But why fixate on this part of his game? Why not embrace the way he controls the game, is brilliant at receiving passes out of defence, is statistically excellent at passing under pressure, or whatever else?But there are so many times when he he has the option to pass it forwards but he passes it sideways or backwards. He is far too cautious with the ball. It drives me potty watching some games. Hahaha. In most games, his first thought seems to always be 'take the lowest risk' approach. I don't expect him to be KDB with the ball but he is not anywhere near the same quality as Fernandindho in his ability to launch an attack with a pass. He was better last year but a drop-off towards the end. Reflected by the fact that Pep was not always picking him for all of the big games.
Caveat: I am more of a happy-clapper than one of those fans who always finds a reason to criticise a player.
He's improving for sure. Doesn't mean he's quite there yet. I'll give you a bigger indication, the PSG tie, he was dropped and Ferna was in, the trust isn't all quite there yet. He didn't obviously start in the final either, it's a matter of trust from the manager, clearly Pep thinks he needs work on his game still. You can enjoy success, and you can also want improvement the next season. Don't see any issue in thatWe've only won the league, 2 carabao cups, made 2 FA cup semi finals, gone on a massive record breaking win streak with unprecedentedly good defensive performances, and made a CL final with him in the side so far since he got here. We need more!
The amount of chances we'll create vs top teams compared to what he has at Spurs isn't remotely similar. Just a matter of finishing them off, and I for one don't doubt his finishing ability at all.Not if he didn't score any of them against the top teams it wouldn't.
Why dropped though? Maybe Pep thought that Fernandinho had a specific skillset that was more relevant for the game? It was a huge game for City with a lot of pressure, Fernandinho is a fantastic leader. Not only that, but we knew from the last game what shithouses PSG were, who better than Fernandinho to sort those guys out? On top of that he's still a great footballer.He's improving for sure. Doesn't mean he's quite there yet. I'll give you a bigger indication, the PSG tie, he was dropped and Ferna was in, the trust isn't all quite there yet. He didn't obviously start in the final either, it's a matter of trust from the manager, clearly Pep thinks he needs work on his game still. You can enjoy success, and you can also want improvement the next season. Don't see any issue in that
Sergio was unproven in the premier league, not the best at penalties and didn’t really get many headed goals.I think the poster is entirely right who said that Haaland is something of a gamble. A great young player, but who hasn't been tested the Premier League, who doesn't fill our weaknesses of headers and penalties in the way Kane does, who comes with a circus of an agent and wages that would wreck the structure of the club. And the nature of potential, while exciting, is ephemeral - he could be the best striker on Earth in two years. But he might not be. Maybe he's hit his ceiling. I doubt it, but the point is that you can't hold potential in your hands. It's magic dust.
Whereas Kane has proven for almost a decade now that he can hit high numbers year on year in the EPL. He's the finished article, coming off his best-ever season, and exceeds in every striking area that we lack in. He's not gonna take excessive wages and he's here until he retires, and we know that he definitely wants to come. Plus, Pep Guardiola is apparently insistent that he's the man for the job, and I trust his judgement when it comes to this sport.
Like I said - a pretty key component to the concept of a "gamble" is the possibility of it paying off. That doesn't mean it wasn't a gamble, nor does it mean that the next time you take a risk it will produce the same results. There are definite risks to Haaland that some people seem willing to ignore for the sake of hyping up a "galactico" signing.Sergio was unproven in the premier league, not the best at penalties and didn’t really get many headed goals.
He did alright for us with those things considered.
There’s a gamble with Kane, not this guarantee some posters like to throw about.Like I said - a pretty key component to the concept of a "gamble" is the possibility of it paying off. That doesn't mean it wasn't a gamble, nor does it mean that the next time you take a risk it will produce the same results. There are definite risks to Haaland that some people seem willing to ignore for the sake of hyping up a "galactico" signing.
But it's all moot in any case. Kane is the one we want.
What baggage ? We negotiate a mutually agreeable package with either player. If we need to give Haaland a little more than Kane that’s obv offset by the huge difference in their respective resale values.Well, yeah - a pretty key component in the concept of a gamble is the possibility of it paying off. My point is that users were scoffing at the idea of Haaland being anything but a sure-fire success that would be worth all the baggage that comes with him and his wages. There are definite risks. More so than with Kane, IMO.
But it's all hypothetical. We're in for Kane 100% and I don't see any way of us getting Haaland. But I can't help but feel there's a mythos being built around Erling that not only ignores the shortcomings that would come with him, but also plays down the massive strengths that comes with Kane. I've said it before - put Kane's stats and attributes on a player with an exotic name from another league, and this thread would be at 3000 pages of giddy excitement right now.