Best Central midfielders in the world

[ForeverRed]

1. Why does Carragher "deserve" to start? Why does he deserve to over Rio or Terry? He certainly didn't over Sol in his prime.
2. No one's taking anything away from Carragher.

Why? Oh I don't know, based on form maybe? Or are you saying Rio has had the season he's had this year for the past 3? Even when Rio was in bad form he was still prefered over Carragher...gimme a break.

[nicephoras]

Why? Oh I don't know, based on form maybe? Or are you saying Rio has had the season he's had this year for the past 3? Even when Rio was in bad form he was still prefered over Carragher...gimme a break.

Central defenders need to form partnerships; replacing them at a whim is foolish. Furthermore, the myth that Rio has at times been an awful defender is just that - a myth. Yet even further, despite playing in a fairly defensive system, Liverpool's defense has yet to attain the stinginess of either Chelsea or ManUtd (or even Arsenal's peak form!) in the league. One could argue that Chelsea plays a fairly defensive system as well, but then, Chelsea's defense has been better. So, on form, I don't see any particular reason why Ferdinand should have been replaced by Carragher judging by "form".

Carragher's problem has really been that it is only over the past 3 years that he has begun to be considered at that level (on the simple merit of his performances). Prior to that no one considered him in the same class and he was never touted as a potential starter for England CB. That may be somewhat unfair but is almost certainly the reason for his exclusion from England. Once other players already in the England setup play enough games and there is no particularly good reason to drop them, they won't be dropped. Which makes perfect sense. Gianfranco Zola never played much for Italy despite being the best player in England over the course of several years. Oh well. Maybe he deserved to start over the players chosen instead. Maybe not. But I'm certainly not up in arms over it.

[jpick]

Gianfranco Zola never played much for Italy despite being the best player in England over the course of several years. Oh well. Maybe he deserved to start over the players chosen instead. Maybe not. But I'm certainly not up in arms over it.

you're being overly diplomatic here. he certainly deserved to be called up more than he was, yet alone deserve to start some of them. I know that and I know you know that :).
hopefully the old "I don't call players from outside the peninsula" unwritten rule that italian coaches lived by can be killed with donadoni. then again, if that was the case emiliano moretti and not tonetto would be the backup left back right now

[Teso Dos Bichos]

You claimed the facts disagree. I await the support for your contention.

Now then, where was that post where last year you claimed Wes Brown should start for England over John Terry? I do so love that particular nugget.

Games played and more European success are the simple facts but since you will obviously disagree with what we all know, I await your reasoning. As for Terry versus Brown, I stand by what I posted. Terry was playing poorly and Brown was playing exceptionally, as Ferdinand's club partner. Since you have just made a post regarding the importance of partnerships over individual talent, there is no point in continuing as you must obviously agree with my stance.

[nicephoras]

LOL You can't even remember what you posted on the previous page - why bother with this? (Neither games played in Europe nor European success were actually in the original point you refuted! Read!)

As for Wes Brown for England - awesome! Wes Brown for England baby! Woooo!

[Teso Dos Bichos]

We are discussing European experience. That involves games played and success is a component of that. Having realised you did not have a leg to stand on you tried to add different factors, such as age and internationals. I did not. We still waiting on you to present this 'evidence' of Terry being superior in Europe.

[nicephoras]

LOL, you really are precious Teso. Enjoy your discussion. I have real work to do.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

You cannot provide any evidence to support your opinion, so you are running away? I would say I was suprised but that would be a lie, as you have done this before.

Will anyone else step in or does everyone accept that Carragher is ahead of Terry?

[yasik19]

You cannot provide any evidence to support your opinion, so you are running away? I would say I was suprised but that would be a lie, as you have done this before.

Will anyone else step in or does everyone accept that Carragher is ahead of Terry?

read a forum on Liverpool board about those two before making insane comments. :rolleyes:

and yes, Mr. SGE and Stevie Mac, are you reading this? Teso knows best.....he really does.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

I don't need to because I know I am correct. In terms of European experience Carragher is clearly ahead of Terry and that is the issue being discussed. It's not difficult to comprehend. Hell, I don't even like either player regardless.

[Walter3000]

Actually it was big game experience, whih doesnt merit every game played in Europe, it also takes into account International experience, of which Terry is on another level. No surprise that the biggest anti-Chelsea bigot around is once again involved in a thread trying to assault the talents of John terry and Frank Lampard, give it a rest.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

You will find that the key issue of contention and the one I was clearly discussing was European experience. You can look at that in overall terms or quality of opposition and success. Either way, Carragher is ahead. Internationals is a seperate issue that I was not involved in but regardless, it is a lot closer than you think. Terry is currently ahead in caps and the EC (tournament and qualifying) but Carragher has the edge in the WC (tournament and qualifying). Of course, Terry being ahead is to be expected considering his captaincy guarantees him a start. However, it is a side issue brought about because certain individuals realised they had no answer to the European experience issue.

It is interesting to see how they both developed. Terry steadily grew into his central defensive position and we saw him break into the side and make the position his own. Carragher was used all over and had seasons at right and left back before Benitez moved him to a permanent central defensive position. Since then there has hardly been anything between them.

[nicephoras]

and yes, Mr. SGE and Stevie Mac, are you reading this? Teso knows best.....he really does.

To be fair, giving Steve McLaren the benefit of the doubt is a dangerous thing. After all, he doesn't even have Wes Brown as the first name on the teamsheet. What kind of a rube is he?

Wes Brown for England!

[Teso Dos Bichos]

It's sad to see your 'level' of posting descend into simply trying to get a pathetic rise.

[Walter3000]

I enjoy to read the excuse about Terry having more international experience, because as captain he is an automatic choice, something he earned on form and merit, when the simple fact is Carragher has more European experience because he is older(playing for Liverpool instead of Chelsea helped for awhile).

The idea that Carragher has more big game experience is ridiculous when taking into account Euro 2004. Carragher watched Euro 2004 and played some miserable out of place role in 2006 because he wasnt good enough to unseat Terry, nice PK by the way.

And how about those two CL final games, really got abused by Crespo and Pipo(loan striker mind you).

Again, let the Anti-Chelsea crusade rest, and go back to pondering why ManUnited would spend 35-40 million on the most over rated CM pairing in history.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

The difference in English caps is 4. Carragher was hurt by his versatility and club roles. He was not good enough to start in central midfield and had Cole/Neville ahead of him at either fullback position. Then Terry took over from Campbell before Benitez had converted Carragher into only playing as a central defender. Whether you like it or not, Terry went through a poor spell for England and never really showed his Chelsea form for one reason or another. There were numerous calls for other options to be tried but that was comprehensively quashed when he was made captain. After all, Beckham was proof that regardless of how poorly you play you can never be dropped as captain. I made the argument at the time and do not see the need in returning to it because there is nothing else to discuss.

As for your pathetic attempt at an attack, funnily enough the third from a Chelsea supporter since this issue was brought up, Carrick was £14m upfront and paying the extra conditions was well worth it considering we won the league. It is also irrelevant to this discussion and arguing with a Chelsea fan in regard to transfers and their worth is simply laughable.

[Walter3000]

You know it hurts though, instead of Essien-Mikel, whom you both could have had, you;re stuck with Owen and MC. Sucks.

Make all the excuses you want, Terry is the captain, Carragher, if he was good enough would be playing regularly at CB, like you said he wasnt good enough in midfield, he has better players in front of him at fullback(he isnt great there either), he had plenty of oppurtunity to make the team as a CB, and couldnt make it happen.

And why talk about about all of his experience, when most of came at different positions. The only comparisons to be made are inthe last few years, when he has been a fulltime centerhalf, since then he's won 2 major trophies, and dont nothing for England, Terry has done more.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

You know it hurts though, instead of Essien-Mikel, whom you both could have had, you;re stuck with Owen and MC. Sucks.

You spent £40.4m, we will spend £31m upfront on two proven players. If we end up paying more it will still be less than you paid and it will have been worth it because we would have won. Carrick's performances and role in the side has been crucial. Hopefully Hargreaves will have a similar impact. If they perform then we could not care less about you paying through the roof for Essien and going through all of that mess to steal Mikel. Likewise, if your pairing works out then you will not care. It's completely irrelevant to this thread.

Make all the excuses you want, Terry is the captain, Carragher, if he was good enough would be playing regularly at CB, like you said he wasnt good enough in midfield, he has better players in front of him at fullback(he isnt great there either), he had plenty of oppurtunity to make the team as a CB, and couldnt make it happen.

It's not excues and I'll leave it to the Liverpool fans to make those. Terry had more of a chance at central defense than Carragher ever had and the captaincy has sealed his position regardless of how he performs. Do you disagree with that?

And why talk about about all of his experience, when most of came at different positions. The only comparisons to be made are inthe last few years, when he has been a fulltime centerhalf, since then he's won 2 major trophies, and dont nothing for England, Terry has done more.

Experience is experience. He holds the record for most European appearances in Liverpool's history for a reason but if you only wish to discuss his time playing centrally then let's do so. In three years Carragher played in two Champion's League finals (won one, lost one), the UEFA Super Cup (won), The FA Cup Final (won) and the League Cup Final (lost). He was named Liverpool's player of the year twice. For England he played in 6 WCQ, 4 WC, 2 ECQ and countless friendlies during that time. Unfortunately for him it has been filling in for injured players in a variety of positions. Terry has done better for England, Carragher has done better in Europe. I was only discussing Europe originally.

---

I don't even know why I am bothering with this. All I did was defend a poster who rightly said that Carragher had more European experience than Terry. Where the hell are Liverpool fans when you need them?

[TKORL]

Terry didn't exactly have an outstanding Euro 2004. It's really not clear to me how Sven's belief that Terry is better, or McLarens belief that Terry has done enough to win the captaincy justifies the argument that Terry is the superior. (How many trophies has Steve Mclaren won?)


As for "getting abused by Crespon and Inzaghi" in the CL final...funnily enough, I saw the same final, and yet I didn't see him get abused by either. While it is true that he was the closest to goal when it was scored, I don't think that it automatically implies that Carragher was at fault.

You have to remember that Djimi Traore was starting for Liverpool on that day. That prolly had to do with something.


"Terry has done more." What HAS Terry done for England? I don't recall Terry being outstanding in the WC. If you want and example of top level defending in the WC, look at Metzelder, Cannavaro, Carvalho, Thuram. Terry has never displayed the same ability at the world's biggest games. I mean then again, the biggest game he's played in is an FA Cup final.

[United Pumps]

I'd completely forgotten that Terry and Carragher were central midfielders. Silly me.