Is Celtic striker Gary Hooper as good as £35m star Andy Carroll?

different style of player

 

What i said in the other thread discussing this, seems relevant:

I would have Hooper over Carroll any day of the week, he will score more and is a more creative player, as shown when they played in the same league (even with Carroll playing for a far better team). It is just your typical English EPL arrogant attitude to say he is English and plays in the EPL so he MUST be better than someone in the SPL. It's * nonsense and these same people were the ones saying Larsson couldn't do it down there.

Carroll has had a decent half season in the Prem, by no means unbelievable, but he's done well, and might go on to be a great player, but so might Hooper. The only reason most people are saying Carroll is far better is because it was Carroll plays in the EPL, and that is wrong.

For the most part EPL players are better than SPL players, that is without question, but my point is that them being in the EPL rather than the SPL isn't what makes them better. Carroll for example would do fine up here but for me he wouldn't score any more goals than Hooper or Stokes are scoring, Drogba or Torres on the other hand, proper world class players, would obviously tear the league to shreds. I don't have anything against the EPL as such, but I hate the way that the English, be it the media or the public, cannot see beyond their own league and refuse to acnowledge anything else. It isn't something from my experience that can be helped, it's a sort of superiority complex hardwired into the English.

What does Carroll offer other than goals, because as far as I can see, he is a typical British style penalty box striker, who thrives on goals from corners and long balls into the box. For his apparently great hold up and distribution none of Newcastle's other players have scored many goals this season that have been created by him. He is the end point of the Newcastle attack, after he has the ball there is a shot generally, and there's nothing wrong with that, but he doesn't have this great ability to bring others into play that people are saying he does. Most of Carroll's goals this season have been headers (again, nothing wrong with scoring headers, but it is a bit one dimensional), and after Dalglish saying that he wanted to get back to the pass and move game that he knows (and learned at Celtic) rather than the boring route one old English style they have been playing this season under Hodgson, Carroll seems like a strange signing, which is why I think it was desperation more than anything.

Hooper, who granted I have obviously seen a lot more of, offers more, he has created as many goals for his strike partner as he has scored, and seems to have everything required to play at the top level. He plays in the SPL so there is no chance whatsoever of him getting an England call-up (remember Thompson, when England were crying desperately for a left midfielder, or Sutton, who was at the time one of the best strikers in the UK being constantly overlooked. It isn't just a Scottish chip on the shoulder either, remember Owen Hargreaves, a Champions League winner with one of the biggest clubs in the world, being booed on his international debut because the ignorant English crowd didn't know who he was), but as far as I'm concerned, by the end of next season there will be EPL teams swarming around him, and then we'll see who's better, I know who I think it will be.

 

Hooper all day long as hes were's the hoops , Andy who ?

 

If you pay me a million quid for my car it isnt worth a million quid, it's worth what it was worth before you paid me a million quid! As is Andy Carroll! (I'll take a million quid for my car for the record!!)
Hooper is quality, neither worth 35 million and I'd take hooper any day of the week!

 

Thats your opinion, I remember reading alot about him about a year before the 94 WC, as he moved from Helsingborg.

I wouldnt consider moving to Feyenoord as a bad step, alot of talented players cut their teeth in holland before moving on. Ronaldo even done it and he didnt turn out half bad either.

Dont give me that all the best talent go to the G14 clubs *.

Also we did have one of the biggest wage bills in the Uk when Larsson was about, go do your homework

 

People are under rating Andy Carroll. Hooper will be better for us as his pace, movement and link0up is better and he scores goals. Carroll though is probably the ideal target man and will be brilliant for Liverpool.

Andy Carroll reminds me of Batistuta, not got the technique of Batistuta but similar style of play, a big battering ram who runs with big strides and bumps players out the way, blasts headers into the net and leathers shots in from all angles with either foot with net bursting power. Only thing he lacks that Batistuta had was Batistuta had the ability on the ball to score freekicks, over head kicks and skillful goals, Caroll has more basic technical ability.

 

Hooper and Carroll were playing in the same league and Hooper scored more so goal wise Hooper is the better option

 

He was 24 not one of the best up and coming talents. There was a lot of excitement about him before but by the time we had signed he was regarded as a failure. It would be like us signing Freddy Adu just now and him becoming a legend.

When Larsson signed? In 1997 we had one of the biggest wage bills in the UK? No we didn't you have made that up.

In 2000-2004 we had the 6th biggest wage budget and Larsson had a good whack of that because he deserved it.

Do your homework.

 

Larsson wasnt a great success in Holland, he had an average scoring rate and didnt light the place up, however the man who brought him here had seen the talent others were missing. He was NEVER going to go to a massive team and we got him at the a price that matched how he had been doing in Holland.

I know people dont like to compare others strikers to the great henrik but their are very early signs of a similar talent in gary hooper IMO. Still early days but the guy has everything, an amazing first touch, superb awareness of whats happening around him, strikers instinct and is a team player.

Would have him over carroll every day of the week and this is not biased in any way as I think their are more qualities to hoopers game than carrolls.

 

Genuinely not sure if your being serious or having a laugh (it did make me laugh so I hope that was what was intended)
If Carroll hadn't went to Liverpool and wasn't discussed and then this question came up everyone would have said Hooper, his price tag hasn't made him any better, he's still a decent young player

 

Than Batistuta, one of the greatest strikers to ever play the game? Are you serious?

Batistuta was a phenomenal footballer, and if Carroll is ever good enough to be mentioned in the same breath as him, then he will be doing a lot better than I for one expected him to. The only thing you can say against Batigol is that he only won one trophy in his career, but the fact that he is held in such high regard despite this shows you how good he really was.

 

another one ,where's Kenyan Bhoy ,he might be able to help crack this ,same pipe by chance.

 

I meant basic as in average not that he had more.

I said the same I would take Hooper for us as he'd be better for us. But for Liverpool Carroll will be a great player there too.

They are different styles of striker. So can't simply just be compared as to who is better. Carroll is a great target man who will score goals for fun, he'll be one of the best target man strikers in europe in a year or two. Hooper is more alike a Robbie Keane, an all action roaming forward who scores goals. I think Carroll's are more in demand at top clubs because they are rarer.

If you mean just the price tag, if Hooper went to Everton at the start of the season and had shown his ability and scored 15 goals by now. Then Hooper would be valued at £18-24million, just the way prices are down there. Carroll is probably valued at about £25million too, Liverpool obviously had to pay over the odds because Newcastle knew they had money and were desperate.

 

Let me know what part needs explaining, on nightshift so have all night :icon_mrgreen:

 

Your comparing andy carrol to a guy who done all this in his career????



goals scored.

1988-1989 Newell's Old Boys 24 7
1989-1990 River Plate 21 4
1990-1991 Boca Juniors 34 13
1991-2000 Fiorentina 269 168
2000-2003 A.S. Roma 63 30
2003 Internazionale 12 2
2003-2005 Al Arabi 18 25
1988-2005 Career 441 249

not to mention the international goals

Argentina national team
Year Apps Goals
1991 7 6
1992 5 6
1993 15 6
1994 10 6
1995 11 9
1996 5 3
1997 2 0
1998 12 12
1999 2 2
2000 5 4
2001 1 1
2002 3 1
Total 78 56

 

Your comparing andy carrol to a guy who done all this in his career????



goals scored.

1988-1989 Newell's Old Boys 24 7
1989-1990 River Plate 21 4
1990-1991 Boca Juniors 34 13
1991-2000 Fiorentina 269 168
2000-2003 A.S. Roma 63 30
2003 Internazionale 12 2
2003-2005 Al Arabi 18 25
1988-2005 Career 441 249

not to mention the international goals

Argentina national team
Year Apps Goals
1991 7 6
1992 5 6
1993 15 6
1994 10 6
1995 11 9
1996 5 3
1997 2 0
1998 12 12
1999 2 2
2000 5 4
2001 1 1
2002 3 1
Total 78 56

 

Think he was meaning it had something in COMMON with kenyan boys post on the mcgeady, commons thread, hilarious stuff by the way, go and give it a read page 2, I got what you were meaning it wasnt half as bad as kenyan boys explantion of mcgeady, commons affair etc etc

 

Aye I am :icon_mrgreen:

Carroll is only 22 remember, he has his whole career to go, when Batistuta was 22 he wasn't the Batistuta we know and love either, we didn't even know him then and he never had a cap

He has a similar style of play to Batistuta, a big battering ram with immsense power in his heading and shooting and lanky striding running style.

But like I said too Batistuta had more technique and scored freekicks and quality volleys and over head kicks that Carroll will not pull off anywhere near as much. He'll never be as good as Batistuta but he's as close a player i've seen to being like him.