Looking at some posts and the title of this topic... Some Manchester United fans also struggle to admit that Havertz is a good player
Donkai Havertz | Arsenal Watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
He was being talked about as one of the flops of the season, he was playing poorly. He even was gifted a sympathy penalty because people felt sorry for him.
He literally is the same player he was at Chelsea, still dont know his best postion, has a purple patch around this time of the season. Most of his goals come vs weaker sides, poor creativity, still cant dribble and still has more bad games than he does good.
"he is the same player he was at Chelsea" do some of you have a contractual obligation to say this five times a day?
If he is the same player then it was a daft move to let him go to us.
If he is the same player then it was a daft move to let him go to us.
Being talked about by who? Lazy pundits and fickle fans? It’s completely irrelevant for me, I’m just concerned about how he’s contributed to the team. You can’t be a key component for a side that is challenging for major honours and be playing poorly.
“Most of his goals come vs weaker teams”… that’s true of literally every striker.
His creativity isn’t poor at all, he’s bagged a fair few assists and would have more if Trossard wasn’t the only reliable finisher in our team (he put two on a plate for Jesus less than 24 hours ago).
His dribbling and hold up play have been pretty effective for us since he’s moved up front and he hasn’t had a bad game in 2024, hence keeping the CF slot despite Jesus returning to fitness.
I'd put a lot of money on being a better header of the ball than Gabby Jesus. That first miss was comically bad.
Fairly standard lazy ass meme culture at work. Once a player gets a reputation or a generalization becomes popular around them most casual watchers seem incapable of deviating from the established narrative.Looking at some posts and the title of this topic... Some Manchester United fans also struggle to admit that Havertz is a good player
Pretty sure something close to half his goals for us in one particular season were headers. He’s pretty good at them.
Last edited:
Bellingham is better.
The title of the thread was changed after Havertz spoke about his fondness of donkeys.Looking at some posts and the title of this topic... Some Manchester United fans also struggle to admit that Havertz is a good player
Agree with the first paragraph more or less. He took some time to bed in but I think he's now found his place in the team as our CF. Whether things change and we look to bolster our options in the summer is a different story, but for now Arteta has definitely found his best position upfront. I don't believe this is just a purple patch because I think our team overall is playing too well for him not to thrive and IMO he'll only improve under Arteta. Don't agree about poor creativity but I do think he's not the most aesthetically pleasing or flashy player, who probably does his best work off the ball. But the way he finds space, draws out defenders and incredible workrate IMO makes up for being a poor dribbler or not the best passer.
Was just never a good fit for us. Three years where there were maybe a few months where he looked like the kind of player we needed but he went missing way too much. Good for him if he's finally found himself.
Though I feel more than his actual level as a player, his salary and contract situation may have played a larger part as to why he was sold. He had two years left on a £250K/wk deal so the options last summer were either to extend him on similar terms or look to sell him while he still had a decent enough value. With the kind of salaries the club have been offering to new signings, extending Havertz' contract on that kind of wages could have been problematic within the squad and set a nasty precedent that you don't even have to perform to continue earning massive amounts of money. Was just best for all parties he moved on when he did.
Havertz staying would almost certainly have meant no Palmer for us so I for one am not looking back one bit. I don't think Havertz and Palmer could ever co-exist in a team, they're too similar.
Wasn't looking forward to him leading the line for Germany at the Euro's but you can't ignore his form for Arsenal, and Germany lately.
Still think his best position is as a CAM/SS behind a striker, rather than being the striker himself, but we don't have any great options in any case so might as well still go with him and hope for the best.
Still think his best position is as a CAM/SS behind a striker, rather than being the striker himself, but we don't have any great options in any case so might as well still go with him and hope for the best.
Again this is only relevant when players are playing under very well refined systems and goals are attributed across from more than one position. Most teams in world football don't achieve that level of pedigree from a tactical standpoint.
The example of Havertz isn't about the ascendancy of his own individual competence but rather the astuteness of the coach who he is deployed under. It's a classic example of why Foden is Foden at City under Pep and why he's lesser the extent of himself for England under Southgate.
It was a good business for all 3 parties involved. Everyone is happy in the end.
I guess it depends if his current form carries on long term, no? If it's just a purple patch, like some players are capable of, and he reverts to the type of form he showed in his early days with you, would you call it a successful transfer?
I never thought he was that bad earlier in the season. Sure, looked like we overpaid and he had a couple of stinkers, but I was willing to give him more time. While I wanted/expected more from him, I never thought he was a liability in midfield. He was getting into some good positions and probably should have scored 2-3 goals before the pity penalty at Bournemouth. He just didn't seamlessly slot into the team like Rice did, unfortunately. I'd expect that now, if we needed him to play in midfield, he'd do much better.
Nah, he was very bad early on.
You can only judge player based on present form, just like Utd rewarded Rashford with a big fat contract after scored over 30 goals.
You're kind of making my point for me, though.
He's just doing what he did at Chelsea. When push comes to shove, he'll wilt like he's always done.
Your only point is Havertz was an average player and Arsenal overpaid for him. His current form is only temporary and he will be back to being average soon. He is a bad business for Arsenal and it is 60 million down the drain. I got that.
No, that wasn't my point at all. It's ok that you didn't get it though.
Why? He's not a £65M player in the slightest.
You are aware you paid £115m for Moises Caicedo?
What is a £65m player? Who cares? It's not my money.
What is a £65m player? Who cares? It's not my money.
Bit of an odd critique for someone with a CL-winning goal on their CV
But apart from his current good form and important goals, amongst which a CL winning header stands out, what have the Romans ever done for us?!
He's no Biggus Dickus, that's for sure
He did score the first and only goal in a CL final for Chelsea so if he does that in another CL final I'll definitely take that "wilting" in the highest pressure game, something that even Henry couldn't do. (Note I am not saying he'll be better than Henry for us)
That was Drogba.
Also him wilting wasn’t about a high stakes game but his general passitivity and uselessness as games pass him by other than a purple patch here and there.
Um actually I think you'll both find that Lampard scored first in a CL final for Chelsea.
Also re: him wilting; don't think that's actually a fair comment. If anything he failed to consistently deliver against crap sides for Chelsea but in big moments he stepped up pretty regularly (tremendous in the CL run against Madrid and City, won the Club WC with a last minute penalty, scored against Liverpool & ran Dortmund ragged the following year, etc).
I meant the first and only goal of a CL Final match _ specifically the 2021 final.
Otherwise I'm in complete agreement with MagicFoolBus (great name btw!)
He's woeful. Looked like a lost puppy out there today.
He definitely shouldn't play in midfield. Either starting CF or "super" sub
He’s naff. He’ll have a purple patch Feb-Mar next year but does f all in 90% of the other games .