What's new

Alexander Sørloth

May 17, 2018
11,872
47,993
You realize Haaland was a teenager, like 17 or 18 years old in those seasons you mentioned? And scoring in absurd amounts at U21 level already.

Not really a good comparison whatsoever.

Of course it is. How many people in here would bother researching that? Most people on here haven't got past looking into how many mins he played for palace.

It's an example of how stats are irrelevant to potential in the right circumstances. I don't expect people to be saying "It's not a good comparison because Haaland has a squishy troll face and Sorloth looks like a Blonde Thanos"
 

Clockspur

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2013
891
4,057
Genuine question, why the disapproval of signing him? Because he couldn't even find his feet in Palace? But he scored tonnes in Trabzonspor. Then was it because the league he scored in is a lowly league?

How are we so sure the rest of the striker targets are supposedly better than him?

He has had a chance at this level and proven he can’t do it. I’m glad he has found his feet in Turkish football and maybe he needs to go to a better league to improve further, but he is not pushing Kane anytime soon. This is likely the last year of Kane the way we are going - we need to be ambitious and this is the complete opposite.

My over riding memory of this guy was him missing an absolute sitter against us a couple of seasons back when Foyth scores in a 1-0 win
 

ikky

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2006
8,951
21,262
You do know players are able to turn it around after having poor spells at clubs ( he wasn’t even really given a chance at palace. How many of you would be raging if we signed Serge Gnabry straight after his Arsenal and West Brom loan spell?
 

VegasII

Well-Known Member
May 14, 2008
9,750
16,670
You do know players are able to turn it around after having poor spells at clubs ( he wasn’t even really given a chance at palace. How many of you would be raging if we signed Serge Gnabry straight after his Arsenal and West Brom Liam spell?

1600100390472.gif
 

Beni

Well-Known Member
Mar 3, 2004
5,431
6,131
I Love how people are using the "Just because he played with Palace and they got rid of him, he must be awful" arguement. The Guy was not given a chance at Palace.

2017/2018
He came to Palace in the January transfer window in 2018, and was played as soon as he signed with back to back starts (Away to Everton, Away to Tottenham, Home to Man Utd and away to Chelsea) and performed well in all games bar Spurs, where Palace defended in own half for 88 minutes, so he never saw the ball.
  • Vs Everton, Created a great chance for Benteke who missed, and later on beat 2 players and produced a great save from Pickford.
  • Vs Man U, Out-muscled 2 Utd players, before cutting inside from the left and making De Gea into a save.
    To quote a match report on him "Sørloth, in particular, ran himself into the ground - and then ran some more – in the pursuit of a winner for the Eagles."
  • Vs Chelsea, He hit the post against Chelsea, and had a goal controversially disallowed.

Following these back to back 4 games in a row against top 6 teams, Palace dropped back to 18th in the league and was never selected again for the season.

2018/2019
The 12 appearances in the Premier League all came from him being brought on as a sub, with the most available time given to him, 33 minutes. In total he was brought on with a whooping 179 minutes game time.

The only games he started, were for 3 Carabao cup games, where he scored 1, and assisted 1 goal.

So, in summary. Crystal Palace spent £9 Million on him, and played him the equivalent of 6 Premier League games out of the 33 Premier League games that were available, plus 3 cup games. Doesn't quite cut the picture that he failed, or given the opportunity to even fail, for someone that was 22 years old at the time.


I Haven't seen Vinicius play, so cannot comment to much, but I would prefer Sørloth based on the type of goals I have seen him score versus Vinicius. From a stats perspective, he is more involved in build-up play, having nearly double successful passes, long passes, forward passes, in opponents half passing figures per 90 mins. Double the aerial duels and better ground duel success and a lot cheaper in transfer funds.

But hey, I am down with whoever Mourinho wants to get, and I will back his judgement, just aslong as we sign a striker, but for me, if I had a choice, Sørloth to me is the better option.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,956
I Love how people are using the "Just because he played with Palace and they got rid of him, he must be awful" arguement. The Guy was not given a chance at Palace.

2017/2018
He came to Palace in the January transfer window in 2018, and was played as soon as he signed with back to back starts (Away to Everton, Away to Tottenham, Home to Man Utd and away to Chelsea) and performed well in all games bar Spurs, where Palace defended in own half for 88 minutes, so he never saw the ball.
  • Vs Everton, Created a great chance for Benteke who missed, and later on beat 2 players and produced a great save from Pickford.
  • Vs Man U, Out-muscled 2 Utd players, before cutting inside from the left and making De Gea into a save.
    To quote a match report on him "Sørloth, in particular, ran himself into the ground - and then ran some more – in the pursuit of a winner for the Eagles."
  • Vs Chelsea, He hit the post against Chelsea, and had a goal controversially disallowed.

Following these back to back 4 games in a row against top 6 teams, Palace dropped back to 18th in the league and was never selected again for the season.

2018/2019
The 12 appearances in the Premier League all came from him being brought on as a sub, with the most available time given to him, 33 minutes. In total he was brought on with a whooping 179 minutes game time.

The only games he started, were for 3 Carabao cup games, where he scored 1, and assisted 1 goal.

So, in summary. Crystal Palace spent £9 Million on him, and played him the equivalent of 6 Premier League games out of the 33 Premier League games that were available, plus 3 cup games. Doesn't quite cut the picture that he failed, or given the opportunity to even fail, for someone that was 22 years old at the time.


I Haven't seen Vinicius play, so cannot comment to much, but I would prefer Sørloth based on the type of goals I have seen him score versus Vinicius. From a stats perspective, he is more involved in build-up play, having nearly double successful passes, long passes, forward passes, in opponents half passing figures per 90 mins. Double the aerial duels and better ground duel success and a lot cheaper in transfer funds.

But hey, I am down with whoever Mourinho wants to get, and I will back his judgement, just aslong as we sign a striker, but for me, if I had a choice, Sørloth to me is the better option.

But an experienced manager in Hodgson rather played a non goal scoring Benteke ahead of him. There must of been a reason for that. I’d trust someone like Hodgson’s opinion of a player over a few YouTube clips. He may well of got better. If he has, why would Palace sell him to us when they need goals themselves. Anyway, it doesn’t really matter. I doubt we really are in for him ahead of the other names mentioned this summer.
 
May 17, 2018
11,872
47,993
But an experienced manager in Hodgson rather played a non goal scoring Benteke ahead of him. There must of been a reason for that. I’d trust someone like Hodgson’s opinion of a player over a few YouTube clips. He may well of got better. If he has, why would Palace sell him to us when they need goals themselves. Anyway, it doesn’t really matter. I doubt we really are in for him ahead of the other names mentioned this summer.

An experienced manager in Tony Pulis thought Gnabry was a bit shit, too.

(Hodgson hasn't really ever been known for 'having an eye for a player' tbh. Palace have had a few players come through under him, but I wouldn't use his experience as a yardstick for success)
 

Beni

Well-Known Member
Mar 3, 2004
5,431
6,131
But an experienced manager in Hodgson rather played a non goal scoring Benteke ahead of him. There must of been a reason for that. I’d trust someone like Hodgson’s opinion of a player over a few YouTube clips. He may well of got better. If he has, why would Palace sell him to us when they need goals themselves. Anyway, it doesn’t really matter. I doubt we really are in for him ahead of the other names mentioned this summer.

Says more about Hodgson to be fair.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,956
An experienced manager in Tony Pulis thought Gnabry was a bit shit, too.

(Hodgson hasn't really ever been known for 'having an eye for a player' tbh. Palace have had a few players come through under him, but I wouldn't use his experience as a yardstick for success)

What‘s Pulis and Gnabry got to do with it?

Anyway, we won’t be signing him, so it doesn’t matter.
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,956
Says more about Hodgson to be fair.

Well, his remit is to keep Palace in the division, so his decision was proved to be the right one.

If you’re desperate to sign him, then fair enough, that’s your opinion.
 

Beni

Well-Known Member
Mar 3, 2004
5,431
6,131
Well, his remit is to keep Palace in the division, so his decision was proved to be the right one.

If you’re desperate to sign him, then fair enough, that’s your opinion.

Nowhere have I said anything about desperate to sign him. My opinion is, if we’re interested in him and that’s a big IF, I would trust Mourinhos judgement over Hodgson.
 

Clockspur

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2013
891
4,057
You do know players are able to turn it around after having poor spells at clubs ( he wasn’t even really given a chance at palace. How many of you would be raging if we signed Serge Gnabry straight after his Arsenal and West Brom loan spell?

Good point, let’s get Vinny J back, just in case he stops being shit
 
May 17, 2018
11,872
47,993
What‘s Pulis and Gnabry got to do with it?

Anyway, we won’t be signing him, so it doesn’t matter.

Well with this

But an experienced manager in Hodgson rather played a non goal scoring Benteke ahead of him. There must of been a reason for that. I’d trust someone like Hodgson’s opinion of a player over a few YouTube clips

You could have said the same a few years ago about Gnabry:

But an experienced manager in Pulis rather played a has-been like Fletcher ahead of him. There must of been a reason for that. I’d trust someone like Pulis' opinion of a player over a few YouTube clips

Of course we know Gnabry is a good player - it was a go to example of a player who was written off in the PL but shouldn't have been. There are loads of other examples, but you can swap almost all of the best players in the world (apparently) with Wenger's name in there. Managers aren't always good scouts or talent spotters - sometimes they are just good motivators. I don't really think Hodgson has credentials to suggest he's the authority on how good Sorloth was or wasn't.
 
Top