Post history

History for Tekkers

Manchester United

Back to topic

Current version

Posted February 02, 2018 00:19 · last edited February 02, 2018 00:21

Pretty sure that by definition, being clinical is how well a player scores goals from the shots they take. Big chances or easy chances, are a bit different. Composure has more impact on the big moments you speak of.

Tekkers wrote:

Because Kane is not a far far better player than Lukaku. He might be better, he might be worse, but its definitely not a sure run thing that he is better than Lukaku.

That is the quote. Read it again. I was clearly pointing out that to say that Kane is certainly the better player is not true when there are cases for both to be better at some aspects. 

Previous versions

3 versions
Unknown editor edited February 02, 2018 00:21

Pretty sure that by definition, being clinical how well a player scores goals from the shots they take. Big chances or easy chances, are a bit different. Composure has more impact on the big moments you speak of.

Tekkers wrote:

Because Kane is not a far far better player than Lukaku. He might be better, he might be worse, but its definitely not a sure run thing that he is better than Lukaku.

That is the quote. Read it again. I was clearly pointing out that to say that Kane is certainly the better player is not true when there are cases for both to be better at some aspects. 

Unknown editor edited February 02, 2018 00:21
paulm wrote:

No, his point was that Lukaku was "more clinical" than Kane, and he also specifically stated that Lukaku might be as good as, or better, than Kane, in general. 

I disagree on both fronts, and I don't believe Kane's shots-to-goals ratio is an effective measure of how clinical he is. I believe finishing "big chances" is more representative of that. 

[/quote]

Pretty sure that by definition, being clinical how well a player scores goals from the shots they take. Big chances or easy chances, are a bit different. Composure has more impact on the big moments you speak of.

[quote=Tekkers]

Because Kane is not a far far better player than Lukaku. He might be better, he might be worse, but its definitely not a sure run thing that he is better than Lukaku.

That is the quote. Read it again. I was clearly pointing out that to say that Kane is certainly the better player is not true when there are cases for both to be better at some aspects. 

Unknown editor edited February 02, 2018 00:20
paulm wrote:

No, his point was that Lukaku was "more clinical" than Kane, and he also specifically stated that Lukaku might be as good as, or better, than Kane, in general. 

I disagree on both fronts, and I don't believe Kane's shots-to-goals ratio is an effective measure of how clinical he is. I believe finishing "big chances" is more representative of that. 

[/quote]

Pretty sure that by definition, being clinical how well a player scores goals from the shots they take. Big chances or easy chances, are a bit different. Composure has more impact on the big moments you speak of.

[quote=Tekkers].

Because Kane is not a far far better player than Lukaku. He might be better, he might be worse, but its definitely not a sure run thing that he is better than Lukaku.

That is the quote. Read it again. I was clearly pointing out that to say that Kane is certainly the better player is not true when there are cases for both to be better at some aspects.