Erling Haland (born in 2000) was 17-18 years old and had 10 goals in 9 matches for Norway at U19 and U18 level.

A little older, Sorloth (born in 1995) was 22 and had 6 goals in 14 matches for Norway U19 and Norway U18 (which one looks better, his or Haaland's goalscoring stat??), 1 goal in 10 matches for Norway U21 and 1 goal in 12 matches for Norway main national team (in a friendly against Iceland).

In January 2018 the Palace board made the decision to sign Alexander Sorloth for 8 million+add-ons.

He had at that time scored 10 goals and assisted 8 times in the Danish league season at the age of 22 in 1450 minutes.

If Palace had waited the year 2018 before making a transfer decision, the board would have seen Haaland do the same thing in the Norwegian league, but at 18 years old: 12 goals and 4 assists in 1500 minutes.

Both players also had 4 goals and 1 assist in the Europa League Qualifiers (Sorloth in 2017, Haaland in 2018 ).

Haaland left to Red Bull Salzburg in January 2019 for 7 million. He continued to score there extraordinarily for his age, 21 goals and 6 assists in 1250 minutes in Austria and 8 goals in the Champions League and has just recently been subject to a 20 million transfer to Borussia Dortmund, where he scored 5 times in his first 50 minutes on the pitch.

He is seen as the best youth prospect for the center forward position in Europe and the 20 million fee was only because Salzburg had agreed a small clause with his agents, not believing that he could prosper so fast so soon. From Borussia, he will only leave for 60 million or more.

Imagine what could have been if the Palace board would have just looked at those youth national team statistics and gotten Haaland instead of Sorloth.....

Edited by mattteo (26 Jan 2020 7.38pm)

No, it's not a question that Salzburg would have made Sorloth just as good as Haaland or that if Haaland were to have come to Palace, he would have flopped in the PL too.

It's just that there's a difference in value between the 2. Haaland would have made it anywhere. He has been constantly used at levels way above his age. He is still only 19. One could see his quality since his Norway U18 or U19 levels years ago.

It was obvious to a trained mind that the better footballer was the one 4-5 years younger, who was having similar (and even better) achievements during the same time. If Palace was going to invest in a young player willing to be PL substitute (like Sorloth was), it should have gone for Haaland.

Perhaps they believed the Danish league, where Sorloth did well, was better than the Norwegian league, but there really isn't much difference. At national team level, yes, the Danes have achieved much better results, but at domestic league level it's rather similar.

I remember Roy Hodgson saying they had to pay that money for Sorloth "because he's just that good at his age". If that was true for 22 yo Sorloth, what did Roy think about 17-18 year old Haaland, who had better numbers??

I can see Russia from my house.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

It’s a fine line picking players. Klopp is undoubtedly up there. Big Sam brought us some quality. Since then, whoever is choosing isn’t on your wavelength matteo sadly

Edited by dreamwaverider (27 Jan 2020 7.46am)

Edited by dreamwaverider (27 Jan 2020 7.48am)

More realistically, he would have at the very most ended up of the subs bench and got 5 minutes here and there, eventually being loaned out.

Not really. I mean, yeah, maybe some are ovwrrated at this age, but who scores a tone in international games usually makes it to professional football.