Yes really. He is a far better all-round player. I would not even class overly offensive players like Vargas as left-backs. The same applies to the likes of Alves on the opposite flank. They might be playing in that position but what they actually are is wing-backs at best. To me a full-back must be able to defend and that is where both simply cannot match the other options.
Ashley cole was awesome but just accept it, his not as good as he was in the past. If you don't see this you're either delusional or your being a biased chelsea supporter
Out of curiosity, how many Chelsea games have you seen this season? Because Cole is really looking a completely different player under Scolari than under Mourinho/Grant, and it looks like he's just about recaptured his Arsenal form. Obviously he has to maintain this form before being hailed as the best in the world though. And I can assure you Teso is not a biased Chelsea supporter.
Not really again, I feel isn't a description of his current level, it's more like his past, he isn't the player who was, in a moment, the best left-back definitely. Right now he's better at this season, but I think isn't enough to be in a top with players who had superlative last one or two seasons and still be in a good moment as Evra, Lahm or Vargas. Wasn't about who's better defending or attacking, I think now have equal importance to a side-back both roles, and actually, if we're talking about only Cole and Vargas, right now deffensively I think are in a similar level and offensively wins the Peruvian.
Vargas defense has improve a lot, i suggest you watch some Fiorentina games, but still Cole is more solid in defense right now. Though Vargas wins without a doubt in the attack. When we speak about left-back specifically, we look for someone who has good defense but most important someone who was good crosses and attacking qualities overall. Paolo Maldini was a center back/ left back but we remember him as a defender in general, and the best of the world for sure. Maldini could play in all positions of defense, and still be equally effective, he was a wall. but when we speak about left back , we associate it with Roberto Carlos, Evra,etc. Players that have attacking qualities mostly, Right back and Left back unlike other defenders, need to attack more. Center backs are rated in terms of Defense since they don't need to "cross balls" or ocassionally shoot the ball to goal. Attacking isn't a quality we rate in other defenders, but in RB and LB its very important.
And you're wrong, again... What's important is the overall effect in the games, and although Cole's is very good, Vargas has had the best whenever on the pitch this season. I'd like to see you using your usual "rubbish", "I've dealt with this before" and "as I've stated previously" ridiculous lines when Fabio and Rafael are tearing it up for Manchester United in the attack while being below average defensively. In fact, I have no idea of how people still manage to have the patience to reply to you. Your posts are by far the most arrogant on these boards, and they come from a man who puts Cristiano Ronaldo on his all time best 11. Wake up Teso.
and how does this supports your argument that Cole is the best in the world? In defense his not the "best" of the world, i'd even say his teammate defender Terry is A LOT better than him defending, and his attack is average at best -_- besides you can't claim his the best in just 5-6 games under Scolari as a coach, you need a lot more time, a season at least
The exact words were "right now defensively I think are in a similar level". I think Cole is still better, but not for too much, actually I'm in doubt, and the difference about attacking is longer in favor to Vargas.
No, it's not. If a full-back cannot defend then regardless of what he does offensively he is a liability. Anyone stating otherwise has no knowledge of the position and no knowledge of football. I'll ignore the rest of your infantile whining. I never stated that Cole was the best simply that he is one of the best and crucially better than Vargas. He might not be the best defensive left-back nor the best attacking full-back but overall he does both to a very high level and it is this balance that makes him so good. Your comparison to Terry is moot because they play in completely different positions. I also clearly stated that under Scolari he is getting back to his best. It's hardly fair to blame a player for not being at his best when he is under strict tactical instructions to play in a certain way. It's like telling Vargas to not cross the halfway line and then moaning that he is not matching his usual level of performance or influence. Cole proved himself at Arsenal and despite his initial role for Chelsea he was still amongst the best around. That is crucial. Not being at your best for tactical reasons but still being better than the majority. I disagree. Vargas is in the top 5 but he is not better than Evra, Cole and Lahm at this stage. He has also not reached the same level as Zambrotta of previous years.
So, in the hypothetical case that a fullback manages to score one goal for each game he plays, it won't excuse him being poor defensively? Would he still be a liability? What makes one player better than the other is the overall effect he has in games, you creating completely absurd concepts and claiming they're facts won't change the fact that, even though a player may have flaws, he may also be better than one completely flawless.
Who do you vote for then? balance? being awesome in his Arsenal years and then completely dropping his level during Mourinho and Grant, and later start to recover his original form under Scolari. Yeah thats very balanced and consistent. Yes thats a theory, How do you even know he was under strict tactical instructions under Mourinho and Grant? , if you really think this you're underestimating Grant and specially Mourinho as coaches enormously if you think they put tactical limitations on a player resulting in bad performances and not correcting or be aware of this throughout a lot of seasons.Why can't you just accept that his level dropped instead of blaming the coach?-_-;
You can find that out yourself if you click on the poll results. Turns out he hasn't voted, though I'm sure in this case a vote from Teso is a vote for Evra.
Id hope that Teso would be unbiased and vote for Lahm, who is the most complete fullback in the world currently.
who the hell is juan vargas and how is he winning this poll... that being said, right now id say gael clichy.... its cazy that 3 of the top left backs in the world are french... u cant wrong with any of them, clichy, abidal, or evra... but id take clichy.... the way he jets up and down that flank, you really dont even need a left sided winger... plus he knows how to tackle and is a very smart and consistent player...
I was waiting for the sarcastic smiley at the end of your post...apparently you're just ignorant. The top 3 LB's in the world arent all French...they are from Germany (Lahm), France (Evra) and Peru (Vargas) in that order. Clichy and Abidal are a fair way down the list. Clichy is good and getting better, but no where near the best in the world. Abidal is very average now compared to the best LB's in the world. Vargas is one of those best LB's in the world. You're probably going off FIFA or FM ratings for your opinion, not a smart move.
Pity you only considered the positive impact he would have on the game as opposed to the negative. The key, as always, is balance. Playing a very attacking player at left-back is merely an attempt to gain an added advantage when in possession of the ball but the second the ball is lost your team is at a disadvantage in that position. Sometimes it will work for you and sometimes it will not. Risk versus reward. If you come up against a team with shit width then great but if you come up against a team with world class width then you are the one in the shit. There is a reason why balanced and thus more 'complete' players are held in higher esteem than their peers. If we were discussing left-wing backs then I would have no problem hailing Vargas because that position demands more attacking play. We are not. See below. You completely missed the point I made. He was clearly put under tactical instructions. It happens to every player at some point in their career. Another factor that impacted on his performances was playing behind a winger in Chelsea's 4-3-3 (4-5-1) when he was used to overlapping to provide all of the width down his flank for Arsenal while Pires/Henry cut inside. It was a toss up between Lahm and Evra. The former provides more end product but the latter locks down his entire flank and regularly faces better opposition. They, along with Cole, make up my top three. Who you want depends entirely on what you want. You should find out about him because he is a very good attacking lateral defender. Clichy is overrated while Abidal has drastically declined.
Whatever, the better player is the one who helps his team the most, it doesn't matter if he's got only one leg or is Cher's illegitimate son. I'm not gonna spend hours responding to all of your obvieties and/or distorted concepts. A circle has no points.
A balanced player can be used in any situation which makes them more useful and more reliable. You cannot help your team if your style of play puts them at a disadvantage in certain situations.
To be fair, it was fairly obvious watching Cole the past two seasons that he was 'shackled' to some extent, and it really did not play into his strengths at all. He's not a great crosser, particularly from a standing position yet time and time again he would get no more than 10 yards within the opposition half and ping a lofted ball up in Drogba's general direction which was almost inevitably cleared. It was pretty clear that it did not work, but under Mourinho's pragmatic reign, the last thing he wanted was his fullbacks stranded forward so he had them play fairly conservatively. Obviously we can't 'know' for sure whether it was tactical instructions or not, but I would say given his form/role at Arsenal and now under Scolari compared to under Jose and Grant, all the signs would point to that being the nature of his (relatively) poor form.
You can, if you manage to put your team at an advantage more times than you put them at a disadvantage. All players commit mistakes, some more than others, but not all players can consistently be the difference between a loss and a win. Wouldn't you play someone as good as Pele offensively and as bad as Titus Bramble defensively in your team as a fullback? Vargas is neither, but he sure can turn games around and be the most important player on the pitch.