I refer to the overhead kick by Wayne Rooney which won the Manchester derby on Saturday.
Commentators are running out of superlatives to describe its brilliance.
I'm just wondering if it was quite as wonderful as some are saying.
Rooney had acres of space in the City penalty area.
He caught the ball perfectly, but any decent striker would have taken on the overhead kick in that situation.
I've seen similar opportunities missed, but I've also seen them scored.
soccer-portal.org/goal-of-the-day/5691-wayne-rooney-goal-v-man-city.html
|
|
I thought it was a really good goal, I'm not sure most would take it on and score with such a clean hit. Plus it was a cruical goal in a big game so it's bound to get some column inches. I see what you are saying about the amount of space, but overhead kicks are nearly always taken when there is plenty of space, if the making had been better he may well have scored with a header.
|
The trouble with overhead kick goals is that they are speculative. There is never any real certainty they will go in, but when they do they look spectacular.
Best goal ever? No, not by a long way.
try some of these, I would say the Tony Yeboah goal is far better and more skillful.
and yes hate him as you must, but Maradonna's goal against England was better than Rooneys.
www.soccernews.com/10-best-soccer-goals-ever-video/41086/
|
>> The trouble with overhead kick goals is that they are speculative. There is never any
>> real certainty they will go in, but when they do they look spectacular.
Probably a bit unfair Zero. It is not as if overhead kicks are just randomly aimed towards the goal, any more than a normal shot is. The taker, if they are skilled, is certainly aiming for a zone in the goal.
>> Best goal ever? No, not by a long way.
Certainly not, and I haven't personally seen anyone say that (although I haven't read today's papers). The only thing I saw was somebody from the BBC suggesting to Rooney that it may be his best goal ever and him saying that it could be.
I saw it last night and, although it was well executed, I couldn't personally see what all the fuss was about.
|
>> Probably a bit unfair Zero. It is not as if overhead kicks are just randomly
>> aimed towards the goal, any more than a normal shot is. The taker, if they
>> are skilled, is certainly aiming for a zone in the goal.
Let is just say then, that the conversion rate of goal to attempt is considerably less than any other attempt on the zone.
|
>> Let is just say then, that the conversion rate of goal to attempt is considerably
>> less than any other attempt on the zone.
Dunno, I've not seen any statistics. It is definitely more difficult to do correctly that a standard shot, but when done well it can often catch out even the best keeper. In that sense, any shot, bar a tap in, is speculative.
|
If he was not in plenty of space it would rate as dangerous play :) I just wonder if anybody has put the ball in the net with an overhead kick and had the goal disallowed because of the proximity of a defender?
My fading memories of playing the game include a similar attempt, however the ball smacked me in the face and left me with a painful face and bloody nose.
Last edited by: Webmaster on Thu 17 Feb 11 at 02:39
|
>> If he was not in plenty of space it would rate as dangerous play :)
>> I just wonder if anybody has put the ball in the net with an overhead
>> kick and had the goal disallowed because of the proximity of a defender?
>>
Plenty of times, I've seen such goals (or attempts at goal) disallowed as often as they've been given if a defender is close enough to be in danger.
It was a good goal, but not particularly unusual or remarkable. Martin peters got a few like that in his West Ham days.
|
>>I refer to the overhead kick by Wayne Rooney which won the Manchester derby on Saturday.>>
Well put it this way. How well and how often would you achieve it?
|
|
Nothing more than sheer luck! - he happened to catch it spot on. so it`s allegedly a great goal. Had he not caught it so clean, it could have gone anywhere, and if he`d missed it altogether he would have ended up in a heap, and he`d have been a donkey! - any player can score a great goal if all the "if`s and buts"come together at the right time, it`s the Perfect Storm syndrome!
|
...Well put it this way. How well and how often would you achieve it?...
Anyone with a good eye ought to be able to get something on the incoming ball, more often than not.
Add a little bit of luck, and the ball will find the goal.
I am an amateur, so my strike rate would be poor.
A professional ought to exceed my performance by a very wide margin.
But then, I've seen so-called professionals at my team and others whose idea of trapping a ball is to let it bounce off their shin and run after it.
The skill level of many Premier League players is so low it makes Wayne Rooney's star shine all the brighter.
Last edited by: Iffy on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 14:34
|
Interviewed after the event, the spud-faced nipper himself said (if I deciphered his discourse correctly) that a kick of that sort is never guaranteed to go in, it's always a chancerish sort of move.
It's completely beyond me how anyone, however young and fit, can even begin to attempt something like that. No wonder these people are paid excessive amounts. They deserve it in a way.
|
|
Billionaire footballer scores a goal in a football match- Local club here (Bangor City) managed to score six in ninety minutes yesterday, I know little about the game but it's hardly value for money is it ?
Last edited by: Pugugly on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 15:12
|
>> Billionaire footballer scores a goal in a football match- Local club here (Bangor City) managed
>> to score six in ninety minutes yesterday, I know little about the game but it's
>> hardly value for money is it ?
>>
I guess its like all sport, the more you earn doing it, the less you want to get hurt (thus stop earning) so you don't try so hard as you might...
I've always preferred 'club racing' to the stuff that makes TV, believing that if the one person owns, maintains, and races the machine, then he (she?) will be hungry to be placed, thus give their all, BUT trying to do so at as small a cost as possible.
|
>> I guess its like all sport, the more you earn doing it, the less you want to get hurt (thus stop earning) so you don't try so hard as you might...
I don't know about you Swiss, but if I tried anything like the Nipper's overhead kick I would certainly end up in hospital. OK, he's made of hard rubber and he bounces, but even so...
|
For some truly great goals, look no further than here -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZJ6j4VYHpo
|
>> Anyone with a good eye ought to be able to get something on the incoming
>> ball, more often than not.
>>
>> Add a little bit of luck, and the ball will find the goal.
Well, ignoring positioning, awareness of those around you and where the goal is etc, then, yes, any strike you take is you getting something on the ball, and then some will go in and some won't.
Why is that any different for an overhead kick?
I get the sense that people are suggesting that overhead kicks are just a lottery, a bit like swinging your foot at a ball, while blindfolded, whereas they are nothing of the sort.
>> The skill level of many Premier League players is so low it makes Wayne Rooney's
>> star shine all the brighter.
It is definitely true that the very best players, can be measurably better than those just below them. For example, how many golf or tennis majors are won by the players not in the top 10 of the world rankings?
However, that doesn't mean that the skill levels of those just below them are not exceptional. For example, the world's 100th ranking golfer player, is still amazingly good compared the millions of other golf players in the world.
The same applies to Premier League players. Why on earth would anybody think that the skill level of many Premier League players is so low? Compared to who exactly?
|
...Compared to who exactly?...
Compared to the better ones.
|
>> ...Compared to who exactly?...
>>
>> Compared to the better ones.
Ah, I see, so as I mentioned in my earlier post, it is pretty standard that a small handful of people in any sport, are significantly better than the "next tier".
If you are just saying that there is a handful of very good players in the Premier League, and then other players who definitely are not as good (but still within a small fraction of 1% of the best players in the world) then I agree.
My only objection is that being in that small fraction of 1% of all the players in the world, can hardly be classified as "low skill".
EDIT: Frankly, I have always found it amazing that, seemingly, in every sport it seems to be the case that the small handful are much better than the rest. You would have thought at the very top, there would be quite a few who were about the same skill level.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 17:19
|
...can hardly be classified as "low skill"...
Not being able to trap a ball cleanly 99 per cent of the time and being unable to kick with both feet falls into my definition of 'low skill'.
|
You fall over if you kick with both feet.
John
|
>> ...can hardly be classified as "low skill"...
>>
>> Not being able to trap a ball cleanly 99 per cent of the time and
>> being unable to kick with both feet falls into my definition of 'low skill'.
I see. But if we assume that applies to many Premier League players, and yet those players are within, say, the top 0.01% of the world's most skillful players, can they really be classified as "low skill" or are you standards, perhaps, a bit unrealistic?
|
>> I see. But if we assume that applies to many Premier League players, and yet
>> those players are within, say, the top 0.01% of the world's most skillful players, can
>> they really be classified as "low skill" or are your standards, perhaps, a bit unrealistic?
>>
Haha. He's got you there Iffy ;-)
Z has a point. An overhead kick must be (I can't speak from experience) a bit like a shot off 3 cushions at snooker. If it misses it's not remarked on, if it goes in then you're a genius...
|
...Haha. He's got you there Iffy ;-)...
Absolutely - if only the long string of assumptions he makes were not so suspect.
It is beyond me how anyone can assume the Premier League players are in the top 0.01% for skill.
All we know for sure is they are in the top 0.01% for pay.
Incidentally, Alan Green on 5Live is asking the same question as me about the Rooney goal.
His phone-in is on for the next hour if anyone's interested.
Last edited by: Iffy on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 18:03
|
|
Just been catching up with the Six Nations - far more civilised game, far more professional sportsmen.
|
>> Just been catching up with the Six Nations - far more civilised game, far more
>> professional sportsmen.
Dirty game though - lots of hand balls.
|
|
Would that have been Ireland v France by any chance? Looked like mass all in wrestling to me!
|
|
I've never been comfortable watching men rolling round in mud and groping each other.
|
|
Watched a summary of them all - was slightly drunk yesterday.
|
|
Wonder if Alanovic has recovered yet after watching the game in Edinburgh yesterday?
|
Hello, Focus. No, I haven't yet recovered - and it's Monday afternoon already! I've recovered from the result (that took a few seconds, frankly - the Scots were so dreadful from the outset that it was over within the first 10 minutes of the match).
Getting over a lunchtime start on the ale and finishing off with a 6 hour session in Fingers Piano Bar on Frederick Street is proving a shade tougher....................I'm not the yoof I once was. I shall mostly be avoiding booze for a very, very long time now.
|
" I shall mostly be avoiding booze for a very, very long time now."
Yeah, I always say that too...
|
>> ...Haha. He's got you there Iffy ;-)...
>>
>> Absolutely - if only the long string of assumptions he makes were not so suspect.
>>
>> It is beyond me how anyone can assume the Premier League players are in the
>> top 0.01% for skill.
Oh come on iffy, I can't let you off with that.
What percentage do you think they are in then?
You don't need to unravel a long string of assumptions. There are only two assumptions. One is that they are well within the top 0.1% (i.e. for every Premier League footballer, there are at least 1,000 footballers who are not as good), and two is that being within that percentage cannot possibly mean that you are of "low skill" as a football player.
If you disagree with that, then just replace it with your percentage, and then tell me that being in that percentage can possibly make you of "low skill".
Your argument is akin to taking, say, the top 1% of people based upon intelligence, and then saying that they are stupid, because you just happen to have some definition of stupid that they fall into, which pays no heed to how much more intelligent they are than the vast majority of other people.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 20:26
|
Just showed this one on Match of the Day 2:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2KeX7nhZRY
Lee Dixon reckoned it was better, and you can see he is significantly further out than Rooney was (Rooney about level with the penalty spot; Sinclair outside the box). Both pretty impressive either way.
|
Was the goal that good? - sooty123
