Which goal was better

[Azzurri]

This is why i just cant get over excited about these type of goals as i much prefer goals were there is actually a goalie to beat.
Anyone can kick a ball into a 2.5 foot by 7 foot space from 50 yards if no one is attempting to stop it hitting that target

Christ, who is it you hang round with?

 

[Steve0]

This is why i just cant get over excited about these type of goals as i much prefer goals were there is actually a goalie to beat.
Anyone can kick a ball into a 2.5 foot by 7 foot space from 50 yards if no one is attempting to stop it hitting that target

Just been into the vaults....they make interesting reading.

 

[TraffordBlue]

I've played more than you and i know for a fact that i would find it more difficult to score sigurdssons than rooneys, maybe you were just a lump it forward type of player so a volley anywere is 2nd nature to you

lol That post amused me.

As for the bit in bold, that's effectively what Sigurdsson did, although it was a top class example of it. There was little technique involved, he just smashed it. Not trying to make out it wasn't an amazing goal as it was and it was very very difficult to score, but it was a hit and hope which paid off because he's a professional footballer who has that in his locker. He doesn't have the Rooney goal in his locker though and that is the difference whereas Rooney has scored one of them (Sigurdsson's) for Man United against West Ham already in his career.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Anyone can kick a ball into a 2.5 foot by 7 foot space from 50 yards

I would imagine that would be quite hard! What goals are we playing with here? A 24' x 8' regular goal would help...

 

[bignev23]

Rooneys was a better technique but was an open goal Sigurdsson had to beat a keeper.

 

[Steve Wigan]

If Sigurdsson actually meant to score that goal against Split rather then just fluking it (and I remain unsure about it) then his goal is the better. The angle alone makes it the better goal. That takes nothing away from Rooney who 100% knew what he was doing. Both are spectacular goals.

What makes Rooneys goal the 'best' is that it wasn't a half volley...he drilled it. Other distance goals, like Rooneys other against West Ham (Ha Ha),the ex RS at Stoke, and Beckhams,were calculated half volleys...it is far more difficult to drill a football (especially the modern 'light' ball) 70 yards and maintain accuracy. Easily one of the top ten goals of all time, I would say!!

 

[Toffeelover]

Rooney goal for me.

 

[Osamabindiesel]

Rooneys was a better technique but was an open goal Sigurdsson had to beat a keeper.

Rooney had a bit more margin for error too. I think it's unfair to say one was better than the other though because they were both spectacular. You won't see many better goals than these two

 

[Lanolin]

Can't get my head round people saying that the technique of Sigurdsson's was better. From a technical point of view, Sigurdsson's was the same as 1000 clearances you see every week, just as a shot instead. Rooney's was far superior in a technical sense. I'm also not sure why people make a big deal about the keeper in this instance. The keeper isn't particularly important in this type of goal. It's not like the Arteta/Bily efforts that somebody posted earlier where you have to hit the corner to beat the keeper which adds to the quality, getting the ball over the keepers head was the easiest part of Sigurdsson's goal, not the hardest.

Personally I just think they were both great goals and don't really have a favourite. Rooney's was technically superior, Sigurdsson's was more of an audacious effort, just depends what type of goal you prefer I suppose.

 

[Tubey]

Rooney had a bit more margin for error too. I think it's unfair to say one was better than the other though because they were both spectacular. You won't see many better goals than these two

I don't think that's true.

If he takes a touch before hitting it, I think Ogbonna gets back on the line at the very least.

It's the pace of the hit that takes both defenders out of contention for that ball. If he touches it and tries to curl it from the half way line, he doesn't score.

Not only that, in terms of technique he has no margin for error. He either hits that like he did or that balloons off his foot for a throw in or, at best, a shot very wide off target.

 

[paulbefc]

I'm going to say Sigurdsson, but it's a really tough one.

For me, the genius wasn't in the quality of the striking of the ball, as in Rooney's goal, but in the ability to spot the (almost non-) opportunity in a split second and then, in another split second, drop the ball on a sixpence from the right wing. The margin for error was almost nothing. That said, Rooney's strike didn't actually need half the (larger) margin for error it had, it was struck so well.

I have played football and am not having for a second the idea that the average footballer would score Sigurdsson's "chance" more often than they would Rooney's. I'm utterly positive I'd score more out of say a thousand theoretical attempts at Rooney's chance than Sigurdsson's. But again, to muddy the water slightly, you could have a million attempts and not strike the ball as well as Rooney did.

 

[paulbefc]

I don't think that's true.

If he takes a touch before hitting it, I think Ogbonna gets back on the line at the very least.

It's the pace of the hit that takes both defenders out of contention for that ball. If he touches it and tries to curl it from the half way line, he doesn't score.

Not only that, in terms of technique he has no margin for error. He either hits that like he did or that balloons off his foot for a throw in or, at best, a shot very wide off target.

He could definitely have got under it a bit more or sliced it more.