It's Messi's and Cristiano's fault that people won't look further than goal statistics
Nordic Ghost Yeti | Haaland at City
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
He would be called out even more in the previous eras.
This is the perfect era with social media for tap-in masters. Even then, most people as you can see in this thread find him overrated. In another era, there's no way you find people placing him over players like KDB, Rodri etc., it would be seen as a crime against football. Just like placing Gerd Muller who was 10-times the player Haaland was over Beckenbauer and Cruyff was a crime.
No way even peak Maradona winning non-controversial Ballon D'ors over Haaland in today's world because "Haaland scores most tap-ins and that's the most important thing in football".
Gerd Muller did in fact place above Cruyff and Beckenbauer when he won the Ballon D'Or
Maradona scored a lot actually, relative to his era and league. He definitely doesn't go down in history as he did without the goals
Ronaldo not so much. He had good allround play until around 2015 but it wasn't good enough for him to be called the bpitw without the goals.
Messi on the other hand combined a much higher level approach play with Ronaldo type goal stats.
He only won 1 Ballon D'or, and at Bayern always considered below Beckenbauer. With below stats, he would win at least 4-5 Ballon D'ors in this social media era. No way Beckenbauer, Cruyff easily winning Ballon D'ors over Gerd Muller in this era, impossible.
Gerd Muller (mind you Bundesliga was a top-2 league in Muller's era)
4-time CL top goalscorer
2 times Golden Shoe
1970 WC top goalscorer with 10 goals (scored at every single stage)
1972 Euros scored 2 goals each in the Euros semi-final & finals won the Euros for Germany
1974 WC scored the winning goal in the WC semis & final
7 times Bundesliga top goal-scorer
all-time goalscoring record in WC (between 74-2006)
most goals in Bundesliga ever
most Bundesliga goals in a season (between 72-2021 - broken by Lewa 50 years later)
most goals in a calendar year (between 72-2012 - broken by Messi 40 years layer)
68 goals in 62 games with NT, 1.1 per game , double of Ronaldo's
in Serie A with Napoli, a few times yes, but he is obviously not a poacher. The point is nobody would compare Maradona with a poacher on number of goals in previous eras, or Cruyff with Muller. This is exactly what's happening in this era, perfect era for Haaland type of players to be hyped up way more than they deserve. Probably the worst era for KDB type of players for the hype.
Last edited:
He has had little to no effect on way too many games, especially the crucial ones, . He has been underperforming his xG all season despite us creating a lot more for him this year compared to last, missing easy chances that has either cost us results or made tight games games more difficult for us. He has made no significant improvement in his all-round game, in fact it feels like he has regressed in that part of his game compared to the end of last season where it felt like he played his best football despite the goals drying up somewhat. We have looked better without him, which was a narrative even last year but it were far from true then, it has been this year.
Might not look like it but I love the guy, but I do think it is justified to be hypercritical when someone is paid the wages he is and you sacrifice so much elements an attacking player can bring you due to his lack of ability in those areas, because of his extreme unprecedented reliability in front of goal. His abillity as a goalscorer is beyond question but he has to live with the fact that when he fails to change the game for us with squandering a chance like he did sunday in a situation where we find ourselves behind in the game, or the performance he had against Chelsea in front of goal where we throw away important points it is valued a lot more than the fact that he can put 5 past Luton in the FA Cup.
As I said, he is young though, but I think he would be the first one to evaluate this season this season as a poor one for him personally despite most likely finishing as the top-scorer. Especially considering how driven he is to win and score goals. It would be an entirely different story if you could watch him and say he has been a bit unlucky this year, or if he took big strides in other parts of his game, but a lot of the issues that have snuck in in-front of goals seems to be concentration-levels and ability to rely on his technical ability to strike the ball clean enough
This is a very interesting response, the bolded part especially, as the expectation was that under Pep, over time. he would improve in areas where he had significant flaws. If he's regressing even more, then that's alarm bells ringing concerning the limits of his potential.
HE LEADS THE PREMIER LEAGUE IN SCORING, FOR FECK'S SAKE. Might not have been as good as last season, might not have been as good as he can be, might not have been great at everything. But nobody who does that after 27 rounds and having missed 5 games has had anything other than a very, very good season. If you have the tiniest smidgen of perspective.
Sorry but it simply isn't as black and white as this, when Haaland has built his reputation and place in the football world on being a abnormal goalscorer.
Considering this is a United forum I'll try and use this as a example. Ferguson dropped Berbatov for a Champions League final inside the same season he produced his best numbers for his whole career, joint top scorer in the league. Now take into account Berbatov weren't necessarily all about goals, but I think it is clear that Ferguson looked a bit behind the numbers that year and evaluated that all though the numbers produced in front of goal in itself was decent, probably even something he was more than happy with especially considering you won the league, when it all came down to it he seemed to think your best team were without Berbatov in it. I have no idea about Berbatovs thoughts on the situation, but I think he would have considered it a better season if he were deemed important enough to the team that he got the start in the ultimate game of the season
Now I'm not really implying that Berbatov had a poor, or certainly not very poor season in 2010/2011 but I do believe that gives Haaland's situation a little bit of context.
Haaland got signed for, and is paid, huge money precisely because he scores an extreme amount of goals. Guardiola has already chosen away player types that he has built his systems on for ages, precisely because Haaland is expected to score goals at an abnormal rate despite the risk that, to be a bit simplistic, that is the only thing he is good at.
If I thought we didn't use him to his strenghts properly, like was the case a bit last season I would have had no issue with the season he has had. But he gets incredible service now in basically every game. Sure there is games here and there that I feel some players specifically should have been braver in trying to give him riskier passes that he can run onto, but as a whole we have been set him up with high quality chances at a very satisfying rate basically every time he has taken to the pitch this season. And those games we have struggled, he has been forgiven excactly because everyone accepts that he is a player that need to get provided service, and then he rewards you with the goals that makes up for it. But when a player like his starts underperforming in front of goal and it leads to dropping points in games performance levels dictate we should win it does become a issue. I am far from an xG nerd but the eye test has made it clear that he is less reliable when provided (mostly bigger) chances this year, while having as little or less impact on the team creating those chances outside of his movement still being absolutely world-class, which obviously still has to be considered in all of this.
Of course an abnormal goalscorer like Haaland is going to score massive amounts of goals for a team as well-oiled and dominant as this City team under Pep, but as harsh as it sounds Haaland is one of those situations that you can deem him to have a relatively poor season despite scoring more goals than any other player. If his current season trajectory continues he will be top-scorer in the league by a good margin but I will not be surprised at all if he this season is one of those that gets sacrifised by Pep when he needs a reliable machine to try and win every game at the end of the season. And that last season would be unthinkable. But it very well will happen unless his form at what he does best drastically improve, and I'm absolutely sure people and himself would admit he has had a substandard-season then.
Last edited:
He’s a gormless looking nobhead, I think we can all agree on that.
He's a striker. Its his job scoring goals. He doesn't have everything like R9, because gets the service he needs anyway. He's not the most skillfull striker ever, but he's more than a terrific version of Lukkaku as well.
He very much is still scoring an abnormal number of goals. What has changed is the rate. Last season he scored in 2/3rds of PL games he played in - which is nonsense - a goal every 77 minutes
Those are, well, this thread has people talking about how Haaland isn't that great or other players are better and those are numbers that should make people point at those posters and LAUGH
This season however he's "only" scoring at a rate of 1 in 2, a goal every 100 minutes in PL - these are the kind of numbers Aguero used to put up btw! And i'm using Aguero as an example, it could be most great strikers of the last 20 years - with a few high profile clangers(which made them more visible, and likely to stick to memory) and he's having a "poor season"...
Refer to my previous point about Messi and Cristiano normalizing the absurd
Those are, well, this thread has people talking about how Haaland isn't that great or other players are better and those are numbers that should make people point at those posters and LAUGH
This season however he's "only" scoring at a rate of 1 in 2, a goal every 100 minutes in PL - these are the kind of numbers Aguero used to put up btw! And i'm using Aguero as an example, it could be most great strikers of the last 20 years - with a few high profile clangers(which made them more visible, and likely to stick to memory) and he's having a "poor season"...
Refer to my previous point about Messi and Cristiano normalizing the absurd
What, you think he had a very poor season and has put up only decent numbers? Which, you know, was the point I responded to?
most tap-ins in football=best player, got it, laughing as you suggested
Aguero didn't need to score at a abnormal rate to have a good season though.
The whole thing is that Haaland with his current skillset and limitations needs to offer a ridiculous scoring rate if he wants to justify his place in the team that he is currently at. It's not really about how good we know he can be, or how absurd his goalscoring record is in isolation. It is whether he has done enough with how games have presented themselves for him this year to justify being the untouchable starter he made himself last year. In my opinion he haven't, and if someone with Haaland's ability and standing endspan up losing his spot he certainly has had a poor season. Which in my opinion as someone that loves him and the club he plays for he is in danger of doing.
On the other hand, if he 3 years from now plays in a City side that creates less chances, dominates matches to a much smaller degree, and in general is a worse side but he has a similat scoring rate, maybe even worse compared to the season he has been having I can see myself thinking he has had a great season, entirely depending how important and reiliable his output has been and how it directly affects the performance of the team.
Expectations changes due to circumstances all the time. Haaland is an abnormal goalscorer, Pep's City has been an abnormal team for quite a few years. The lack of games ge gas affected for us this year has been very frustrating, and it can be traced back to his performance. Therefore in my opinion a poor season so far
Saying all that he hasn't been the best player in the league this season, and he doesn't have the most goal contributions. Because the fact Haaland offers little outside the box, when he drops to a level more in line with all the other players in the league its only natural he gets called out more, right now in terms of goal contributions per game he isn't outperforming Salah or Watkins, by a great deal if at all, and all those players have a better all round game.
He's not having a poor season though, its still a great one just not to the standard of his last one.
No I think Berbatov getting deemed not good enough to start a CL Final despite a decent goal output provides context that a player like Haaland that on a different scale than Berbatov gets judged only on his ability to put the ball in the net because of his la k of options to impact our game in other ways deserves to be criticised when he over the course of the season has failed to put the ball in the net when he absolutely should do.
The point I try and make is that you can deliver something on paper that is better than all your competitors, but due to circumstanses it has not been good enough.
Decent numbers is the wrong word I agree, in itself his numbers are fantastic. Our disagreement seems to be that you can't have a poor season if you deliver great numbers and I respect that.
I'd give you another City player as an example. Kevin De Bruyne in Pep first season. 20 assist or whatever it was from midfield. Despite those numbers he was visibly a very poor midfielder (which changed later) and we really had a poor season as a whole.
At this point, after 27 games, City have scored:
62 goals in 2024.
67 goals in 2023
64 goals in 2022
56 goals in 2021
68 goals in 2020
74 goals in 2019
Having Haaland in good form, bad form, or without Haaland obviously means feck all when they are scoring pretty similar number of goals with or without him. He can score 50 goals in PL this season and City will win similar number of points and score similar number of goals.
It's quite obvious that the goals Haaland is scoring are mostly goals that he took from other players in his team, because he definitely hasn't made City much better team.
62 goals in 2024.
67 goals in 2023
64 goals in 2022
56 goals in 2021
68 goals in 2020
74 goals in 2019
Having Haaland in good form, bad form, or without Haaland obviously means feck all when they are scoring pretty similar number of goals with or without him. He can score 50 goals in PL this season and City will win similar number of points and score similar number of goals.
It's quite obvious that the goals Haaland is scoring are mostly goals that he took from other players in his team, because he definitely hasn't made City much better team.
I love that United fans are getting offended because a City supporter is saying that a City player hasn't been great this season. Modern football fans are fecking weirdos.
Well yeah, because Aguero wasn't capable of abnormal scoring rates
He is under no danger of losing the starting spot, get real. That said I agree with the point that given his salary, City need to be appreciably better with him on the pitch than without, otherwise they're that money could be spent better. This is of course true of every high paid player. And yes, you right in that this season, City haven't been better with him, so far
That still doesn't change the fact we are only calling this a poor season because of the standards he set and the perception left over by his abnormality having been normalized
Agree with this. Was just pointing out how he's having the kind of season we'd normally judge to be good, if not very good, from most of the great strikers of the last 20-30 years, and we're unironically calling it poor, and we're not wrong either
Maybe, maybe not. City signed him and had their best season ever. Most of the CL winners, and best teams, of the last decade had one guy scoring a huge % of their goals
City went from playing 3 to 4 actual defenders and their attacking prowess didn't drop a bit
Just like Haaland is not capable of having an average performance without scoring a tap-in. And, sometimes even a tap-in isn't enough to rate him average just like the last game against United.
No, people are calling his season poor simply because he is a poor player outside converting tap-ins. His all around game is non-existent.Many were calling him out last year too especially with his poor showings in later rounds of the UCL.
Crazy how after all these posts, you still can't grasp why people don't rate him as high as you do.
Because for you, a good season for a striker is fully dependent on the number of tap-ins. Most don't evaluate strikers from such a limited angle.
There's no way Benzema could stay at Real Madrid for 14 years if you were the manager or the president of Real with that type of mindset.
And, so? Haaland had the best season of his life "by far" after coming to City, being a Ballon D'or/FIFA Best contender, winning Golden Shoe and other individual awards. He wouldn't have any of these without a being a part of Pep's City.
It's not like City was struggling for goals, PL titles, UCL semi-finals or finals before Haaland. And, Haaland was far from the difference maker in those games City tends to lose such as the UCL semi-finals and finals.
Last edited:
Berbatov. Well, Jimmy Greaves wasn't selected for the 1966 World Cup final, despite being a much more highly regarded striker than Geoff Hurst. That sort of thing has to do with what overall team selection you deem to give you the best chance of winning in the specific context of that specific match. Berbatov wasn't left on the bench because anyone thought he'd had a very poor season. But I guess some people are just hard to please.
Greaves as well hardly played in that tournament due to injuries, and Berbatov wasn't that one specific Champions League final. He pretty much lost his spot at United entirely the next season.Berbatov. Well, Jimmy Greaves wasn't selected for the 1966 World Cup final, despite being a much more highly regarded striker than Geoff Hurst. That sort of thing has to do with what overall team selection you deem to give you the best chance of winning in the specific context of that specific match. Berbatov wasn't left on the bench because anyone thought he'd had a very poor season. But I guess some people are just hard to please.
Anyway as I tried to articulate despite my shit english the point wasn't whether Berbatov had a good or poor season but whether you can deliver numbers that is better than anybody else statistically but still have delivered a season that just isn't good enough.
Im just repeating myself at this point, but scoring goals at an insane rate is what Haaland does, it is his bread and butter. With players like him (maybe only him currently in football) you need to look behind the numbers a bit to judge what he brings to the team properly, because he gets paid more than anyone else to put away the numerous chances we create for him.
Based on watching every game of his this season, if you look behind the numbers his great numbers this year is a bit skewed. When someone has 28 goals in 31 games but you don't trust him to win you games even if provided with chances you feel any striker in top level football should score it is a issue. And when it is not about luck but down to basically concentration and terrible finishing and it has been all season long, poor season is justified. I'd hazard a guess you can make a montage of horrendous finishing from him this year that puts the likes of Darwin to shame. That is disapointing considering how prolific he has been since that 2019/20 season for Salzburg
They defend rival players more than they’d defend their own. So strange
Yeah, I have this weird preference for keeping discussion about football players within relatively sane parameters.
Yeah, it's utterly bizarre.
What, you're actually bewildered by the concept of reasonable discussion? And think the natural order of things is kneejerk shitpiling on oppo players and unreserved defence of our own? Not that there's a surplus of the latter around here, if anything it's worse. Garnacho is just another overrated youngster, Bruno is a liability who's been one of our worst players this year, Rashford's a championship level player. So much crap. Can it really be that hard to just keep things fairly reasonable, whether it's a United player or someone else.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think it's really fecking weird that United fans are getting upset because a City fan said that a City player isn't having a great season.
Unless you're a fellow countryman - which maybe you are - then I don't see the need to get upset about said opinion.
I don't see anyone upset.
More so bewilderment.
More so bewilderment.
I'm not upset because a City fan said a City player isn't having a great season. I'm fecking annoyed because people stoop to obvious idiocy in player discussion, such as the top scorer in the PL having had "a very poor season". You get the same with United players. You wouldn't, if people could just do a tiny bit of basic reality check before letting their thoughts out.
Also, I really wouldn't have to write this if you'd bother to make a small detour via reading my previous post, rather than just repeat what you already wrote previously.
You seem pretty bothered by it tbh. Really not sure why you care about a City fan saying that a City player isn't having a great season. Each to their own but I think it's odd.
To be fair, reasonable discussion would be if you actually argued why you think he hasn't had a poor season for his standards, instead of only implying that it isn't sane to say someone with great statistics can have a poor season.
As a fan of the player and team he plays for I think I have provided a pretty balanced take on why I think his season is a lot worse than the stats suggest. The discussion isn't if he is a bad player or not, he is already one of the greatest goalscorers of all time. That is why he gets held to a different standard to other strikers
Last edited:
I'm clearly talking to the wall here.
I'm not arguing he hasn't had a poor season for his standards. I'm arguing it's absurd to argue he's had "a very poor season", given that he's the leading scorer in the PL. In fact, I think it's pretty senseless to hold him to a different standard than other strikers. As if you could just take his uniquely high and consistent scoring contribution as a sort of automatic baseline benefit and judge him on other things. That's exactly how people end up descending into this bullshit.
I respect this opinion but this is where we disagree. In fact, due to the team he plays for and the accepted fact of his other limitations you could argue Haaland can quite easily have a disastrous season delivering the same type of numbers as other strikers in different teams.
If he had the same output as Ollie Watkins and Darwin Nunez this season I would have been even more disapointed with him, and I suspect more people would agree with me then. Yet, I think Watkins has had a fantastic season, and Nunez a pretty good one so far.
It's not really that I expect him to have even bigger numbers at this stage, allthough I kind of think he should because of the chances he has missed, but the reliability in the crucial moments this season has been very poor from him, and if this continues in the same vein I can see him be a major factor in us losing out on trophies to other good teams. And for someone paid to get us goals that is poor. But that is standards other strikers can't be held too because they haven't reached his level
And the bullshit in this thread is waist deep
And Haaland has had a poor season (not relative to his standards, in the absolute) in your opinion?
I blame myself. When the anti-goal nerds started their crusade years ago to devalue "just scoring", I should have seized power then. That's why names like RvN and Gerd Muller are epithets today to some people and all bots. All he can do is score... what?
It's also why despite riding on Ronaldo's coattails for how many seasons, Benzema has an inflated reputation, as people have extrapolated that 1 excellent season from him onto his entire career... But I digress.
What a strange reply...most tap-ins in football=best player, got it, laughing as you suggested
Goals win you games, who cares as to how they are scored?
Your arrogance would hold some merit if football was just an exhibition in aesthetics, but as we both know, it is not.
I think most fans would love a player like Haaland in their team, unless they are heavy into masochism.
Short answer no, he probably havent if you take everything out of the equation.
But being a striker for the top clubs is about scoring the right goals at the right moments. This is the reason strikers like Drogba, Rooney, Benzema goes down in history as better strikers than the likes of Higuain and Lukaku despite worse strike-rates for similar clubs. Van Nistelrooy also wouldn't have the legacy he had if he didn't deliver his output at the same rate in the crucial matches as he did in the "easier" ones
I do back Haaland to improve in this regard in the future. He is very young and has all the tools. But this has so-far been a poor season for him, and considering he is the subject that is all that matters.