Cassidy
No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2013
- Messages
- 27,963
No. He ended with 343 games for all clubs and 247 goals. Haaland I believe still is about 1 goal per game If you take all his teams and national team.

No. He ended with 343 games for all clubs and 247 goals. Haaland I believe still is about 1 goal per game If you take all his teams and national team.
People still talking about how great Shearer was as a player.I'd always consider success as trophies. Loo, at Harry kane, I don't think people will talk about his success at spurs because he hasn't won anything, regardless of how well he's played
That's totally rational and completely justified. Defenders are there to stop things, strikers are there to score. You achieve the former by not making mistakes, you achieve the latter by trying a lot and succeeding a few times.Part of the problem is that defenders get slaughtered for every mistake that they make, even if they make 5 good defensive contributions before and after that. Seems worse now with social media. Doesn't happen with strikers, sure their mistakes are highlighted, but the goals they score more than make up for it.
The defenders were protected within systems, Maldini and Baresi are GOAT defenders that would excel in every era of football, but a lot of limited enough defenders were protected by everyone playing more defensively in outlook. In hindsight if we take a 70 or 80 year outlook, the 90s will be remembered as the deviation from the norm, rather than the standard, as the likes of Haaland are closer to some 50s, 60s and 70s records.
But only in England/the UK for the most part. He doesn't have anywhere near the same reputation on the continent because he didn't leave his mark on the World Cup or the Champions League.People still talking about how great Shearer was as a player.
Ronaldo was playing in Serie A when it was at its peak, the level of defending in the PL these days is laughable in comparison. VVD is supposedly the best the league has had to offer in recent years and was part of a team that conceded 7 against Ollie Watkins and co.No. He ended with 343 games for all clubs and 247 goals. Haaland I believe still is about 1 goal per game If you take all his teams and national team.
Honestly don't see him moving here, Haaland likes it at City, and he is a norwegian, they usually prefer english football anyway.The perfect striker for United but because of our terrible owners we can’t compete at the very top at present. It’s amazing to see his numbers this season yet he is still criticised. I’m praying for the day he wants his move to Real.
I think a lot of people in England never watched him at Dortmund and don't understand that he plays differently for City (whilst still scoring a lot of goals).It's just not true that he doesn't create or pass well. Take the first so called "rebound" yesterday, where he pressure the goalkeeper into making a mistake, feed de bruyne and finally is there like a hungry wolf. Some of these posts are so goddamn stupid and void of any analysis, you'll wonder how people manage to collect their valuable likes.
I did not argue otherwise. My point was players who get you goals cost more than other positions. The Balon D'or list is full of players who get you goals. Rarely a defender or strictly a creator and thats because goals win you games.Basketball is completely different because of so many reasons. The first is that basketball is a highscoring game - you get much more chances and it is far easier to create those chances by yourself. Attacks are also much more replicable since there are far less variables and a smaller field. There's not really an equivalent to a poacher in basketball since you create your points by plays of types that are typically attributed to playmakers in football.
And I wonder on which basis you claim that goal scorers were always in highest demand or held in the highest regard. Just a quick look at the Ballon d'Or history shows you that the best scorers were rarely if ever considered the best players - and if it was then the player usually had much more to his game than just goals. That's also backed up by the list of transfer record fees: Neymar, Mbappe, Coutinho, Felix, Enzo, Griezmann, Grealish, Lukaku, Dembele, Pogba, Hazard, Cristiano - how many of those were strikers with as little overall contribution as Haaland at the time of their moves? Probably Lukaku alone.
But you said something very good: "hardest to do consistently, whilst being the most important" - this is clearly playmaking. While I think the midfield role is the most important on the pitch, you find more players able to do the job while playmaking/chance creation is the most difficult discipline but only makes a difference when the basics are ensured.
I mean, you're free to believe what you want about Haaland but history or paycheck doesn't back your point upIt's never been the highest goal scorers that created the highest demand, it's been the best playmakers/chance creators - often in combination with scoring but not necessarily. Nobody had van Nistelroy over Zidane, Eto'o over Ronaldinho or Müller over Beckenbauer.
Id be interested in an actual academic research article that went into depths about the greats and their overall contributions.Talent for dribbling and playmaking it's shown at early ages, what can change or improve it's accuracy in front of goal
Haaland hasn't shown anything to make people believe he will become a better dribbler and playmaker like R9, Henry or Benzema...not even Mbappe, considering that whenever his team isn't dominating he can't create anything for himself.
He will be one of the best strikers ever for sure, but i doubt he will become a top 15-20 player in history cause that requires more than just scoring a lot of goals.
I hear ya, Del Piero was my personal favourite during that era. I saw him as more of the playmaker forward although he did play out on the left and behind the striker at times so this was normal.Read the thread, his goalscoring was only one aspect of his game, and that is why he was renowned (and still is till today) as one of the best players to ever walk the earth, this is quite obvious to anyone who watched him back then.
Obviously scoring helps, he also existed in an era where the style and artistry of the game were more celebrated than today.
Its like someone today asking why Zidane or Scholes were so great in seasons when they hardly got any assists
But by the same logic, strikers are there to score, so if they miss 3 chances then they’re not doing their job even if they score.That's totally rational and completely justified. Defenders are there to stop things, strikers are there to score. You achieve the former by not making mistakes, you achieve the latter by trying a lot and succeeding a few times.
You are wrong. Haaland very much wants to play in Spain. It is in his plans, if we are to believe to his father. Its just that Haaland and co dont want to rush things.. 2-3years at City and then Spain and Real are real possibility.Honestly don't see him moving here, Haaland likes it at City, and he is a norwegian, they usually prefer english football anyway.
Also, competing with City financially is not something we can do, you will probably have to deal with him for a long time.
depends on your definition of significantly more. Mbappé has 31 goals in 32 this season. He had like 40+ last season. Dude has been consistently scoring at close to a goal per game ratio since he was 20 years old. Haaland scores more, yes, but at that level of scoring, does it matter?For example Mbappe is a better footballer than Haaland. Most would agree on that. Mbappe scores prettier goals, but significantly fewer goals.
I don't disagree, but being a great player is different from success which is winning stuff, and Shearer definitely had less success than a player of his quality should havePeople still talking about how great Shearer was as a player.
As long he broke records in the PL, Harry Kane will always retain his reputation as one of the greatest strikers to play in PL.
EDIT:
Okay I forgot Shearer won PL with Blackburn, so ignore this post.
Oh yes, he is one of my favorite players tooI hear ya, Del Piero was my personal favourite during that era. I saw him as more of the playmaker forward although he did play out on the left and behind the striker at times so this was normal.
"Dad"My Dad is 5' 11", I'm, 6' 2" and I have 3 brothers who are 6' 6", 6' 3" and 6' 5" respectively so heigt differential is pretty normal
I just think the metric "scorers" is super misleading. You don't play for your personal scorering stats, you play for goals for your team and when you make an important play it doesn't matter if it is the last or second to last touch before the actual goal. Of course "playing well" correlates with scoring goals and assisting to an extent but people obsess way too much over them. So much so that they compare players based on these scorers (as evidenced in this thread) and ignore the productive stuff they do outside of them almost completely. R9 especially in his prime had so many outrageous plays not reflected in a goal or assist while Haaland is almost invisible outside of them. As said, the "density of good plays" by Ronaldo is much, much higher than Haaland's.Not saying Haaland is as good as Ronaldo on the ball but the timing of Haaland's runs yesterday for example was top class and elevated his team. Like for example one of his early chances was just a clipped ball over the top by Ake, nice pass but nothing unbelievable and Haaland timed the run perfectly, outran and outmuscled the defender and then nearly scored, how many forwards in world football would have done as well in that situation? Not many. And then the second goal, could be a foul on the keeper, but still the determination to press the keeper, which a lot of his kind of forwards don't do too much. Benzema does, but Mbappé wouldn't for example. Then the rebound, the leap to score it and time it right.
Anyway it's just an example of how he helps the team more than pure dribbling or first touch. I love Ronaldo but it's not right to say 'not remotely as good' when he's performing at the level he's currently at. He's only the 2nd player in L'Equipe history after Messi to get more than one perfect 10 rating in a match. If you look at his goal contributions per match, he's currently on Messi/Pele level. That's obviously contributing to the team in a considerable way.
Of course if you can pick between two players who offer basically the same but one of them also scores a lot, the latter is more expensive/important/whatever. But the one quality that's always prioritized above everything is creating. And that's because creation is more difficult than refinement and destruction. Playmaking in it's different variations is clearly the top priority in a player by all the evidence, may it be Ballon d'Ors, lists of all time greats, highest transfer fees, fee record holders and so forth. But those attributes are very poorly reflected by goal and assist stats because many play deeper than pure strikers and thus have a higher proportion of great plays that won't show up in their goal or assist records. And Haaland is probably the most extreme example of this to date.I did not argue otherwise. My point was players who get you goals cost more than other positions. The Balon D'or list is full of players who get you goals. Rarely a defender or strictly a creator and thats because goals win you games.
The transfer record (although recently skewed by premier league desperation and inflation, is also full of goal getters if you look at the full list. Even the list you provided has 7 players who were principal scorers for their teams.
The best comparison would be players who are primarily creators vs primarily scorers
True but still. Remember that clip from Rooney when the ref threw the ball to the ground and he killed like 3 people in 5 secs. Think that wasn't even carded. Nowadays he would get a 5 years sentence.Less offside goals though.
It's the gap between super teams and the runner ups. Those two used to be much closer to each other. It's much easier to score when your team outclasses the opponent in every area by a level or two.Is football getting easier for attackers? I remember watching football in the early 2000’s and thinking that 20 goals was an excellent season for a striker. That only seems to be decent nowadays with players like Kane, Haaland, Salah etc hitting mid to high 20’s easily. I know some players hit big tally’s in the 90’s (Fowler, Shearer, Cole) but it seems more of a regular occurrence nowadays. Maybe it’s just me imagining it?
Not taking anything away from Haaland by the way. He’s incredible.
At Saltzburg, Dortmund and the national team he's been a goal a game player. Do you think these are perfect teams? City on the whole don't play to Haalands strengths. Put him in a team like United, which is far from perfect and I'm betting he'd have a similar output with Bruno getting 20+ assists per season.Comparing Haaland to Brazilian Ronaldo (atleast the pre-injury version) is a bad joke. The later had a far far superior allround game.
Haaland is the second coming of Gerd Muller. A player whose entire game is about scoring ugly goals that win games and at a freakish rate. A player like Haaland (as was the case with Cristiano in his later years at Madrid) will succeed an uber dominant team like Citeh but put him in a team which is less than perfect and I guarantee he will struggle.
While I agree it's actually quite impressive that people now have to go to R9 to get in a dig at him. Just a shame he's not doing it anywhere where it counts for anything.At Saltzburg, Dortmund and the national team he's been a goal a game player. Do you think these are perfect teams? City on the whole don't play to Haalands strengths. Put him in a team like United, which is far from perfect and I'm betting he'd have a similar output with Bruno getting 20+ assists per season.
It doesn't matter where this fella plays. He'd still be knocking in those goals for fun.
This is simply not true... He has 21 in 23 games for Norway, a team far more discombobulated than any United team during the last couple of years. Hell, you can even look at his CL record for Salzburg and Dortmund. Hardly teams that ar dominant in the CL.Comparing Haaland to Brazilian Ronaldo (atleast the pre-injury version) is a bad joke. The later had a far far superior allround game.
Haaland is the second coming of Gerd Muller. A player whose entire game is about scoring ugly goals that win games and at a freakish rate. A player like Haaland (as was the case with Cristiano in his later years at Madrid) will succeed an uber dominant team like Citeh but put him in a team which is less than perfect and I guarantee he will struggle.
No one is comparing their abilities. The argument is whether Haaland and his attributes would allow him to have the same success as R9 if he swapped into his teams. If Haaland played for PSV, Inter, Brazil, Barcelona, Real, would he also smash the scoring records, win the trophies etcComparing Haaland to Brazilian Ronaldo (atleast the pre-injury version) is a bad joke. The later had a far far superior allround game.
Haaland is the second coming of Gerd Muller. A player whose entire game is about scoring ugly goals that win games and at a freakish rate. A player like Haaland (as was the case with Cristiano in his later years at Madrid) will succeed an uber dominant team like Citeh but put him in a team which is less than perfect and I guarantee he will struggle.
as demonstrated below. He is 1:1 in every situation.At Saltzburg, Dortmund and the national team he's been a goal a game player. Do you think these are perfect teams? City on the whole don't play to Haalands strengths. Put him in a team like United, which is far from perfect and I'm betting he'd have a similar output with Bruno getting 20+ assists per season.
It doesn't matter where this fella plays. He'd still be knocking in those goals for fun.
He's a certified 1:1 strikerThis is simply not true... He has 21 in 23 games for Norway, a team far more discombobulated than any United team during the last couple of years. Hell, you can even look at his CL record for Salzburg and Dortmund. Hardly teams that ar dominant in the CL.
Some feat for a limited playerApparently he is not as talented nor as good footballer as other all time greats.
But if there is one player who is going to break all the all time records in future (mostly Ronaldo's and Messi's records), chance is its going to be Haaland.
I do find it amusing when people choose to compare one of the (for me) top 10 players in history like R9 to have a go at Haaland. Others go a different route and say it's only because he's playing at City that he's racking up astronomical numbers even though they don't play to his strengths. I find it hard to understand why people can't just admit he's a generational talent that's going to break all kinds of records even if as some people believe, he isn't a very good footballer.While I agree it's actually quite impressive that people now have to go to R9 to get in a dig at him. Just a shame he's not doing it anywhere where it counts for anything.
it was my fault.I do find it amusing when people choose to compare one of the (for me) top 10 players in history like R9 to have a go at Haaland. Others go a different route and say it's only because he's playing at City that he's racking up astronomical numbers even though they don't play to his strengths. I find it hard to understand why people can't just admit he's a generational talent that's going to break all kinds of records even if as some people believe, he isn't a very good footballer.
Such a ridiculous point given his stats for Norway and Salzburg.Comparing Haaland to Brazilian Ronaldo (atleast the pre-injury version) is a bad joke. The later had a far far superior allround game.
Haaland is the second coming of Gerd Muller. A player whose entire game is about scoring ugly goals that win games and at a freakish rate. A player like Haaland (as was the case with Cristiano in his later years at Madrid) will succeed an uber dominant team like Citeh but put him in a team which is less than perfect and I guarantee he will struggle.
Then into the sin bin you go. Your punishment is to make parodies of the first 3 threads in the generals that would make horsechoker proud.it was my fault.
?????"Dad"
I jest
Salzburg is dominant in its league and Haaland also primarily played against weaker opponents with Norway. It's also only logical that he struggles against opposition on par since he's no player that drops back and creates dangerous situations himself. He can catch you on the break but that rarely happens against top teams.Such a ridiculous point given his stats for Norway and Salzburg.
In fact I’d nearly say it’s closer to the opposite, City’s style isn’t even helping him, some games they don’t feed him the ball. A team with a simpler playing style of just passing to him in behind constantly and he might score more than he is doing.
He’s capable of bullying good defenders though and giving them the run around, all he needs is an average ball in behind or to feet. The evidence - every level and every team he’s played at since the age of 17. Doesn’t matter who he is playing for.Salzburg is dominant in its league and Haaland also primarily played against weaker opponents with Norway. It's also only logical that he struggles against opposition on par since he's no player that drops back and creates dangerous situations himself. He can catch you on the break but that rarely happens against top teams.
And yes, that's criticism on a very high level. But people begin comparing him to Mbappe, CR7, Messi and Ronaldo and if you see to what ridiculous standards Messi is held by now, it's clear that people start seeing Haaland more critical over the years as well. He's a player that can be fully invisible when his team isn't playing well and that is going to be a constant point of criticism over his whole career.
Since 18/19 Haaland has scored a goal every 76th minute, while Mbappe has scored a goal every 91th minute. Haaland has also played for inferior teams until this season.depends on your definition of significantly more. Mbappé has 31 goals in 32 this season. He had like 40+ last season. Dude has been consistently scoring at close to a goal per game ratio since he was 20 years old. Haaland scores more, yes, but at that level of scoring, does it matter?
Dude, you've clearly not a fan of Haaland and your bias is showing. Try to get your facts straight.Salzburg is dominant in its league and Haaland also primarily played against weaker opponents with Norway. It's also only logical that he struggles against opposition on par since he's no player that drops back and creates dangerous situations himself. He can catch you on the break but that rarely happens against top teams.
And yes, that's criticism on a very high level. But people begin comparing him to Mbappe, CR7, Messi and Ronaldo and if you see to what ridiculous standards Messi is held by now, it's clear that people start seeing Haaland more critical over the years as well. He's a player that can be fully invisible when his team isn't playing well and that is going to be a constant point of criticism over his whole career.
What records... the scoring records. Ronaldo and Messi have so much more than that.Apparently he is not as talented nor as good footballer as other all time greats.
But if there is one player who is going to break all the all time records in future (mostly Ronaldo's and Messi's records), chance is its going to be Haaland.
Of course not, that's completely absurd.But by the same logic, strikers are there to score, so if they miss 3 chances then they’re not doing their job even if they score.