Henry or Haaland - who you you rather have in your team ?

Hmm?

Can I take them both?

I saw this debate raging on ESPN about the best Prem striker of all time with the Norweigan guy Jan Fjørtoft of course backing Haaland.

You can't win the goals debate with Haaland, but it's not as simple as that.

Defences and defenders seemed to be better in 90's in large part because nobody was playing it out from the back, now nearly ever team tries to when barely any team can and it often unfolds into kamikaze defending, pretty much every team had 4 at the back 25+ years ago, same 4 playing week in and out and all knew their jobs, now there's a lot more rotation with some emphasis on full backs getting their assists and goal numbers up.

Ashley Cole the best left back I've ever seen, had poor numbers in those regards, but he wasn't tasked with that job. He would be today, probably taking away from his defending.

Haaland could play in any era in any league, but think his numbers today are massively inflated due to much poorer defenders.

Kind Regards.

Haaland is the best finisher I've ever seen. Just gobbles up chances. And it has been debated at length whether having him in an XI is detrimental to the overall team or not despite his goals.

Henry obviously more silky and scored all types of goals.

the Premier League has never been stronger tbh. Some of the defenders Henry was playing against were really poor

I agree.  Haaland has everything and he is also 23 years younger.

Fowler, Wright, Andy Cole, Shearer, Van Nistlerooy all better natural finishers than Haaland amongst many others

Henry may have played against some poor defenders, but they are even poorer now. Organisation at the back is definitely poorer. Chelsea conceded just 15 goals in 2004/05, next best is Arsenal with 17 in 97/98. Man City's best is 22 despite the billions spent on defenders. Man United in 94/95 conceded just 4 home goals all season.

Haaland doesn't gobble up chances, that makes it sound like he's loitering around the box waiting for half chances, he's a battering ram that steamrolls defences and slots it home or out muscles them in the air with his brickhouse 6ft5  inch frame.

The 03-07 era of the Premier League was probably the strongest it ever was, with Arsenal, Chelsea and United both at an incredible level.

Kind Regards.

I'd take Tony Henry over Alf-Inge Haaland

He has a first touch to die for and constantly creates a yard of space for himself that others don’t ( or can’t ).  And he passes a ball into the net like Jimmy Greaves.
A battering ram. 

henri was total class - no competition

I'm 61 and Haaland is the best striker, centre forward, number 9 I have ever seen....
I've seen them all play live...
Shearer,Fowler,Henry,Rooney,Kane,Rush,Wright,Van Nistelroy the list is endless but this guy is the very very best out and out number 9 I have ever seen and his goal scoring record (which is what he gets paid for)speakers for itself....

Greaves,muller and rush all better goal scorers than these two.

For me, with his physique and determination, Haaland transcends the ages.

I can imagine him playing in some grainy old footage from the 1920s & or getting England's winner in '66'

jimnast
A few of Muller's goals on youtube 'best goals compilation'.
Might be of interest.
Wouldn't like to say out of Henry or Haaland. Think Haaland is
more relianton team mates than Henry was though.

Haaland is a brute, we haven't seen many 6ft5inch brickhouse leading the line and steamrolling prem defences before, but without that physicality, don't think there's much else there, there was that clip that went viral of the City players pre match all passing to each other and knocking it off with quick one touch passes, and Haaland's first touch making him look like a donkey so they limited the passes to him, Henry was next level in terms of skill, pace and quality of finishing, that goal Henry scored against United for example - Haaland could never do that. You want a gleaming, flash supercar to navigate the tricky, winding roads of the Alps with sudden drops in gradient whilst looking resplendent in the sun against the still, scenic, mountainous backdrop, then Henry's your man, you want a sturdy, mean machine Tank like vehicle that'll give you a chance to steamroll the bloody, beaten battlefields of Eastern Europe enroute to Moscow unscathed, then Halaand's your man. I'm taking the car.

Kind Regards.

You clearly don’t like Haaland, which is of course o.k.  We can’t like everybody, can we?  A brute he most certainly isn’t, able to handle himself he is.  And what he allegedly does in training is irrelevant.
Gerd Muller!  A footballing god.  One of the all time greats.

I'd have Henry, clearly miles ahead of HL in terms of skill. Haaland is a great goal scorer but footballing-wise he'd be well down the list of the greats. anyone who says otherwise hasn't a notion about football IMO.

The debate isn’t about who we rate as the better player it is about who you would have in your team, between the two.  Henri was clearly the more gifted footballer.

Look at the space he made for himself, in the box by the way, to grab his two today.  The guy is a goal scoring genius.

One trick ponies both of them, I'd take Kane all day and twice on a Sunday, all rounder can pass, head, score and is currently sitting third for the golden boot with Halland at 8th.

I’d take both - Kane and Haaland.  Imagine them in the same forward line.  As for one-trick-ponies it’s a glib phrase which means very little.
Kane, I believe, now ahead of Haaland in the fastest ever 100 goals scored for their new club.  Some feat.

Now imagine kane spearheading the arsenal side

Spearheading, that's a big word for you mega