Well he is the main issue of our attack. He is to easy to lock down and even if he beats a guy he stops.
His best work is defensively, which isn't what you want of your winger.
Antony is proper useless.
11
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 38
- Goals
- 11
- Assists
- 2
- Yellow cards
- 2
His best work is defensively, which isn't what you want of your winger.
Antony is proper useless.
The most interesting stat there, that matches the eye test, is that Rasmus best partner is Rashford. Rasmus has gotten worse with every match where Rashford has been absent.
I think these stats are probably bollocks, I suspect Rashford not passing when he should, taking too many touches and running into traffick only to scuff a shot/pass that happens to fly past Højlund equals a chance created.
This is all about subjective opinions and I respect you’re seeing something in a different way to me, but here’s a few genuine questions…
Is it also Hojlund’s fault that Antony is crap?
Or just Antony’s fault that Hojlund’s crap?
And further still, if the output of a CF is essentially mainly down to their wingers and creators - as is being endlessly suggested for Hojlund - why didn’t Jesus score even half the goals for City that Haaland does…? It’s the same creative players feeding him. Jesus is a really good player…
Why won’t Richarlison score Kane numbers? Same creators surrounding him.
Why even bother buying a top CF if it’s essentially mainly down to your wingers?
Or is it that the ability to score goals is an innate talent that some have in higher levels than others and perhaps Hojlund’s level of that ability is currently not actually that high in relation to actual elite forwards.
Last edited:
Even when we were playing better last season Antony wasn't doing well with creating chances. It's clearly not because of Hojlund.
I can't speak for anyone else, but has Antony or Garnacho been worse than Rashford this season? Statistically yes in terms of supplying Hojlund but I don't recall seeing anything that suggests this, Hojlund is out of his depth and those supplying him are under performing hugely, but the stats that support this don't reflect what's happening on the pitch. The failure of our young attacker and the failures of those supplying him aren't mutually exclusive, it's both. Stats are infuriating.
You first have to have bucket loads of chances created for you in order to determine whether he is going to score a lot or miss a lot. It’s all well and good saying he could be a Kane or a Richarlison, a Jesus or a Haaland but until he gets the kind of service they get how do you know for sure? The likes of Kane and Haaland’s chance conversion rate is somewhere within the 20-30% of all chances they get, yet Hojlund gets so little we’re essentially berating him for not having a higher chance conversion rate than these two because he has so little amounts of chances to try and convert in comparison.
I'd like to give Rashford another run on the left since Garnacho's been struggling recently and he has a good impact off the bench. Lets see if Hojlund does better with him this time. Although the thing to remember with Rashford is that the main reason he was dropped the first time was for his utterly diabolical (especially defensively) performance against Newcastle where he half-assed every challenge and the rest of the time didn't even bother tracking his man.
That was extremely obvious from their early matches, but fanbase decided on this season’s scapegoat early when the goals didn’t flow.
Guys like you have issues you need to resolve first before you post:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The stats support the eye test that Antony and Garnacho are the worst partners for our striker and he has gotten worse with every game, getting less passes and having less involvement the more he has played with them.
Antony was rubbish before Højlund arrived so the idea that Højlund made Antony worse is a bit silly.
Rasmus started well and actually scored a goal very early from a Rashford pass. Sadly that got chalked off by one of this seasons many VAR mistakes.
Rashford, despite playing less, has passed to Højlund more. It makes sense given those two have actually trained together outside of team training to improve their play together.
We need to get Rashford back and Amad
People need to stop talking about fecking Kane. He is the best striker in the world and we where never getting him. Get over it. Expecting Højlund to be prime Kane and not 20 year old Kane is setting yourself up for dissapointment.
Rashford struggled early on because he was, unlike Antony and Garnacho, actually trying to adapt his playstyle to having a striker partner.
He has played a completely different game for many years but it was pretty clear he wanted to adapt. And even a struggling Rashford gave our attack much better synergy than Antony.
To all the ETH faithful, how do you explain this ? If a manager cannot instruct/influence the play for his main striker to be fed, wtf is his point then ?
His performances and lack of output are concerning, although it's not entirely his fault. No proper midfield, selfish wingers.
that’s not my point: my point was that if these two players were taking it upon themselves not to pass to our striker (and I doubt that’s actually the case), then they shouldn’t be playing, given the positions they play (not to mention their own underwhelming output.)
I can’t stand Rashford - think he’s been garbage. I would be curious to know what his stats have been in terms of passing to Hojlund.
The funny thing is, and I say this as a huge critic of Rashford, that Rashford has it in him to get to the byline and make very incisive passes into the danger area (all whilst providing a very credible goal threat, unlike Antony.) We saw it in one of Hojlund’s first games, as well as last year (I remember an own goal resulting from his playing one such dangerous pass with his left foot, but can’t recall the opponent.)
The challenge is getting Rashford’s head out of his ass, which is no small task, unfortunately.
There's nothing to explain, really. The right flank, in terms of creativity, is a black hole. There's nothing new about that. We went on and spent close to a 100 million quid to attain the services of a RW whose primary functions are progressive carries/passes, providing width and shielding the ball. He's always been the supporting cast to an attacking full-back and whoever in the system occupies the right half-space. At United, we expect AWB and Dalot to do the job players like Mazraoui or Hakimi do. His game is also incompatible with the way Bruno envisions the play-maker role, so they never formed a good understanding between them. Now, in all his wisdom, ETH is taking the piss out of this fanbase by shoehorning McTominay into these areas. Because... goals or whatever. On the other flank, he basically ditched last season's plan with Rashford as the main finisher inside the box (with Shaw/Malacia as the supporting cast down the flank) to turn the latter into a provider who use isos to feed a young and inexperienced forward in the box. Now, the newbie doesn't know what to do on the pitch, Rashford is devoid of all confidence, his replacement (Garnacho) is still miles off being ready for this level and Shaw looks bewildered, more often than not, as an inverted full-back. There are no two pieces in that puzzle that seem compatible with one another. We are relying on Dalot/AWB and McT to exploit the right flank and create openings, and on Rashford/Garnacho to constantly beat their man and score/create on the opposite side. Or Bruno to come deep in the build-up to find someone in-behind with space to run into. I don't even know what Hojlund is supposed to be doing up front.
I don't think he's gonna work as a lone striker while still developing. He needs a technical 2nd striker with him on the pitch, he had the same with Atalanta and his national team.
The focus on his goals is not focusing on the main problem. He can score goals, the CL has proved that, his league drought is a bit of a statistical anomaly. My main area of concern is his all round play and his basic technique which is being kind, erratic at this stage. If his hold up play, link up, passing on the move, first touch, does not improve then I don't think he is a long term starter.
I think/hope it will improve, but it might be a 2/3 year process, comes back to needing a starting ready level striker, ideally with an all round game, to take the pressure off him and create some cohesiveness in attack. Who that is I don't know, who isn't looking for that type.
I don't think he's good enough but the fact that Garnacho and Antony have only passed the ball to him a combined 11 times is abysmal. The tactics are shocking and ETH simply has to go.
It's always a chicken and egg situation with strikers when the team is underperforming and chances and goals in short supply.
Is the team not creating or is he not making the runs correctly?
Is he holding the ball up well enough for the team to build a platform or should the team be getting the ball up the pitch more effectively?
Should he be expected to do more off his own back as a 9 for us?
I'm not sure, logically it's probably both. Not as if Hojlund has been fluffing his lines every game. He's missed a few but there isn't great service. Sometimes he holds the ball well sometimes he doesn't. Some of his runs seem pointless and sometimes we have brainless players that don't see him. It's probably exactly what it is, a rough prospect in a fairly shocking team with players like Garnacho who is rough himself and Antony who is totally useless. It's hard work and needs a lot of training pitch time.
Is the team not creating or is he not making the runs correctly?
Is he holding the ball up well enough for the team to build a platform or should the team be getting the ball up the pitch more effectively?
Should he be expected to do more off his own back as a 9 for us?
I'm not sure, logically it's probably both. Not as if Hojlund has been fluffing his lines every game. He's missed a few but there isn't great service. Sometimes he holds the ball well sometimes he doesn't. Some of his runs seem pointless and sometimes we have brainless players that don't see him. It's probably exactly what it is, a rough prospect in a fairly shocking team with players like Garnacho who is rough himself and Antony who is totally useless. It's hard work and needs a lot of training pitch time.
By this logic Garnacho and Antony are the worst wingers in the league, Bruno is the worst playmaker. Currently no assists or goals in many matches.
Martial and rashford have been on the striker position and been just as bad but with less defensive work.
But lets spend another 50-100 mill on a new striker instead of fixing the biggest problem wich is our midfield. Keep Mainoo and Eriksen for the bench and get 3 new starter who can work and play passes.
Spot on and all great points. I like the kid but the excuses are too much at times.
This, is a nutshell, sums it all up as to how weak and hopeless some corners of our fanbase have become:
“People need to stop talking about fecking Kane. He is the best striker in the world and we were never getting him.”
Out of respect for the poster, I will not disclose his username.
“People need to stop talking about fecking Kane. He is the best striker in the world and we were never getting him.”
Out of respect for the poster, I will not disclose his username.
The starting eleven each week is almost like eleven tiny fires that all need putting out.
Trouble is which do you put out first.
Hojlund individually has problems, but when the wingers and midfield also has problems it’s not quick or simple to fix.
Trouble is which do you put out first.
Hojlund individually has problems, but when the wingers and midfield also has problems it’s not quick or simple to fix.
League 1!?
A really great striker will probably still score goals even with our team performing like this. obviously he isn't that (yet?), and may never be. But I really can't blame what's happening right now on him at all. He's the most inexperienced starter in our team and we're playing like absolute shit. Our players seem to either ignore him or never find the time and space to find him. That's also maybe a him problem, but he's 20 and we have 3/4 "creative" players behind him doing feck all. I feel bad for him, it's such a shit environment for him to develop and you can see he's already lost the vigour he had when he first joined. In his first few games he looked quality, he was holding it up and moving it on, pressing and running like crazy. That's gone because we've already destroyed his confidence
also, nobody should have ever expected him to be an instant success either. He's 20, he hasn't played a lot of first team football and the PL is a big step up as well. Overall I like the positives I've seen a lot and I can very easily forgive the negatives so far.
Ah come on, not only does Levy have to agree to sell him to us rather than abroad, but Kane would have to choose us over Bayern. It's weirder that people think we could have got him tbh.
Some better context
Yes Rashford did and does a better job getting the ball to Hoijlund's feet. But when you take into account the ability to get the ball to any player who can shoot Rashford has been one of our worst attackers. In terms of Hoijlund getting a premier league goal? Sure, Rashford playing more could well be the key to it. Most likely everyone else scores less goals combined though because he's the only one Rashford is passing to.
More Reguilon and Hannibal is most likely a better solution for the team scoring more goals in general. And if Hoijlund isnt among them? Then he needs to do something about that.
He's been nearish but doesnt quite get to plenty of balls across the box this season that if he got to them they'd be fairly easy to turn in. Antony put in a great first time right foot cross that he hesitated before gambling on in our last game. That wont count as a key pass or a chance created because he didnt get a touch on the ball. But if he gambled from the outset he had a very good chance of scoring a goal
Yes Rashford did and does a better job getting the ball to Hoijlund's feet. But when you take into account the ability to get the ball to any player who can shoot Rashford has been one of our worst attackers. In terms of Hoijlund getting a premier league goal? Sure, Rashford playing more could well be the key to it. Most likely everyone else scores less goals combined though because he's the only one Rashford is passing to.
More Reguilon and Hannibal is most likely a better solution for the team scoring more goals in general. And if Hoijlund isnt among them? Then he needs to do something about that.
He's been nearish but doesnt quite get to plenty of balls across the box this season that if he got to them they'd be fairly easy to turn in. Antony put in a great first time right foot cross that he hesitated before gambling on in our last game. That wont count as a key pass or a chance created because he didnt get a touch on the ball. But if he gambled from the outset he had a very good chance of scoring a goal
Well said and could not agree more.
But, I still see the issue of Hojlund not being fed enough > Hojlund not being good, because simply put, we can't tell if a striker is good if he does not get enough service/balls from his teammates, yes some great strikers can operate on scraps and still manage something out of nothing, but not a 20yo inexperienced strikers.
Well what part of that statement is wrong?
Gee, maybe this part?
"...we were never getting him".
Kane was desperate to leave Spurs and claim Shearer's scoring record. Levy would have taken 120m from us and if we pushed us to 125m, Kane would still have been a bargain.
That is incredibly naive.
Gee, it sure must be fun creating fantasies in your mind.
I have no doubt that Kane would have joined us. However, I seriously doubt Levy would sell to us. A mere 25m above what Bayern were offering wouldn't twist his arm in my opinion. I think Levy would charge us 150m MINIMUM.
He'll bag one tonight now that Eriksen is back!
Needs a goal
Man Utd 3:2 Aston Villa
Never in doubt.