Unless you've done a statistical breakdown of his missed chances and cross referenced it against all the other top strikers at the time then it's a bunch of BS influenced by what Hoddle said. Every striker misses chances. Saying that 'he's not as clinical as Romario' is not the same as the Hoddle crap that he needs 8 chances to score a goal. Every striker needs multiple chances to score a goal. One wonders how he managed to become the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (2nd at time of retirement) with all the thousands of chances he was supposedly missing.The feck has Glenn Hoddle got to do with it? I remember it cos he frustrated the hell out of me.
He became the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (if that's true) by playing for 7 years in the most prolific team in PL history, in his and our prime. If he was more clinical he'd have done much better. I don't care what Hoddle says, guy is a clown. If you ever watched Cole you'd know his best trait was to give the ball to Yorke when he could, a much better player.Unless you've done a statistical breakdown of his missed chances and cross referenced it against all the other top strikers at the time then it's a bunch of BS influenced by what Hoddle said. Every striker misses chances. Saying that 'he's not as clinical as Romario' is not the same as the Hoddle crap that he needs 8 chances to score a goal. Every striker needs multiple chances to score a goal. One wonders how he managed to become the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (2nd at time of retirement) with all the thousands of chances he was supposedly missing.
...Which year did Cole score 40+ goals?Cole's first season with us was a disaster; it's to fergie's credit he stuck with him and was repaid with a 40 plus goals the following year.
He wasn't the most agreeable of personalities by all accounts. Remember him being offended by people not referring to him as 'Andrew' and throwing his toys out the pram.
In his first season, he scored 12 in 18 league games, I would hardly call that a disaster - the next season he only scored 11 in 34.Cole's first season with us was a disaster; it's to fergie's credit he stuck with him and was repaid with a 40 plus goals the following year.
He wasn't the most agreeable of personalities by all accounts. Remember him being offended by people not referring to him as 'Andrew' and throwing his toys out the pram.
Cole scored 12 in 18 league games in his first half season with us. He never came close to scoring 40+ goals in a United season?Cole's first season with us was a disaster; it's to fergie's credit he stuck with him and was repaid with a 40 plus goals the following year.
He wasn't the most agreeable of personalities by all accounts. Remember him being offended by people not referring to him as 'Andrew' and throwing his toys out the pram.
Exactly, so many people repeat this line as if he had some terrible conversion rate. If it was true and he didn't miss those 5 chances for every goal that they say he did then he'd have nearly 1000 goals in the PL.You remember that because Glenn Hoddle told you to remember that. It's objectively nonsense.
Aye. If we look at the peak of his career in two-season chunks:Cole's first season with us was a disaster; it's to fergie's credit he stuck with him and was repaid with a 40 plus goals the following year.
Exactly if he also scored all those "missed" chances he'd have over 400 pl goalsUnless you've done a statistical breakdown of his missed chances and cross referenced it against all the other top strikers at the time then it's a bunch of BS influenced by what Hoddle said. Every striker misses chances. Saying that 'he's not as clinical as Romario' is not the same as the Hoddle crap that he needs 8 chances to score a goal. Every striker needs multiple chances to score a goal. One wonders how he managed to become the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (2nd at time of retirement) with all the thousands of chances he was supposedly missing.
Except it was debunked multiple times over the years.Cole's first season with us was a disaster; it's to fergie's credit he stuck with him and was repaid with a 40 plus goals the following year.
He wasn't the most agreeable of personalities by all accounts. Remember him being offended by people not referring to him as 'Andrew' and throwing his toys out the pram.
The England thing is definitely a problem but it applies to a lot of the other top strikers at the time that were not given the same opportunity Shearer was.Was one of my favourite players growing up. Between around 97 and 00 he was just excellence, often had a cracker of a goal up his sleeve to. Peak andy would be a welcome addition to this team
Probably what goes against him when people talk about best PL strikers is that it never really happened with England. Still anybody unfamiliar i strongly recommend some Cole videos on YouTube. A joy
He scored 12, but got 5 v Ipswich in the 9-0. It did take him a bit of time to get going, but the partnership with Yorke was just so good, eg the goals v Barca in 99.Cole scored 12 in 18 league games in his first half season with us. He never came close to scoring 40+ goals in a United season?
He was incredibly unlucky that he played in an era where England had an incredible pool of strikers to choose from.Was one of my favourite players growing up. Between around 97 and 00 he was just excellence, often had a cracker of a goal up his sleeve to. Peak andy would be a welcome addition to this team
Probably what goes against him when people talk about best PL strikers is that it never really happened with England. Still anybody unfamiliar i strongly recommend some Cole videos on YouTube. A joy
The competition you listed most of them played much less than he did.I'm just saying he didn't play much for England cos of the amount of competition and that stands against him in making lists of great strikers if you're not making your national team.
I think Hoddle didn't bring him to France 98 cos Sheringham and Ferdinand offered something different and Cole was more similar to Owen and Shearer.
I know he's numbers are great but I remember finding him frustrating to watch at times.
Anyway he had a great career and won more than the other England strikers put together.
Most prolific in prem history? How did you work that out? Blackburn outscored us in 1993, Newcastle outscored us in 94, Blackburn outscored us in 1995 (cole played half). We were leading scorers in 1996, 97, 98, 99, 2000. interesting to see his conversion rate.He became the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (if that's true) by playing for 7 years in the most prolific team in PL history, in his and our prime. If he was more clinical he'd have done much better. I don't care what Hoddle says, guy is a clown. If you ever watched Cole you'd know his best trait was to give the ball to Yorke when he could, a much better player.
I'll say it again. Shearer went 10 games without scoring and kept his place. If the process was fair, other guys would have got more opportunities.There weren't as many international fixtures at the time, we had a cast iron first choice striker in Shearer and a raft of good forwards just begind him. You could argue several strikers from that era didn't earn enough caps as they all took games off each other fighting for scraps behind Shearer.
Loved Cole though, forward like him now would transform our team.
This is an asinine postHe became the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (if that's true) by playing for 7 years in the most prolific team in PL history, in his and our prime. If he was more clinical he'd have done much better. I don't care what Hoddle says, guy is a clown. If you ever watched Cole you'd know his best trait was to give the ball to Yorke when he could, a much better player.
Why let fact get in the way of an opinion? Also sits 13th for Premier League assists. Yorke is nowhere to be seen on both lists.He became the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (if that's true)
Totally agree.I'll say it again. Shearer went 10 games without scoring and kept his place. If the process was fair, other guys would have got more opportunities.
As a matter of interest, how old were you when we signed Cole in 1994/95?He was decent, any side would of been happy to have him I'm sure, but he was hardly a top striker that teams build around. Yorke was the talisman. I certainly wouldn't have him in a top 10 list.
I just remember Cole as needing at least 5 chances to finally find the back of the net, and he got fed a lot of good chances. Had his best years at Newcastle before coming to us.
People remember it more because he missed some big chances, West Ham final day, Real Madrid there's probably a few others.Unless you've done a statistical breakdown of his missed chances and cross referenced it against all the other top strikers at the time then it's a bunch of BS influenced by what Hoddle said. Every striker misses chances. Saying that 'he's not as clinical as Romario' is not the same as the Hoddle crap that he needs 8 chances to score a goal. Every striker needs multiple chances to score a goal. One wonders how he managed to become the 4th most prolific striker in PL history (2nd at time of retirement) with all the thousands of chances he was supposedly missing.
Because Hoddle says dumb things. I do agree though that the last day v West Ham is something that sticks in the memory so that's fair. He gained redemption in following seasons but I think that first year there was a lot of pressure on him because of the transfer fee. Plus a lot of prolific strikers went to United and didn't match their typical numbers prior to him, it was something of a theme going way back to people like Birtles and Brazil and then even people like McClair in Fergie's era. It's been a bit of a graveyard for strikers (with some exceptions) so I think all in all, Cole did well.People remember it more because he missed some big chances, West Ham final day, Real Madrid there's probably a few others.
Hoddle also said that Michael Owen wasn't a natural goalscorer.
Absolutely. Another England manger might have had him as his main man. I don't mean it as a criticism of Cole, just something that has probably diminished his reputation whereas stupidly, even one decent international tournament would have changed all thatHe was incredibly unlucky that he played in an era where England had an incredible pool of strikers to choose from.
Shearer, Sheringham, Les Ferdinand, Fowler, Owen, Ian Wright just off the top of my head.
He'd comfortably be second choice after Kane if he were playing today!
People remember myths more than reality though. I watched the West Ham match live on TV in 95,and I didn't recall him being at fault. I rewatched it in it's entirity a couple of years back to check my memory and I didn't find it changed my mind at all. Miklosko just played the match of his life and we were missing key players.People remember it more because he missed some big chances, West Ham final day, Real Madrid there's probably a few others.
Hoddle also said that Michael Owen wasn't a natural goalscorer.
I can't get my head around this. Surely Hoddle would've seen Cole and Sheringham link up well for United in the 97-98 season, so you'd assume this was enough evidence to put to bed any fears that Cole's hatred towards Sheringham could ruin England's World Cup chances. Or am I missing something?It was well known Sheringham and Cole didn't get along. Had been a thing since Cole replaced Sheringham in an England match in 95. Cole was walking onto the pitch, first ever game for his country, Sheringham totally blanked him, didn't shake his hand or even acknowledge he was coming on. Cole felt humiliated in front of all the thousands of people watching, should have been a huge moment in an England shirt, but Sheringham ruined it by doing that and he hated him for it ever since. Still does apparently.
Hoddle didn’t bring him to France because he wanted Sheringham in the squad and he knew they didn't get along, so he made up a bullshit excuse and brought Ferdinand instead. He could have brought Dublin or Sutton for something different because they were actually in form that season. Might have made some sense, but he brought a guy who scored about 5 or 6 league goals and then said Cole needed 7 or 8 chances to score.
Old enough to be excited about the signing of the biggest prospect in English football at the time. Unfortunately he never quite reached his potential. Good player no doubt, did a job for us, but people trying to compare him to Ruud & Shearer are off their tree. More like Dion Dublin level.As a matter of interest, how old were you when we signed Cole in 1994/95?
Also fairPeople remember myths more than reality though. I watched the West Ham match live on TV in 95,and I didn't recall him being at fault. I rewatched it in it's entirity a couple of years back to check my memory and I didn't find it changed my mind at all. Miklosko just played the match of his life and we were missing key players.
I don’t remember Hoddle saying that, but my overriding memory of Cole was that he’d miss more than he’d put away. I always used to think if we’d signed Shearer he’d have scored 50 league goals a season. Cole did miss an awful lot of easy chances, no escaping that. And I do rate him, too.absolute quality player, still one of my favourites to this day. Criminally underrated player, a lot of it stems from that twat Hoddle and his " 5 chances to score 1 goal" comment. We were so despised in those days, people took notice of any shite spouted and ran with it as gospel.
He was decent, any side would of been happy to have him I'm sure, but he was hardly a top striker that teams build around. Yorke was the talisman. I certainly wouldn't have him in a top 10 list.
I just remember Cole as needing at least 5 chances to finally find the back of the net, and he got fed a lot of good chances. Had his best years at Newcastle before coming to us.
The Andrew thing isn’t true. He’s spoken on it many times in interviews. He didn’t care.Cole's first season with us was a disaster; it's to fergie's credit he stuck with him and was repaid with a 40 plus goals the following year.
He wasn't the most agreeable of personalities by all accounts. Remember him being offended by people not referring to him as 'Andrew' and throwing his toys out the pram.
Old enough to analyse a player's performance in numerous matches, or just to see whether they'd printed his poster in the middle of Shoot magazine?Old enough to be excited about the signing of the biggest prospect in English football at the time. Unfortunately he never quite reached his potential. Good player no doubt, did a job for us, but people trying to compare him to Ruud & Shearer are off their tree. More like Dion Dublin level.
Utterly insane to compare him to Dublin. Insane opinion.Old enough to be excited about the signing of the biggest prospect in English football at the time. Unfortunately he never quite reached his potential. Good player no doubt, did a job for us, but people trying to compare him to Ruud & Shearer are off their tree. More like Dion Dublin level.
Old enough to be excited about the signing of the biggest prospect in English football at the time. Unfortunately he never quite reached his potential. Good player no doubt, did a job for us, but people trying to compare him to Ruud & Shearer are off their tree. More like Dion Dublin level.
