He may offer a goal threat, but it is how he links up with the rest of the team that's seems to be the problem..
Meanwhile the rest of the team links up and doesn't score.
He may offer a goal threat, but it is how he links up with the rest of the team that's seems to be the problem..
Very true..Meanwhile the rest of the team links up and doesn't score.
Arsenal are able to play with Giroud, City with Dzeko / Negredo / Bony, so in theory there is no reason why style of play should prevent us from playing with that type of striker.
There is obviously the point about the quality of the players we have but we need to be able to change up our play a lot more than we seem capable at the moment.
I highly doubt it, it probably would of broke the system, in the same sense that Suarez/ Carroll never really worked..It would have been interesting to see him as a part/an alternative in the Suarez, Sturridge & Coutinho set up. I bet he'd have scored for fun.
Suarez was boss with Huntelaar who is a tall striker who doesn't really create much himself.I highly doubt it, it probably would of broke the system, in the same sense that Suarez/ Carroll never really worked..
He is a completely different type of player..
Benteke is the type of player that relies in others contributions to score..
Whilst those 3 you mentioned can create something from nothing..
Yes he can score goals, but he looks far too a static for me, especially for a side that plays a pressing game..Benteke scores goals given the chance.
The rest of our team don't give him the chance.
Hence he looks shit.
We ignore the other wankers because it's easier to find a scapegoat.
There's no mystery.
In a poor Dutch league..Suarez was boss with Huntelaar who is a tall striker who doesn't really create much himself.
The difference is, Giroud is actually quite good at being a pivot, playing with his back to the goal and bringing teammates into play, playing one-touch football... Benteke has a huge powerful frame, but doesn't use it all that well to shield the ball. Sometimes he can do nice flicks or short passes, but not with enough consistency to build plays around.
That's why @dmishra and several others, including me, were saying right after this signing was announced that the only way it's going to work is if he's a 2nd striker who focuses purely on goal-scoring, instead of being a "pivot" for which he's just not suitable. This could still work, in theory, but we need to get the 1st striker fit and firing and that's been the problem for the whole season.
I highly doubt it, it probably would of broke the system, in the same sense that Suarez/ Carroll never really worked..
He is a completely different type of player..
Benteke is the type of player that relies in others contributions to score..
Whilst those 3 you mentioned can create something from nothing..
Agreed. Giroud wasn't all that a couple of seasons ago either, I thought he was pretty awful considering the strikers they've had in the past, but they stuck with him, gave him confidence and got their rewards.
It's odd though, Benteke CAN create something from nothing. He did at Villa. He often picked the ball up, went past a few defenders and buried his shot. He scored goals of all nature. He has already scored bicycle kicks, volleys, headers and tap ins for us so far.
It's all just very frustrating.
I highly doubt it, it probably would of broke the system, in the same sense that Suarez/ Carroll never really worked..
He is a completely different type of player..
Benteke is the type of player that relies in others contributions to score..
Whilst those 3 you mentioned can create something from nothing..
He's more of Heskey tbf, has the ability but a confidence Player, without the pace... No stereo typing him as another Carroll from me.. Im just saying it like most others see it..Carroll and Suarez as a partnership didn't fail, Carroll failed as a signing but they barely played as a partnership. Benteke, as you said, relies on others to contribute, to do the donkey work, he thrives on jumping on chances, so he would have capitalised on their movement and creativity. Quit with this braindead stereotyping him as another Andy Carroll.
He's more of Heskey tbf, has the ability but a confidence Player, without the pace... No stereo typing him as another Carroll from me.. Im just saying it like most others see it..
On his game you are probably right, but on current form he is every little bit like himBenteke isn't anything like Heskey.
On his game you are probably right, but on current form he is every little bit like him
The treble season? Agreed.When Heskey was at his very best he was superb. Sadly, we only saw that for one season.
The treble season? Agreed.
He's key was an enigma, he had all the attributes of a striker in footballing terms. Pace, power and ability. But he lacked confidence, bar that good season and the odd game. That hat trick at Derby was what he could achieve.
Collymore the same. All the attributes to frighten the opposition witless with Fowler as the perfect foil. But is inconsistency is his legend.
Benteke reminds me of both in terms of the negative side of them. I know it's early days and he's been in and out of the team, but these days you do just don't get the luxury of time afforded to settle in. People want results immediately.
There's no patience in the game anymore,.