of his own were works of total genius.
Both have been very good in qualifiers, but yes Sterling has stood out the most in both games. He's been excellent, if he can take this form to tournaments all the better for England to have two top class attackers.
By the way, basically all football journalists/pundits have been praising the selfless role Kane has been playing and how his quality has allowed him to do it flawlessly. But yeah, totally mooching and not playing a very important role.
You're making equally large posts about a player who doesn't even play for the club you support. Well played.Yet here you are typing damage control dissertations and fiction novels because the harsh reality is stressing you out.
Media praising poster boy Harry Kane?! you don’t say. Mooching off of the Sterling stimulus package has bountiful benefits.
Aguero's goal/game ratio is the best in the league. Get rid of his injury issues and he would smash in 40+ a season. An individual in that City team could absolutely have an extraordinary goal scoring season.Not sure about that point. City's tactics is such that the goal threat comes from everywhere and no single player is likely to have exceptional stats like say Salah last season. Even Aguero might fail to reach 35 goals despite City being on course to 170 goals in all compets. In contrast, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal and Chelsea are quite dependent on 2-3 goalscorers, almost everything goes through Liverpool's front 3 or Kane and Son or Hazard. City are not like this. Therefore, to explain Sterling's stats with City's system might be misleading.
Salah alone contributed to 50% of Liverpool's league goals last season, this could never happen at this City team, goals are more evenly spread out. City have the most creative team in the league and yet Aguero have scored fewer goals from open play than Mane who isn't even an out and out striker. Admittedly, Aguero has played fewer minutes but he has scored only 19% of all City goals this season (all compets). Sterling - only 13%.Aguero's goal/game ratio is the best in the league. Get rid of his injury issues and he would smash in 40+ a season. An individual in that City team could absolutely have an extraordinary goal scoring season.
Aguero gets a lot of chances per game, as does Sterling. More clear cut ones than Kane or Hazard for sure. It doesn't totally explain his stats (he's clearly also an exceptional player) but it is a contributing factor.
Hazard would thrive at City and would score and assist more, I'm certain of it. He'd be less of a one man show but he would get far more space to operate and far more back post tap ins and 1 on 1 situations.
Ok then Salah last season is the best player in the PL history based on your logic? Or does that only apply to Sterling vs Hazard?all these woulda/coulda arguments for Hazard, but his best, in title winning teams (that competed against Pep’s City), does not stack up to Sterling’s best. And that’s not gonna change regardless of how many alternate realities people concoct.
When Sterling contributes as much to his team's play as Hazard does we can talk about him being better.Nothing ridiculous about it.
When Hazard has as productive a season as Sterling then we can talk about him being number 1.
Lets not forget that Sterling was one of if not the best player for a team that got the Premier league record points total.
You think my appreciation of football ends with Manchester United?You're making equally large posts about a player who doesn't even play for the club you support. Well played.
Oh man yeah it's a total agenda, he's actually been terrible you're right. Let's all jump on the media conspiracy bus, that seems rational.
Is this what football has become, a pure stats game? "He is more productive therefore he must be better". You do know that Gigi Zola averaged 1 goal in 4 in the league at Chelsea, and only on 2 occasions out of 7 seasons did he score over TEN league goals.Nothing ridiculous about it.
When Hazard has as productive a season as Sterling then we can talk about him being number 1.
Lets not forget that Sterling was one of if not the best player for a team that got the Premier league record points total.
No, amazing season though. My assessment of Sterling vs Hazard takes productivity into account but not solely (and that's without mentioning that this season is not an isolated thing, Sterling has been outproducing Hazard for the past two season, current one being the third).Ok then Salah last season is the best player in the PL history based on your logic? Or does that only apply to Sterling vs Hazard?
Conte's Chelsea was not nearly as good as Pep's City offensively.
Salah alone contributed to 50% of Liverpool's league goals last season, this could never happen at this City team, goals are more evenly spread out. City have the most creative team in the league and yet Aguero have scored fewer goals from open play than Mane who isn't even an out and out striker. Admittedly, Aguero has played fewer minutes but he has scored only 19% of all City goals this season (all compets). Sterling - only 13%.
Hazard wouldn't get "far more space to operate" as teams park the bus against City - far more often than against Chelsea.
They praised Kane because he played well. People in the match thread on here praised Kane because he played well. Basically everyone could see he was doing well except for you, because you're so bizarrely invested in fanboying Sterling you feel the need to portray Kane in a bad light.You think my appreciation of football ends with Manchester United?
You keep mentioning media, like what am I supposed to do with that? I see things and make my own judgements. no one said anything about conspiracies, that's more fiction. I just don't find it surprising they praised Kane, he is captain and has been poster boy for the national team for a while, that doesn't take from the fact Sterling allowed him to jump on his backpack and carried him this international break.
I’m not portraying Kane in a bad light, I think he’s a good player, I just know Sterling is clear of him as the best and that Kane is enjoying the benefits of subscribing to the Sterling stimulus package.They praised Kane because he played well. People in the match thread on here praised Kane because he played well. Basically everyone could see he was doing well except for you, because you're so bizarrely invested in fanboying Sterling you feel the need to portray Kane in a bad light.
They both played well in the qualifying games. Sterling was better, but the idea he carried Kane is stupid.
I'm afraid you don't understand.That's because City score more goals than Liverpool, more than anybody!
I just told you .. Aguero scores more goals per game than anyone else, if he played most games like Mane does, he would score a shit ton of goals.
Teams park the bus vs Chelsea too, they just don't have the tools to unlock those buses. City routinely smash sides for 4 or 5 ffs.
Vs Chelsea you mark Hazard out of the game, you win. Against City there's no point focusing on Sterling because Sane, Aguero etc are still a threat. So yes he gets less attention from defenders, Hazard gets focused the hell out of.
100%. I saw him play at youth level for England and he was a class apart. He was perceived then as a special talent and potential world class player in the future.I’ve mentioned this in another thread ages ago but I went to primary school with Raheem and trust me his potential has always been there. By the time he was in year 5/6 he was deemed the best player in the whole of Brent (the borough where we grew up) and the P.E teachers etc. knew he would end up playing for England one day.
P.S: don’t ask me what he was like cos I never actually spoke to him he was two academic years above me.
I mean I do understand. All of City's attacking players have incredible stats. They might not have Salahesque seasons goal scoring wise but they have multiple players up there with the top scorers. Aguero IS the top scorer and you're somehow acting like its hard to score more goals for City than Chelsea.I'm afraid you don't understand.
Playing with better players does not guarantee that your personal stats will get better. There are plenty of examples with good players moving from smaller to giant clubs and their stats remaining similar or getting worse. Berbatov is a case in point. People thought, wow, if he is so good at Spurs, just imagine him with Ronaldo, Rooney, Giggs, Scholes, etc. Well, he wasn't more productive than at Spurs, despite playing for a much better team.
If you play for a worse team but most of the attacking play goes through you, chances are your stats will be excellent. If you play for a better team but the attacking play is more versatile and other top players assist and score, then nothing guarantees that your stats will be better. City are not putting their eggs in 1-2 baskets. They will probably have 7-8 players on 10+ goals come the end of the season. Had Sterling played for Chelsea instead of Hazard, most of the attacks would go through him and his numbers would be pretty good.
Re: Mane and Aguero. Mane has played 5 full league games more than Aguero and has scored 17 goals form open play vs 15 for Aguero. Now, imagine that Aguero did play those 5 games and did score another 4 goals. That would still be only 2 goals from open play more than Mane. Not because there isn't much between them but because City's play, in contrast to Liverpool's, is less concentrated on the front 3 and way more varied.
Don’t forget Lingard, he’s been really good for England and could also slot into the midfield three.England are very fortunate to have both Sterling and Kane at the peak of their powers. Can’t really call either the sole best English player as they are both elite players playing in different positions.
Will be interesting to see how they get everyone into the team in a year or two. I’ll be the first to admit that I wasn’t overly keen on Rashford since he broke through but am starting to change my mind on him as under Ole he’s impressed me.
Kane, Sterling, Rashford, CHO, Sancho 5 into 3 (possibly 4 places if Sterling, Sancho or CHO move into one of the mid positions and England get 2 work horses to counteract their lack of defensive contribution) this could be a nice problem to have around the time the Euros come around. Makes a change from Rooney and some pub players upfront.
I'd agree with most of what you say. But Berbatov scored 46 goals in 2 seasons at Spurs and only 56 goals in 4 seasons at United. And over those two seasons at Spurs he assisted about 30 goals which is more than he did at United for 4 seasons. And he started a lot of games at United. Again, playing with better players often means that you are not the/a main man anymore and your productivity is not as good as it was when everything was going through you. Hazard is fantastic but it is not guaranteed that his numbers at City would have been better than Sterling's, nor is it certain that Sterling is not a better fit for Sarri's system at Chelsea. Hazard is better outside the box, Sterling is more dangerous in the box. And Sterling's work rate is on another level defensvely wise.I mean I do understand. All of City's attacking players have incredible stats. They might not have Salahesque seasons goal scoring wise but they have multiple players up there with the top scorers. Aguero IS the top scorer and you're somehow acting like its hard to score more goals for City than Chelsea.
No, playing under better players does not instantly equate to better stats. But playing in an ultra efficient City attacking system alongside some of the best players in the world will boost most individuals. That's just a fact. Berbatov played less at United than Spurs, pretty sure he was still top score one year?
No top side puts all their eggs in one basket if they can help it. Chelsea aren't deliberately only getting Hazard to score goals, it's just the players around him aren't particularly good and so far more burden falls to him.
Most of the attacks would go through him, yes. But he would have to drop deeper to see the ball otherwise risk being lost in games (which happened to hazard A LOT when he played too far forward) and he's a player most dangerous in the penalty area.
Sterling is more suited to his current role at City than he would be to the Hazard role. He's not a creative hub, regardless of how many assists he's got. His numbers would still be good for Chelsea because he's a very good player, but they wouldn't be as good as they are at City.
Mane is having an incredible season but a player still scoring more than him for City is meant to be proof it's harder to get lots of goals for them? Yes, City spread their goals around, but the front 3 still manage a ridiculous amount of goals/assists because they score more overall than anybody else. Nobody is saying it would be easy to get Salahesque numbers at City, but is it easier to get double figures for goals/assists there than anywhere else? Yeah, I'd say so.
He scored a bunch of goal against weaker national opposition and he is the best English player all of a sudden? Kane or Rashford for me.
