LOL jack you talk as if we have another worldclass striker sitting on the bench waiting for time. Pato will start garauntee and the other spot is fought over by pippo/borri/huntelaar. One is 36, one is the next gila and always injured, one can't even say "Bonjorno"



We have no choice but to give him time. If he doesn't perform, well I guess we'll be enjoying Uefa cup again next year.

That's what I meant!
If he doesn't perform we're screwed!

How about he miraculously just starts scoring. Like Amr Zaki for Wigan.

Compare was the wrong word to use, I also wasn't responding to you, Mr. CentreoftheUniverse.

+1

The reason I hoped I'd not see Fabiano at Milan was mainly his age, and a little his nationality. maybe he would have done a bit better now (since the Hunter can only finish the chances provided for him while Fabiano can create chances for himself) but I think the REAL problem is the lack of a great attacking midfielder. as long as Kaka's void is not filled we will struggle, IMO.

And how do you know Fabiano would be doing so much better?

I'm not saying he wouldn't but we can't look back and say what if because there's no proof that things would be different.

+1

The reason I hoped I'd not see Fabiano at Milan was mainly his age, and a little his nationality. maybe he would have done a bit better now (since the Hunter can only finish the chances provided for him while Fabiano can create chances for himself) but I think the REAL problem is the lack of a great attacking midfielder. as long as Kaka's void is not filled we will struggle, IMO.

When Huntelaar does score, I will make sure to analyse it to see if it's a goal that 'counts'. I remember all of the ridiculous Gila criticism, depsite scoring 17 goals in his first season was stupid because people felt they weren't 'important' (despite the fact I proved otherwise. Huntelaar won't be any better than Gila, in my opinion.

you are sooo right my friend. gila didn't get enough credit for what he did, i have high hopes for huntelaar, he's probably not physical enough to play against rigid serie-a defenses, pato gets by with his pace, inzaghi does the same with his positioning kjh just has to focus on his own strength

When Huntelaar does score, I will make sure to analyse it to see if it's a goal that 'counts'. I remember all of the ridiculous Gila criticism, depsite scoring 17 goals in his first season was stupid because people felt they weren't 'important' (despite the fact I proved otherwise. Huntelaar won't be any better than Gila, in my opinion.

All strikers score, there is not a sane person that would argue would the goal count or not. The important thing is that the striker delivers. But then there is the issue of is he the right player? Gilardino was not the right player for us, IMO Huntelaar isn't either. we need someone like Dzeko, strong and forceful (Drogba would have been ideal), who can bulldoze his way through defenses. Players like Gilardino or Huntelaar, come with hype and when they do not do a Marco Van Basten they get hung the next day, when in reality they are average at best.

When Huntelaar does score, I will make sure to analyse it to see if it's a goal that 'counts'. I remember all of the ridiculous Gila criticism, depsite scoring 17 goals in his first season was stupid because people felt they weren't 'important' (despite the fact I proved otherwise. Huntelaar won't be any better than Gila, in my opinion.

1. More than 50% of Gila's goals came when we practically had won the game IIRC. how did you prove otherwise

Here are Gila's goals from the 05/06 season, the final score and at what point in the game Gila's goals came. I'll highlight the goals that I think can be considered somewhat 'important'. What I consider to make a goal important, and it's reason:
-If your team wins by 1 or 2 the goal is important no matter when it is scored. Even if you win by 2-0, the 2nd goal is still very important as it kills the game, while 1-0 is still a very cautious scoreline late on in a game. Scoring the 3rd in a 3-0 win, however, isn't what I would consider important.

-Scoring in a defeat when you are losing by 2 or less. If you're losing by 1 it's important as your goal brings the game level, if you're losing by 2 you bring your team back into the game, so it's important at the time. Losing by 3 I don't think it's so important, you're still a way off.

-Scoring in a game that ends in a draw. Pretty obvious it's important, you've helped your team to a point.

@ Sampdoria - Lost 2-1 - Gila's goal made it 1-0
@ Treviso - Won 2-0 - Gila's goal made it 2-0
@ Cagliari - Won 2-0 - Gila's goal made it 1-0
@ Empoli - Won 3-1 - Gila's goal made it 1-1
@ Empoli - Won 3-1 - Gila's goal made it 2-1
vs Udinese - Won 5-1 - Gila's goal made it 1-0
vs Udinese - Won 5-1 - Gila's goal made it 4-0
@ Fiorentina - Lost 3-1 - Gila's goal made it 1-1
vs Messina - Won 4-0 - Gila's goal made it 4-0
@ Livorno - Won 3-0 - Gila's goal made it 1-0
@ Livorno - Won 3-0 - Gila's goal made it 2-0
vs Parma - Won 4-3 - Gila's goal made it 2-1
vs Treviso - Won 5-0 - Gila's goal made it 3-0
@ Reggina - Won 4-1 - Gila's goal made it 2-1
vs Cagliari - Won 1-0 - Gila's goal made it 1-0
@ Udinese - Won 4-0 - Gila's goal made it 2-0
@ Messina - Won 3-1 - Gila's goal made it 3-1

So in my opinion 14 of his 17 league goals could be considered 'important'. One thing people need to remember is AT THE TIME OF SCORING. Some people will probably argue the case that scoring in a 5-0 win - even if it's the 1st goal - isn't important, but it is. How is Gila meant to know his team is going to score another 4? So I base my stats at the time of scoring, obviously the outcome has a little bearing, like if the team was to win 4-3 and he scored to make it 4-0, it's still an important goal as it's essentially a game winner.

So 14 of 17 were important in my view, I think this somewhat dispells the myth that his goals are to just push up the scoreline.

I did a list of goals Gila scored, the scoreline when he scored them, etc. I believe you even agreed with me. I'll try and find it. The price tag is irrelevant, of course Gila was going to be more as he was hot property in Italy at the time, while Huntelaar was a reject.

EDIT: Found the post.

Gila goals were 'unimportant'..

Anybody notice all the victories listen in the games where he scored, too.

IMO any goal scored for his team is important and thinking a strikers ratio or praise should be played down just because he scored for 3-1 or 4-1 is not fair.

Really? I remember some saying most of Pato's 18 goals last season were unimportant because we couldn't get all the points from those games...

This is his first season record and it can't be argued with. but what about the other 2 seasons?
Also what about his 0 goals in his first season in the CL? in the course of 3 seasons he managed only 4 CL goals. what about that?

I think Milan-Gila simply wasn't supposed to work. just like Sheva-Chelsea.

I'm with Blue on this

I was an avid supporter of Gila, I still like him, and I had many discussions over him with Max mostly, but Gila was in a great team, atleast in his first season, a team that rivaled Barca in goals scored, over 80 Serie A goals that year IIRC. Also Gila had Carlo's support something that Huntelaar seemingly doesn't have because Leo unlike Carlo in really in a hot seat were as Carlo was always comfortable in his position.

Huntelaar has been getting absolutely no service in any of the games, its not like he's been missing point blank chances in all of the matches, add that to the fact that he's still adapting to the way the team plays and you'll get what we have. We've even managed to make Pato look mediocre unless he's trying to do something all on his own from the middle of the pitch Pato is invisable as well throughout the entire match

i don't think anyone can hold kjh responsible for our woes, he's just unfortunate to be in a really crappy unproductive team, hope u gets that much needed 1st goal soonest

We need to do whatever it is that is possible to get this guy to score. Our season hinges on R80 and KJH.

This season..I mean reaching fourth. If those two click, we do have a chance. Of course it doesn't mark the end of our problems. But at least we won't have a repeat of 1996/97.

You know what's intriguing about Huntelaar? How poor he's been since leaving Ajax.

Man you are biased against Huntelaar as much as most of us are against Ronaldinho! Surely what he did in Madrid was anything but poor and abysmal!

And how long exactly is his career after leaving Ajax? 20 games? In two different clubs? The one playing like ****? Zidane took as much time to get accustomed to the game in Spain... I guess he was poor too!

We get it you wanted Fabiano and you have every right to want whoever you want but this is UNFAIR.

TBH..I'd rather have Pippo than KJH. The sad part is we need KJH in form, but we're so up against it, we don't have the luxury of playing him in.

The difference between my scepticism of KJH and you lots' cynicism of Dinho is that I want KJH to prove me wrong, to start scoring and be successful for us. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind the majority of those who dislike Ronaldinho actually don't really want him to play well at all - they want to simply continue hating him and want a reason to do so.

No, the difference is Ronaldinho has been mediocre for 3 years now while Huntelaar has been average (I'll say mediocre if you want me to, it does not change anything though it surely is not true) for 6 months while changing teams twice in two different leagues...

9 months. Not 6.

And the issue of time that form has been poor is almost irrelevant in context of my argument which is that the dislike of Dinho is such that I believe many fans secretly don't want him to play well. Whereas we all definitely want KHJ to manage it.

Dinho attracts a high level of hate. And anyone who gives him any support seems to incur the wrath of his detractors.

Who currently are right to not rate him, because his form is so poor. But it's become rather personal with him I feel.