Erling Haaland

[Marvin]

The gulf between being a top EDS level player and our first team is enormous. It took Phil Foden the best part of three year a to bridge it and he's pretty much the only one.

delap looks useful but all he is at the moment is a distant prospect.

Foden would have bridged it straight away imo but there was no space for him because of David Silva. IMO Foden has been ready for some time, however how can we know for sure. I don't think any City fan is surprised by his development. We saw the potential in the glimpses we saw.

 

[Marvin]

I watched bits of the Leicester v Spurs game late in the 2nd half when it was evident that the City game was won and there was one moment when Kane was put clean through late on. I forget who the defender was but he easily recovered and beat Kane for pace. I knew Kane wasn't particularly quick but it really struck me then that if you play Kane, you aren't going to get that many goals by slipping him through like we do Sterling or Jesus. Haaland has the advantage over Kane in that he is much quicker. Most of Kane's utility to Spurs is his all round quality that enables him to come deep and play through balls to Moura/Son. We don't need this.

IMO Kane is a very efficient goal scorer who would improve City but he is getting towards the end of his career and I think I prefer Haaland as a striker, however imo Dortmund are not going to sell Haaland, they are going to sell Sancho. The player to get imo is Grealish, but that only works if he has a release clause in his contract.

 

[Cheadle_hulmeBlue]

He had a glimpse against Leicester and whilst he hit the bar, we conceded 4 goals after he came on.

that is an incredibly harsh judgement on a young player. You can’t really blame delap when the whole team was playing poorly and he was a sub.

the defence in particular was mainly to blame.

If pep thought liked that we’d never play any young players.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

Is this the Delap thread? LOL.

 

[Keeper!]

I watched bits of the Leicester v Spurs game late in the 2nd half when it was evident that the City game was won and there was one moment when Kane was put clean through late on. I forget who the defender was but he easily recovered and beat Kane for pace. I knew Kane wasn't particularly quick but it really struck me then that if you play Kane, you aren't going to get that many goals by slipping him through like we do Sterling or Jesus. Haaland has the advantage over Kane in that he is much quicker. Most of Kane's utility to Spurs is his all round quality that enables him to come deep and play through balls to Moura/Son. We don't need this.

IMO Kane is a very efficient goal scorer who would improve City but he is getting towards the end of his career and I think I prefer Haaland as a striker, however imo Dortmund are not going to sell Haaland, they are going to sell Sancho. The player to get imo is Grealish, but that only works if he has a release clause in his contract.

Hardly a game to judge a player, end of season games give no indication whatsoever.

Kun looked good when he came on, in fact he looked amazing but Everton's defending was appalling, non existent.

Most players minds were already on their holidays, especially players from the likes of Spurs, Everton and co.

 

[Coatigan]

Hardly a game to judge a player, end of season games give no indication whatsoever.

Kun looked good when he came on, in fact he looked amazing but Everton's defending was appalling, non existent.

Most players minds were already on their holidays, especially players from the likes of Spurs, Everton and co.

That game aside then, Haaland is so much quicker than Kane, the point is pretty valid imo. There would be a change to how we play woth either coming in, but with Kane, that change is a good bit bigger.

 

[decmancity]

I watched bits of the Leicester v Spurs game late in the 2nd half when it was evident that the City game was won and there was one moment when Kane was put clean through late on. I forget who the defender was but he easily recovered and beat Kane for pace. I knew Kane wasn't particularly quick but it really struck me then that if you play Kane, you aren't going to get that many goals by slipping him through like we do Sterling or Jesus. Haaland has the advantage over Kane in that he is much quicker. Most of Kane's utility to Spurs is his all round quality that enables him to come deep and play through balls to Moura/Son. We don't need this.

Do we get many like that anyway? how many do Sterling and Jesus fuck up when one on one with the keeper. I don't think Kane is fast but I back him in a one on one from any position. In fact if KDB is getting the ball to him 25-30yrds out I am expecting Kane to finish it from that distance.

 

[Keeper!]

That game aside then, Haaland is so much quicker than Kane, the point is pretty valid imo. There would be a change to how we play woth either coming in, but with Kane, that change is a good bit bigger.

At this time, my worry about Haaland is his size, he's a bit unit, can see him having issues in his career, especially knee problems.

Kane is much more a complete player, he's a very good footballer, far more than just a goal scorer.

 

[Vester]

I think that even if Txiki has a good relationship with Raiola, his strategy with advising his clients to not renew their contracts until they are about to expire to make sure his client (and himself) gets as much money as possible could be another issue that makes it more likely we will go for Kane. I dont see anything wrong with Raiola doing it, since he works for his clients, and not the clubs, best interest and no matter what we think of it there is a reason many top class talents like him as their agent. People need to understand that the commission agents gets in the end comes from the players pocket, since it would have been him that would have gotten that money otherwise. How the player and agent chooses to split their earnings is up to them. Dont believe shit stories like "player X and clubs Y and Z have all agreed terms but the agents fee is a stumbling block". If that was the case the player would just fire his agent and he would have a hard time attracting clients.

But as the situation with Pogba and now Donnarumma has shown, the financial benefits of signing a younger player that usually have a resale value, or would save some money on transfer fees in the future if the player renews his contract are pretty much gone for the club if Håland would choose to use the same strategy as mentioned players to maximize his earnings.

Of course there is a different scenario with City, considering most players want to win as much as possible and earn as much as possible while doing. We as a club can in most scenarios offer both which is a main reason most of our successful players stay here for a long time. The fact that at the moment there is no really step up from City like Real or Barca have been previously also makes it more likely any top player would like to stay here as long as possible. But I dont think it would be much cheaper to extend Hålands contract if he signed for us than it would be to sign a replacement if he would want to leave.

With that said, I would still prefer Håland over Kane, mostly because his connection to our club and I think he has the potential to be better than Kane over the time of a 5-year contract. If everything would work out he could be a club legend, and that is something Kane could never be. I would of course be more than happy with either of them, but it would not surprise me if we end up with someone like Andre Silva because his price tag of 35-40m seems more in line with how City usually do business. I think we would be willing to break our transfer record for the right player, but If Dortmund and/or Spurs demand 150m or more I think we will walk away.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

that is an incredibly harsh judgement on a young player. You can’t really blame delap when the whole team was playing poorly and he was a sub.

the defence in particular was mainly to blame.

If pep thought liked that we’d never play any young players.

We don’t.