And what have we learned?
Arsenal are a real threat and it is hard to see them not challenging for the rest of the season. If they win then it will be because they deserve it.
City look like a few things really need to click into place, with a few of the players suffering post WC dips in form. Inevitable I suppose that we would suffer the most as City sent almost twice as many players as most of their rivals. Haaland is the best striker in the PL by a long long way and hopefully Alvarez will be a great asset. Rico and Palmer mean the future looks good and Phillips needs to prove he was worth a transfer.
Newcastle, should get top 4 and in future seasons will challenge for the PL and the Cups.
United, sadly appear to have actually turned a corner and the derby is unlikely to be a repeat of the game earlier this season. Those 4 should be the Top 4 at the end of the season.
The rest? Chelsea need a lot of time if Potter is to get them playing the same tune. Liverpool, no idea, wheels have come off much more than expected and Nunez looks like he needs time to settle in the league. Spurs, even if the Qatari's invest will be doubly financially doped but as long as they are financially dopey are unlikely to ever win anything.
Brentford and Fulham are outperforming expectations and playing decent football.
Relegation? Any 3 from 13th down tbh, Wolves cannot score, Forest want to buy a new team every transfer window and Everton and West Ham look all over the place.
Almost halfway through the season
posted on 10/1/23
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 13 minutes ago
who cares about all round footballer?
———
Most people at the very top of the game. It’s why limited goal poachers aren’t much of a thing nowadays. Though Haaland’s beastly goal record has changed that to an extent. And I think Kane is a better striker, he offers a lot more in the role. Even when he doesn’t score he can be the best player on the pitch, when Haaland doesn’t score he’s usually invisible - in fact, he’s often invisible even when he does score as he hardly touches the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
disagree, football no more than ever is about numbers. passes completed, tackles made, presses , intense sprints etc..... this is what managers and scouts look at now . how effective they are.
If a player produces better numbers they are thought of as better players in scouts and managers eyes.
So much stat work involved now that entertainment and doing multiple roles becomes less important than actual results.
posted on 10/1/23
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 13 minutes ago
who cares about all round footballer?
———
Most people at the very top of the game. It’s why limited goal poachers aren’t much of a thing nowadays. Though Haaland’s beastly goal record has changed that to an extent. And I think Kane is a better striker, he offers a lot more in the role. Even when he doesn’t score he can be the best player on the pitch, when Haaland doesn’t score he’s usually invisible - in fact, he’s often invisible even when he does score as he hardly touches the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
disagree, football no more than ever is about numbers. passes completed, tackles made, presses , intense sprints etc..... this is what managers and scouts look at now . how effective they are.
If a player produces better numbers they are thought of as better players in scouts and managers eyes.
So much stat work involved now that entertainment and doing multiple roles becomes less important than actual results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And players with better all round numbers are usually valued more than players with limited ones. There’s a reason many were surprised City went for Haaland as Pep has always valued players that bring more to the table than just goals from inside the box.
posted on 10/1/23
To come back to my original point; some will think Haaland is better and some Kane better overall. Some will argue X is better for Y team and visa versa.
I think to say one is better than the other by a “long, long way” (OP) is just not right.
posted on 10/1/23
I think to say one is better than the other by a “long, long way” (OP) is just not right.
———
Unless it’s talking about their overall ability, in which case it’s fair to say Kane is much better. But Haaland is absolutely phenomenal at the limited things that he does. Just depends on what you want from you striker. But I’ll never subscribe to the idea that Haaland is a better striker because he’s scoring so many tap ins for the most creative team in football. It’s like when United fans used to say RVN was a better striker than Henry because he was more clinical in the box. Deep down everyone knew Henry was much better.
posted on 10/1/23
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 16 minutes ago
I think to say one is better than the other by a “long, long way” (OP) is just not right.
———
Unless it’s talking about their overall ability, in which case it’s fair to say Kane is much better. But Haaland is absolutely phenomenal at the limited things that he does. Just depends on what you want from you striker. But I’ll never subscribe to the idea that Haaland is a better striker because he’s scoring so many tap ins for the most creative team in football. It’s like when United fans used to say RVN was a better striker than Henry because he was more clinical in the box. Deep down everyone knew Henry was much better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that one is not waaay better than the other but your comparing a 22yr old with a 30 Yr old. Who knows, Haaland could still develop his all round game on top of his striking ability, im sure Kane didn't always drop back like he does now when he was 22.
posted on 10/1/23
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 16 minutes ago
I think to say one is better than the other by a “long, long way” (OP) is just not right.
———
Unless it’s talking about their overall ability, in which case it’s fair to say Kane is much better. But Haaland is absolutely phenomenal at the limited things that he does. Just depends on what you want from you striker. But I’ll never subscribe to the idea that Haaland is a better striker because he’s scoring so many tap ins for the most creative team in football. It’s like when United fans used to say RVN was a better striker than Henry because he was more clinical in the box. Deep down everyone knew Henry was much better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that one is not waaay better than the other but your comparing a 22yr old with a 30 Yr old. Who knows, Haaland could still develop his all round game on top of his striking ability, im sure Kane didn't always drop back like he does now when he was 22.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that’s not the debate. The debate is between the two now, not when they’ve finished their careers.
posted on 10/1/23
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 3 hours, 27 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 13 minutes ago
who cares about all round footballer?
———
Most people at the very top of the game. It’s why limited goal poachers aren’t much of a thing nowadays. Though Haaland’s beastly goal record has changed that to an extent. And I think Kane is a better striker, he offers a lot more in the role. Even when he doesn’t score he can be the best player on the pitch, when Haaland doesn’t score he’s usually invisible - in fact, he’s often invisible even when he does score as he hardly touches the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
disagree, football no more than ever is about numbers. passes completed, tackles made, presses , intense sprints etc..... this is what managers and scouts look at now . how effective they are.
If a player produces better numbers they are thought of as better players in scouts and managers eyes.
So much stat work involved now that entertainment and doing multiple roles becomes less important than actual results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And players with better all round numbers are usually valued more than players with limited ones. There’s a reason many were surprised City went for Haaland as Pep has always valued players that bring more to the table than just goals from inside the box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are choosing to miss the point, City have outscored the rest of the PL by bucketloads in the past few years, but since Kun left have done so without a recognised striker. Pep needed someone he could rely on to stick the ball in the net in big matches in the CL. He already has players who are better all round players than Kane, and quite a few of them, he didn't have an out and out striker. If you are going to get an out and out striker, get the best. He did, and at a fraction of the cost that Spurs wanted for Kane. It will be interesting what Bayern offer for Kane and how determined Kane will be to force through the move this time. Normally you would say it is his last chance to get a move to a club where he can win things but lots of players are getting moves to big clubs well past the age of 30 so who knows?
posted on 11/1/23
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 13 hours, 47 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 13 minutes ago
who cares about all round footballer?
———
Most people at the very top of the game. It’s why limited goal poachers aren’t much of a thing nowadays. Though Haaland’s beastly goal record has changed that to an extent. And I think Kane is a better striker, he offers a lot more in the role. Even when he doesn’t score he can be the best player on the pitch, when Haaland doesn’t score he’s usually invisible - in fact, he’s often invisible even when he does score as he hardly touches the ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
disagree, football no more than ever is about numbers. passes completed, tackles made, presses , intense sprints etc..... this is what managers and scouts look at now . how effective they are.
If a player produces better numbers they are thought of as better players in scouts and managers eyes.
So much stat work involved now that entertainment and doing multiple roles becomes less important than actual results.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And players with better all round numbers are usually valued more than players with limited ones. There’s a reason many were surprised City went for Haaland as Pep has always valued players that bring more to the table than just goals from inside the box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WTF
posted on 11/1/23
comment by Lisandro The King Martinez (U10026)
posted 13 hours, 46 minutes ago
I think to say one is better than the other by a “long, long way” (OP) is just not right.
———
Unless it’s talking about their overall ability, in which case it’s fair to say Kane is much better. But Haaland is absolutely phenomenal at the limited things that he does. Just depends on what you want from you striker. But I’ll never subscribe to the idea that Haaland is a better striker because he’s scoring so many tap ins for the most creative team in football. It’s like when United fans used to say RVN was a better striker than Henry because he was more clinical in the box. Deep down everyone knew Henry was much better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Haaland is not a limited Footballer at all. He can link up play and has shown it at Dortmund. Pep is deliberately asking him to stay in the box, as he does with his wingers to stay on the touch line because Peps football is about maintaining positional discipline.
At a later stage when Haaland is ready Pep will allow him a more free role and he will drift in games, most probably when KDB leaves the club.
To say he is a limited player is scandlous.
posted on 11/1/23
Haaland is not a limited Footballer at all. He can link up play and has shown it at Dortmund. Pep is deliberately asking him to stay in the box, as he does with his wingers to stay on the touch line because Peps football is about maintaining positional discipline.
At a later stage when Haaland is ready Pep will allow him a more free role and he will drift in games, most probably when KDB leaves the club.
To say he is a limited player is scandlous.
......................................
It is a defence mechanism from Spurs fans who can no longer claim to have the best striker in the PL. Its why they keep saying 'Yes but Kane can drop deep'. He has to do that because Spurs midfield is so poor, if he had the quality around him that Haaland does he would stay in the box but he doesn't. Kane wouldn't get in the City team now. It is similar to the ridiculous 'financially doped' claim that one of their fans makes every post, forgetting that Spurs are financially doped with the tax dodger's money and it didn't help them against Sporting. It takes more than money to be succesful it takes a vision and a determination to deliver more than just a profit.