Nordic Ghost Yeti | Haaland at City

[heraklion]

Yet they win the CL in Haalands first season.

Yet, Haaland never won a top-5 league title before City.
Yet, Haaland never won a league title let alone a double or treble before City.
Yet, Haaland never knew what a CL semis or finals looked like let alone dreaming of winning it before City.

Yet, Haaland never won a top-5 league top scorer award, Golden Shoe, UEFA Best before City.
Yet, Haaland never was a Ballon D'or, FIFA Best contender before City.

Yet, Dortmund had their best season in Bundesliga in the last 10 years after Haaland left.

You see where I'm going with this yet.

City has always been a top contender for all the titles dominating PL easily, either winning or playing semis & finals in top tournaments just like other top teams with or without Haaland. Haaland has never been a top contender for any top individual award like Ballon D'or, UEFA Best, FIFA Best, Golden Shoe etc. before coming to City, he couldn't even come close to winning Bundesliga let alone dreaming about touching UCL and Premier League titles until he came to City.

Haaland needs a team like City way more than City needs him to win things..

 

[chomsky89]

Yet, Haaland never won a top-5 league title before City.
Yet, Haaland never won a league title let alone a double or treble before City.
Yet, Haaland never knew what a CL semis or finals looked like let alone dreaming of winning it before City.

Really? Does it say anything that a 19-20-year-old can not drag his underdog teams to victory in the Bundesliga and past title candidates City/PSG in the Champions League on a couple of tries?
When 21-year-old Haaland joined City, he already had the best goal-to-game ratio in the 70-year history of the Champions League/European Cup(which he still has). Including 4 goals/assists vs PSG/City. I think he did his part in those 11-man units named Salzburg and Dortmund.

 

[Fobal]

In matches where City don't dominate or isn't able to create, he will go missing or put away the one chance he gets. That is his profile and comes with his workdescription. He is a #9, not a SS, false 9, #10 or a hybrid. In matches like the one yesterday his job is to occupy defenders and be on his toes the one or two chances he gets. Without crosses into the box or balls in behind there little to do for any striker. In close matches like that, strikers very rarely plays the main part. In matches where defenses leave space or where City is dominant he will allways be devestating. Yesterday Liverpool was the better team and shut down City's midfield quite efficiently. He did set up his teammates a few times though.

Compare him to Nunez yesterday for instance:

Touches:
Nunez 24 vs. Haaland 22

Passing accuracy:
Nunez 67% vs. Haaland 80%

Chances created:
Nunez 0 vs. Haaland 3

Shots:
Nunez 2 vs. Haaland 1

Offsides:
Nunez 5 vs. Haaland 0

Add to the fact that Liverpool created more and pinned City down at times. Liverpool had 6 accurate crosses into the box vs. Citys 2 (one of them the corner that they scored from)

If you want to point your finger at someone who went missing in that City team yesterday, it was Alvarez. He gave away the ball in dangerous positions and he created nothing from his LW position.

Man those stats are wrong as fvck if Nuñez doesn't have a single chance created

 

[Harry190]

Broskis, stop doing this to yourself. The kid's dynamite. He scores at least 50 goals a season. He's always perceived as a threat by the opposition, regardless of how well he plays.

We just missed out on him, otherwise he'd be considered a saviour here.

 

[heraklion]

Really? Does it say anything that a 19-20-year-old can not drag his underdog teams to victory in the Bundesliga and past title candidates City/PSG in the Champions League on a couple of tries?

Does it say anything that City wouldn't be able to win UCL without Haaland? The arena where they have already been one of the favorites for years, where they would regularly play semis or finals.

Does it say anything that City wouldn't be able to dominate PL without Haaland? something they've been doing for years without Haaland.

Does it say anything that Dortmund wouldn't be able to win Bundesliga without Haaland or go far in the CL without him? They were on the verge of winning it last year right after he left. Already topped their UCL group this year over PSG, AC Milan and Newcastle.

City doesn't need Haaland to dominate the PL or go far in the CL etc. They have already been doing it dominating PL, playing semis, finals in the UCL. Just because his arrival coincided with City's UCL win (with him ghosting as usual against Real and Inter) doesn't make him the X-factor behind the UCL win especially with his ghosting habits.

When 21-year-old Haaland joined City, he already had the best goal-to-game ratio in the 70-year history of the Champions League/European Cup(which he still has). Including 4 goals/assists vs PSG/City. I think he did his part in those 11-man units named Salzburg and Dortmund.

His UCL ratios don't mean much when he's not even going far in the tournament. Per game stats naturally drop the more you play QFs, semis and finals as things get harder. Not surprisingly, Haaland's goal per game ratio in UCL QFs, SFs and finals is terrible 0.28 (2 goals in 7 games). I wonder what's happening to his "best-goal-to-game ratio" in the 70-year history of UCL..

Imagine thinking we'll get impressed by statpadding against the likes of Young Boys, Copenhagen, Brugge, Ghenk etc. and ghosting the moment things get more challenging in the UCL.

Lewa scored 4 against Real singlehandedly taking Dortmund to UCL finals. Haaland is not even the best striker coming out of Dortmund let alone the whole Europe.

 

[stefan92]

Yet, Dortmund had their best season in Bundesliga in the last 10 years after Haaland left.

That's actually false, they had better season under Favre, it was just that they came close to the title due to Bayern's collapse.

 

[heraklion]

That's actually false, they had better season under Favre, it was just that they came close to the title due to Bayern's collapse.

Your definition of better season would be different from many other people's definition which would make yours false. They never came that close to winning Bundesliga in the last 10 years.

You'd probably say the same thing "they had a better season under Favre" even if they didn't collapse in the last game and won the Bundesliga after 10-12 years.

Not to mention they finished their UCL group at the top over Milan, PSG and Newcastle this year, and seem likely to make it to the UCL QFs.

 

[Hammondo]

Which begs the question if Haaland makes City better or worse.

All I know is City never had any problems scoring goals or smashing teams 5-0 before he came. And they did so using a more fluid build up play with tons of different goalscorers.

Depends what the alternative is, right now with their squad I would play him, but they could buy a player to make them better.

 

[Hammondo]

Yet they win the CL in Haalands first season.

He didn't really make the difference though.

 

[stefan92]

Your definition of better season would be different from many other people's definition which would make yours false. They never came that close to winning Bundesliga in the last 10 years.

You'd probably say the same thing "they had a better season under Favre" even if they didn't collapse in the last game and won the Bundesliga after 10-12 years.

Not to mention they finished their UCL group at the top over Milan, PSG and Newcastle this year, and seem likely to make it to the UCL QFs.

If Dortmund had won the title last year it would be rightfully largely attributed to how weak Bayern were. Dortmund didn't challenge for the title from a position of strength, they came closer to that with Haaland or before Haaland arrived than after he left.

Sometimes a weak season is good enough when everybody else is even worse, sometimes a strong season doesn't win anything if others are flying. I think very few people will disagree with me here.

However I grant you the surprising CL group win this season, but before you specifically mentioned their Bundesliga season, so this is a separate point. And even if that's true it's still a mystery how that happened. Newcastle really bottled it in an amazing way.

 

[heraklion]

If Dortmund had won the title last year it would be rightfully largely attributed to how weak Bayern were. Dortmund didn't challenge for the title from a position of strength, they came closer to that with Haaland or before Haaland arrived than after he left.

Sometimes a weak season is good enough when everybody else is even worse, sometimes a strong season doesn't win anything if others are flying. I think very few people will disagree with me here.

However I grant you the surprising CL group win this season, but before you specifically mentioned their Bundesliga season, so this is a separate point. And even if that's true it's still a mystery how that happened. Newcastle really bottled it in an amazing way.

Dortmund got 71 points last year, their 3rd most in the last 10 years.
While I agree Bayern wasn't at its best last year, Dortmund also performed very well despite losing their "main striker". They scored 85 with him the prior season and 83 without him last season. All it shows me is that Haaland was not that big of a loss for Dortmund .

Their UCL performance is quite impressive, were already guaranteed to qualify for the 2nd round before the final game against PSG. Newcastle basically gifted the 2nd position to PSG by losing to Milan..

 

[Joel Miller]

Yet they win the CL in Haalands first season.

That’s incidental though. He was really poor in the semi finals and the final.

 

[B20]

Djimi Traore won the CL for us in 2005. Two years later, he had left the club and we lost the 2007 final.

QED

 

[Fobal]

That’s incidental though. He was really poor in the semi finals and the final.

We should stop the nonsense that only semis, finals or knock out stages goals matter. We all get the importance, the scenario, even the glamopur but many titles are lost against minnows and great NT's go home in group stages because the team didn't do the homework. Not few times there are equal or more nerves in some stage group match than in semis or finals.

 

[Saffron]

We should stop the nonsense that only semis, finals or knock out stages goals matter. We all get the importance, the scenario, even the glamopur but many titles are lost against minnows and great NT's go home in group stages because the team didn't do the homework. Not few times there are equal or more nerves in some stage group match than in semis or finals.

You can't really compare a WC group stage to a CL group stage though. WC group stages are always super intense due to far fewer games meaning every single point is absolutely crucial. There are fewer pushover teams as well.

In CL group stages there is generally a sense that the group favourite will always go through in the end, even if it means finishing second. It's generally very easy to get tickets to generic CL group stage games and there's seldom a sense that every match is crucial. You only really get heated matches towards the end if a big team happens to be be in danger of not going through.

A league game often has more at stake than a CL group stage game.

 

[redmeister]

Haaland has missed 26 "big chances" this season and there are still 10 games to go. The current record his held by Haaland and that was 28 last season.

 

[MassVolto]

Haaland has missed 26 "big chances" this season and there are still 10 games to go. The current record his held by Haaland and that was 28 last season.

Source?

 

[redmeister]

Source?

Data goes back to 10/11 season

https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/big_chance_missed

 

[Joel Miller]

We should stop the nonsense that only semis, finals or knock out stages goals matter. We all get the importance, the scenario, even the glamopur but many titles are lost against minnows and great NT's go home in group stages because the team didn't do the homework. Not few times there are equal or more nerves in some stage group match than in semis or finals.

Why? You’re implying the finally won the CL because they had him. But they were in another CL final a couple of years prior too. So given that Haaland wasn’t the difference maker in the final (or even the semi’s) then why would it be acceptable to say that he was the missing piece of the puzzle? He was comfortably dealt with.

 

[Fobal]

Why? You’re implying the finally won the CL because they had him. But they were in another CL final a couple of years prior too. So given that Haaland wasn’t the difference maker in the final (or even the semi’s) then why would it be acceptable to say that he was the missing piece of the puzzle? He was comfortably dealt with.

Nah man, I was talking in general, of how we tend to forget that every competion is the match ahead and that so many teams fvcked it up way prior to a KO stage. That there are lots of other factors in prior stages in WCs, Copas, Euros or CLs that many times makes many matches harder to deal than a semi or final... it's a path, you are not allowed to skip the first "metres" and that winning in those instances not few times builds confidence or even in a lot of ocassions a new team is born during the competition.

On Hallands CL case, people tend to talk with the monday's paper, but the reality is that if they flew on group stages in CL was also due to Hallaand, and that he also with his mere presence alters any rival's squeme, not to an extent a Maradona, Messi does, but he still does it.
Does this mean that he could have played better or a lot better in some KO stages or games agaisnt big rivals in some cases (not always BTW), sure, but let's do not go to the other extreme and think that you arrive to those stages by doing nothing or not having sometimes a harder time than in late stages.

 

[heraklion]

but the reality is that if they flew on group stages in CL was also due to Hallaand,

Is this a joke?

and that he also with his mere presence alters any rival's squeme

As if other players' presence doesn't affect any rival's plans.

not to an extent a Maradona, Messi does,

and not to the extent of tons of other players.

not having sometimes a harder time than in late stages.

maybe 10% of the time.

90% of the time big teams like City fail in the post-group stage like QFs, SFs etc. Haaland wasn't brought to help City go through the group stage.. In fact, I don't even think City failed even once in the UCL group stage other than their first UCL campaign when they were not that big. For such teams, failing in the group stage is like soft-core relegation, an embarrasment that happens once maybe twice in every 10-20 years.

Especially, under Guardiola who never had any UCL group stage exit in 14 years, but lost 6 times in UCL semis..

let's do not go to the other extreme and think that you arrive to those stages by doing nothing or not having sometimes a harder time than in late stages.

Let's not go to the other extreme and attribute City's group stage "success??" to mostly Haaland and then declaring him as the main architect behind City's UCL win, this is not even funny or serious.

 

[Fobal]

Is this a joke?


As if other players' presence doesn't affect any rival's plans.


and not to the extent of tons of other players.


maybe 10% of the time.

90% of the time big teams like City fail in the post-group stage like QFs, SFs etc. Haaland wasn't brought to help City go through the group stage.. In fact, I don't even think City failed even once in the UCL group stage other than their first UCL campaign when they were not that big. For such teams, failing in the group stage is like soft-core relegation, an embarrasment that happens once maybe twice in every 10-20 years.

Especially, under Guardiola who never had any UCL group stage exit in 14 years, but lost 6 times in UCL semis..


Let's not go to the other extreme and attribute City's group stage "success??" to mostly Haaland and then declaring him as the main architect behind City's UCL win, this is not even funny or serious.

Man I was talking more in general regarding this obsession of only giving value to KO stages matches on every mata mata competition, I do not share that wide spread view on the subject.

Regarding Erling, he is a kid, he is what he is, City doesn't entirely suits his best assets and he has indeed to improve his game in certain circumstances, but he still is a really great goalscorer. BTW man, the Ballon D or silly discussions are over, just do not get over the top against the lad, he ain't my cup of tea type of player, but he ain't either a run of the mill player, he has plenty of time to improve too.

 

[wr8_utd]

Haaland has missed 26 "big chances" this season and there are still 10 games to go. The current record his held by Haaland and that was 28 last season.

I never really watch Haaland and think of him as clinical. He just misses way too many chances.

 

[heraklion]

Man I was talking more in general regarding this obsession of only giving value to KO stages matches on every mata mata competition, I do not share that wide spread view on the subject.

Regarding Erling, he is a kid, he is what he is, City doesn't entirely suits his best assets and he has indeed to improve his game in certain circumstances, but he still is a really great goalscorer. BTW man, the Ballon D or silly discussions are over, just do not get over the top against the lad, he ain't my cup of tea type of player, but he ain't either a run of the mill player, he has plenty of time to improve too.

My last couple of posts including the last one were a response to the claim that "City never won the UCL before Haaland, therefore he's the reason why they won it".

Other than that, I agree with most things in your post.

 

[Alpha 1]

Yet they win the CL in Haalands first season.

He was not the reason they won the final.

 

[kouroux]

When he had that run against VVD which ended up as a weak shot down the middle, I have no idea why the defending was so praised. For me, it was about Haaland not being able to keep his balance and place his shot. Imagine Mbappe in that same situation

 

[troylocker]

City has always been a top contender for all the titles dominating PL easily, either winning or playing semis & finals in top tournaments just like other top teams with or without Haaland. Haaland has never been a top contender for any top individual award like Ballon D'or, UEFA Best, FIFA Best, Golden Shoe etc. before coming to City, he couldn't even come close to winning Bundesliga let alone dreaming about touching UCL and Premier League titles until he came to City.

Haaland needs a team like City way more than City needs him to win things..

Yet they won their first ever treble in his first season there.
Are you sure he wasn't a top contender for any top individual awards prior to moving to City?
Here's a little selection of individual honors Haaland won before joining City (age 19-21): Player of the year in Germany (2021) and Austria (2019), top scorer in the CL (2021), golden boy (2020), UEFA CL forward of the season 20/21, Fifa world 11 in 20/21 and 21/22, top 10 and 11 in Ballon d'or votes in 21' and 22', IFFSH world 11 in 2022, ESM team of the year 19-20 etc.....and many more. Plus of course breaking a ton of goalscoring records along the way too. Is it possible for a player playing for Dortmund and a country that doesn't qualify for EUROs of WCs to be a bigger contender for the top individual award than Haaland was?
I mean Lewandowski was older than Haaland when he was there, but even when Dortmund were winning the BL and played CL finals with Lewa scoring 4 against Real Madrid in the CL-semis, Lewa only got top 25 once (14th) in the B d'or votes...... Imagine a 19/20/21 year old who couldn't even win the Bundesliga, reach semifinals in the CL or win PL titles with Dortmund on his own. You set high standards for players you don't like

City now has what is probably the thinnest and weakest squad they've had in a long time especially in the creative department.
Here's a list of City's key transfers in/out the last couple of seasons (concidering creativity and controlling games):

In: Alvarez, Grealish, Nunes, Doku and Kovacic.
Out: Sterling (avg. 14 assists/season), David Silva (avg. 14 assists/season), Mahrez (avg. 12 assists/season) , Gundogan (avg. 7 assists/season) + (Jesus, Aguero)

Who would you rather have to create chances for a pure goalscorer? The "in" or the "out" group of players? (I know they have KDB, Silva and Foden as well, but so did the out group) The city team 3-4 seasons ago had so much creativity in every position in the front 7-8 + plus they had wingbacks who could step in with creativity as well. Now they have bought Alvarez, 3 frustrating dribblers with little to no endproduct and Nunes who, well what is Nunes good at again?

The team they can put out to support an out and out #9 now compared to 3-5 seasons ago is pretty unimpressive.

That said, Haaland has had a sub par season by his standards. He's finishing has been off, that's just a fact. He is still intrumental for City and he will be key in City's trophyhunt this season as well.

I've said many times in here that there's more than one way to be good footballer. There's 22 players on the pitch and 95%+ of the time you don't have a football at your feet. What you do off the ball is important and requires just as much skill and talent as the on the ball part of the game. A striker who doesn't need service doesn't exist. Strikers don't dictate games, their job is make themselves available for service, convert chances and occupy defenders/stretch teams + defensive contributions as 1st defender. Most of those tasks doesn't involve carrying the ball, but still requires talent, intelligence and a great deal of physique and focus. In those areas, Haaland is as good anyone who's played football. Finesse and picking up the ball deep to distribute or create is not among Haaland's main attributes, and he has obvious flaws in his game, but he compensates with his extreme qualities in other areas. The idea that you need to be complete or good at everything to be considered among the best is silly. Specialists can be great footballers too.

 

[devaneios]

In: Alvarez, Grealish, Nunes, Doku and Kovacic.
Out: Sterling (avg. 14 assists/season), David Silva (avg. 14 assists/season), Mahrez (avg. 12 assists/season) , Gundogan (avg. 7 assists/season) + (Jesus, Aguero)

Who would you rather have to create chances for a pure goalscorer? The "in" or the "out" group of players? (I know they have KDB, Silva and Foden as well, but so did the out group) The city team 3-4 seasons ago had so much creativity in every position in the front 7-8 + plus they had wingbacks who could step in with creativity as well. Now they have bought Alvarez, 3 frustrating dribblers with little to no endproduct and Nunes who, well what is Nunes good at again?

City in 21/22 with Mahrez, Gundogan and without David Silva
150 goals in 58 matches(100 GD)

City in 22/23 with Mahrez, Gundogan and without David Silva
151 goals in 61 matches(105 GD)

Unless you put a lot of importance on Sterling regarding creativity, doesn't seem a fair argument. Also, Aguero(who wasn't at City in 21/22) and Jesus leaving isn't much relevant, as they would play in Haaland's position.

Of course a player can be way better in one season than in another, but that wasn't your point and proves of that are necessary.

 

[heraklion]

Yet they won their first ever treble in his first season there.

And, so?
Yet, Haaland never touched a top-5 league title or a double or a treble before City.
Yet, Haaland was never a top contender for Ballon D'or, UEFA Best, FIFA Best, Golden Shoe before City
Yet, Haaland couldn't even lead a top-5 league in goalscoring before City

Yet, Haaland has 0 g&a in 7 semis & finals "even with City"

Are you sure he wasn't a top contender for any top individual awards prior to moving to City?
Here's a little selection of individual honors Haaland won before joining City (age 19-21): Player of the year in Germany (2021) and Austria (2019), top scorer in the CL (2021), golden boy (2020), UEFA CL forward of the season 20/21, Fifa world 11 in 20/21 and 21/22, top 10 and 11 in Ballon d'or votes in 21' and 22', IFFSH world 11 in 2022, ESM team of the year 19-20 etc.....and many more. Plus of course breaking a ton of goalscoring records along the way too. Is it possible for a player playing for Dortmund and a country that doesn't qualify for EUROs of WCs to be a bigger contender for the top individual award than Haaland was?

Yes, I am sure.
talks about top awards, then mentions "player of the year, Austria", imagine hyping up Ballon D'or "no.10-11" as "top contender"
Any Golden Shoe contender?
Any FIFA Best top-contender, Any UEFA Player of the Year top-contender like top-2, like top-3, like top-5, should I go on?

Imagine a 19/20/21 year old who couldn't even win the Bundesliga, reach semifinals in the CL or win PL titles with Dortmund on his own. You set high standards for players you don't like

Aren't you the guy declaring him better than R9, Van Basten, Messi, CR7 etc?
Aren't you the guy saying "but but City never won the treble before Haaland"?

Why are you so accepting of lower standards for Haaland "before City"? At the end of the day, "in your own words", he brought the treble for City, and he's better than almost all other top goalscorers

Dortmund was on the verge of winning Bundesliga right after Haaland left, they're in the UCL QFs this year.
Surely Haaland could at least win a Bundesliga title with them with "his superpowers"? At the end of the day, he was the "treble-maker" for City..

City now has what is probably the thinnest and weakest squad they've had in a long time especially in the creative department.
Here's a list of City's key transfers in/out the last couple of seasons (concidering creativity and controlling games):

Your football knowledge is more like sub-zero.

Are you by any chance from Norway, specifically from Haaland's village or something? That's the only thing that could explain the level of delusion in your posts.

 

[Eriku]

When he had that run against VVD which ended up as a weak shot down the middle, I have no idea why the defending was so praised. For me, it was about Haaland not being able to keep his balance and place his shot. Imagine Mbappe in that same situation

Let’s imagine:


2:43

 

[kouroux]

Let’s imagine:


2:43

I had that sequence in mind and the difference in defending is fairly obvious don't you think ? Less space for starters and much better defending overall. The outcome would have been very different in he let Mbappe shoot the same way he did with Haaland

 

[Eriku]

I had that sequence in mind and the difference in defending is fairly obvious don't you think ? Less space for starters and much better defending overall. The outcome would have been very different in he let Mbappe shoot the same way he did with Haaland

Pretty bloody similar if you ask me. Haaland fluffed it, sure, but he managed to get the space needed to get an unhindered shot off in the first place.

 

[giorno]

I had that sequence in mind and the difference in defending is fairly obvious don't you think ? Less space for starters and much better defending overall. The outcome would have been very different in he let Mbappe shoot the same way he did with Haaland

He let Haaland shoot because there was more space, and timed his challenge perfectly to throw him off balance right as he was taking the shot

VVD is an historically great 1vs1 defender, maybe only Ronaldo pre-injury and Messi could be expected to get the better of him in those scenarios

 

[GledTheRed]

He let Haaland shoot because there was more space, and timed his challenge perfectly to throw him off balance right as he was taking the shot

VVD is an historically great 1vs1 defender, maybe only Ronaldo pre-injury and Messi could be expected to get the better of him in those scenarios

Didn't VVD just push him off balance?

What a genius.

 

[Tom Cato]

Is the argument that Haaland makes teams worse?

 

[Saffron]

Is the argument that Haaland makes teams worse?

Not ”teams” but City specifically. Just like Zlatan made prime Barca worse but would have been great for almost any other team. And Zlatan had much better link up play than Haaland.

Having such a one dimensional player on top just happens to be an exceptionally bad fit for the free flowing machine City used to be. They used to unravel teams with ease and score 5 for fun with 5 different goalscorers.

Now they struggle to beat relegation threatened teams 1-0 and they've actually been lucky to have as many points as they do according to the xPoints table.

 

[adexkola]

Is the argument that Haaland makes teams worse?

Yeah, when Haaland is playing it's like City is playing with 10 men. Or something

Having such a one dimensional player on top just happens to be an exceptionally bad fit for the free flowing machine City used to be. They used to unravel teams with ease and score 5 for fun with 5 different goalscorers.

Now they struggle to beat relegation threatened teams 1-0 and they've actually been lucky to have as many points as they do according to the xPoints table.

Aye, they've never struggled to put relegation threatened teams away before Haaland.

No mention of the fact that they're conceding more goals, have less "patient" players in the buildup (losing Gundogan/Mahrez, gaining Doku/Alvarez) causing more transition opportunities for the opposition, lost KdB for half a season, are trying to do what no other team has done (without a dropoff in performances) in retaining a treble (including a 4th PL in a row)...

Their drop off is mainly due to the guy, who despite also missing 2 months of the season, has... checks notes 30 goals and 6 assists?

The bot has an excuse. What excuse do others have?

 

[adexkola]

And the Zlatan example isn't applicable here. For one, playing him as center moved the best player in the world at the time and an arguable GOAT of all time from his position, in that team. If primetime Messi is in this City side, Haaland gets benched or moved elsewhere, but so does any striker in the world past or present (yes, including R9)

Second, you can point to multiple Barcelona performances on either side of Zlatan (08/09, 10/11) as proof that Barcelona were better off without him. Where is that proof with Haaland? What performances of the previous 2 years before his arrival are proof that maybe this was a wrong decision? How do you look at a treble side and say, "well actually he made them worse". Worse than what exactly?

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Is the argument that Haaland makes teams worse?

City, who haven’t yet gone out of a major competition in the 19 months since he joined.

 

[kouroux]

Pretty bloody similar if you ask me. Haaland fluffed it, sure, but he managed to get the space needed to get an unhindered shot off in the first place.

Easily much better defending in the Holland clip