If Haruna is better than Mikel than Im the Queen of England
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:27 pm
Mikel is more stable...and for a player known to be a DM he is more attacking minded than Lukman Haruna.
Lukman has a better shot than Mikel at times, but that flatters to deceive.
Mikel makes better passes and has a wide array of passing options. Rather than always playing the short pass, Mikel can play long accurate passes, decisive short passes, lobs, crosses etc.
Mikel is less prone to making rash decisions, Mikel is a moure rounded player.
And contrary to popular belief, he can attack much the same way that Lukman can.
Mikel does not let the stage daunt him, unlike Lukman who seems to have regressed from his performances in the friendlies.
Mikel is a more intelligent player and is more successful when weaving through defenses.
Mikel is not my favourite player, but if there is a contest between him an Haruna, Etuhu or even Ajilore/Ayila I will say Mikel is the better player
Lukman has a better shot than Mikel at times, but that flatters to deceive.
Mikel makes better passes and has a wide array of passing options. Rather than always playing the short pass, Mikel can play long accurate passes, decisive short passes, lobs, crosses etc.
Mikel is less prone to making rash decisions, Mikel is a moure rounded player.
And contrary to popular belief, he can attack much the same way that Lukman can.
Mikel does not let the stage daunt him, unlike Lukman who seems to have regressed from his performances in the friendlies.
Mikel is a more intelligent player and is more successful when weaving through defenses.
Mikel is not my favourite player, but if there is a contest between him an Haruna, Etuhu or even Ajilore/Ayila I will say Mikel is the better player
