swiz123:


Honestly, I thought you played football to some extent. Because if you ever did, you would understand that Havertz goal requires more technique than that of Muani. The reason is simple, when a ball bounces, volley becomes easier and lifting the ball above a goalkeeper becomes much more easier.

Intelligent players will always go a lobbed shot in Muani's situation. Even if you don't rate Havertz, don't tell me you expect Messi to fire a shot in Muani's situation.

rooftops:
People stubborn for this place o. Even if you interview muani today, he will attest that he rushed that ball.
Havertz own is more difficult than muani's because he was closer to the keeper.

FBS:

That pass though, Enzo on fire. Agba baller.

swiz123:


Honestly, I thought you played football to some extent. Because if you ever did, you would understand that Havertz goal requires more technique than that of Muani. The reason is simple, when a ball bounces, volley becomes easier and lifting the ball above a goalkeeper becomes much more easier.

Intelligent players will always go a lobbed shot in Muani's situation. Even if you don't rate Havertz, don't tell me you expect Messi to fire a shot in Muani's situation.

popizaino:
@Lana my gif plug.

There is an action on the 0:46secs of this video, can you help me and bring it out so that airmark will explain to house why he didn't ask Mbappe to have scored that second goal using the same technique and aim,he is asking Muani to have used for his missed chance.

airmark:


Stop stressing yourself.

Argentina's keeper was well off his line and not too close to Muani. Main reasons, it was feasible for him to lob as his best bet. Compare it with Mbappe's chance and see which is easier to execute. That's why Havertz attempt was more difficult as he had to calculatively kick it so the keeper won't stop it and the ball wouldn't miss the target. Don't forget that he did it, without the ball bouncing.

If Havertz had shot like Muani and missed, I wouldn't have blamed him because the chance of scoring wasn't as high as Muani's.

airmark:


Stop stressing yourself.

Argentina's keeper was well off his line and not too close to Muani. Main reasons, it was feasible for him to lob as his best bet. Compare it with Mbappe's chance and see which is easier to execute. That's why Havertz attempt was more difficult as he had to calculatively kick it so the keeper won't stop it and the ball wouldn't miss the target. Don't forget that he did it, without the ball bouncing.

If Havertz had shot like Muani and missed, I wouldn't have blamed him because the chance of scoring wasn't as high as Muani's.

Havertz29s:
What are you even still arguing about, i thought even muani admitted he fücked up.

hensben:
The guy even had the ball set properly for that and had all the time to do that compared to that of Havertz. But it is what it is.

airmark:


It was a cup-winning gift from the god of soccer.

airmark:




Jorginho's upgrade.

hensben:
Chalobah is used to Jorginho hence his pointing to the back.

hensben:
Chalobah is used to Jorginho hence his pointing to the back.

Itsrm:


Jorginho don suffer

Ballzproblem2:
I tell you the Kain PTSD our players suffer for that guy hand eh, back pass wey go dey put your defense on constant pressure Enzo will lead revolution for forward passe

Ibime:


What's the angle of the bounce?

You can't compare a ball bouncing horizontally to a ball heading in direction of goal

It's always easier to lob when the ball is heading in direction of goal.

When the ball is bouncing in the direction of throw-in line, you have to factor in changing the angle and the elevation with one strike. That means hitting a sweet spot on your instep that would do both at the same time. All Havertz had to do was change the elevation, the angle was already in the direction of goal. Muani lobbing the keeper is not impossible but strikers are unlikely to take that option 7 times out of ten

Ibime:


What's the angle of the bounce?

You can't compare a ball bouncing horizontally to a ball heading in direction of goal

It's always easier to lob when the ball is heading in direction of goal.

When the ball is bouncing in the direction of throw-in line, you have to factor in changing the angle and the elevation with one strike. That means hitting a sweet spot on your instep that would do both at the same time. All Havertz had to do was change the elevation, the angle was already in the direction of goal. Muani lobbing the keeper is not impossible but strikers are unlikely to take that option 7 times out of ten

Ibime:


What's the angle of the bounce?

You can't compare a ball bouncing horizontally to a ball heading in direction of goal

It's always easier to lob when the ball is heading in direction of goal.

When the ball is bouncing in the direction of throw-in line, you have to factor in changing the angle and the elevation with one strike. That means hitting a sweet spot on your instep that would do both at the same time. All Havertz had to do was change the elevation, the angle was already in the direction of goal. Muani lobbing the keeper is not impossible but strikers are unlikely to take that option 7 times out of ten

airmark:


Stop stressing yourself.

Argentina's keeper was well off his line and not too close to Muani. Main reasons, it was feasible for him to lob as his best bet. Compare it with Mbappe's chance and see which is easier to execute. That's why Havertz attempt was more difficult as he had to calculatively kick it so the keeper won't stop it and the ball wouldn't miss the target. Don't forget that he did it, without the ball bouncing.

If Havertz had shot like Muani and missed, I wouldn't have blamed him because the chance of scoring wasn't as high as Muani's.

hensben:
Chalobah is used to Jorginho hence his pointing to the back.

airmark:


Didn't even know that.

Popizaino, case closed. Thank me for educating you. 😄

hensben:
Chalobah is used to Jorginho hence his pointing to the back.

popizaino:


There were other options so he said, not that lopping was the best option.

Theuniverse:
ever since Potter came to Chelsea as English coach, how e don even benefit us sef? var, refs decisions, 50-50 decisions day always go against us. isn't the fa suppose to give one of their country man some privileges, an English man coaching a big club like Chelsea, when last did that even happen. this shows that even the fa regard Potter as a dunce and completely useless, that they should even help us. against westham var error,against leicester two red card tackles overlooked etc. I day sure say if na epl, that havertz retaken penalty vs Dortmund will not happen, they for no even check and replay am sef. an American owner and English coach, suppose to be a powerful force in fa, to benefit us, like Ferguson time 4 manunited. this shows the fa views boehly and Potter as dunces and completely useless. they know that our coach is calm and a Dundee, he no go shout and fire them. so they are are using our games to gamble and play betting. they fit try this nonsense with ten hag,pep or even arteta? they apologise to arsenal for var error, that same week no apology for us for westham handball var error. thunder fire Potter and his badluck, even his country men see him as useless, why will we cfc fans value him?