Doesn’t it more reflect the fact that Belgian players, largely, haven’t been great this year? De Bruyne and Hazard should be higher up but someone like Courtois has had a bad year, Carrasco and Dembele have gone to China, Nainggolan had a pretty poor time at Inter but is back in form now. The preponderance of Brazilians while overdone reflects in part the Copa America and also the club success of Flamengo.
That's right but that applies to many Real Madrid players and seven of them are nevertheless in (Hazard - who is not so high for his Madrid games, Benzema, Ramos, Kroos, Modric, Casemiro, Varane). They aren't all 100% obvious names. The counterpoint is some of those have rebounded a bit, but so did Courtois I guess. Haven't seen everything but he had his games in the Champions League where he was decisive (Galatasaray) but also the league (Valencia, Bilbao recently) where he was busy and is therefore the best/2nd best goalkeeper in WhoScored. He has won points for them this campaign. Thus that fits within my point/observation still.
Well yes, my thoughts are broadly the same here. The next question is what are the driving factors behind all those clicks. I'll comment briefly on a few of your other things. This are not mutually exclusive ideas. If I claim VvD had likely won the BdO if he was Italian (also based on what we know from a few research papers with regression analysis) then it doesn't exclude Italian football(ers) have taken a reputational hit the last decade. Furthermore, 'my claims' are not limited to only the last 10 years. I don't see it that way. Bluntly put: Germany has usually by 'consensus' three footballers in an all-time top 20. That is more than every other European country. Now you might think there is still a barrier to overcome, but all those three are from the province associated with 60+ million deaths in the 20th century, with then providing shelter for war criminals afterwards. It meets the 'least likely case' test. The football system with all those sponsors, population, media (receiving FIFA medals) etc. is just that strong. They have eight in this The Guardian list, almost the double amount of 'Holland', who outclassed them this year on the pitch. We've played our role in the development of the sport, tactical concepts and some teams (at Liverpool the main function of the three dutchmen is to provide an antidote against the pitfall of chaos and loss of cohesion in which klopp teams can easily fall into), which has also been recognized. In the ecosystem of modern times there is however at times a tendency that it gets pushed aside because the media has become so geared towards the bigger markets and leagues. Books and works like the one of Michael Cox is obviously written for that audience and has that slant (don't get me started about the likes of Honigstein), and is for demographic reasons also more about the last 10 years than the 15 years before. Well known are the anecdotes of countries where the best supported team is Barcelona or Manchester United rather than a local team. In a broader sense of 'undervaluation' (beyond only football) I still get the idea we are one of those countries others look to for how to organize things, especially in a context of permanent minorities ("theoretically this country cannot exist" said America's foremost political theorist Robert Dahl and the famous sociologist Putnam said the same). https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/12/why-are-there-so-few-prisoners-in-the-netherlands https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/21/democracy-has-only-one-way-to-save-the-planet-netherlands/ First of all, while I have used other phrases as 'conspiracy' in the past, I never used 'oppression' for reasons stated above. 'Oppression' is not the right word. Yes, for example, I think we get often the short end of the stick when it comes to seeding, base camp or referee assignments (getting things done at the authorities, including anti-doping stuff and finding solutions) but 'oppression' doesn't cover it. We challenged the status quo in the early 70s and then also in the 1990s. Both times the authorities responded with pressing the reset button. Plain and simple, easily visible. We were #2 in the coefficients and the UEFA response was a downgrade back to Greece and Denmark levels (for entry tickets and financial compensation). In tournaments we had between 1970 and 2016 the 2nd most semi final appearances (behind Germany), despite often unfavorable seeding, so a few times we threatened to win the whole thing. What is the 'status quo'? The status quo has a financial dimension of maximizing money, and even the European Commission has from time to time recognized this. Already in 2004: "There is a need for an ongoing and better-structured dialogue between the audiovisual sector and sport, and I am convinced that the public institutions, and particularly the European ones, can play a beneficial role as arbitrators. The EURO 2004 cup final can provide a starting point for discussion, given the economic weight of football in European sport and that the need for sporting content in Europe will lead to similar business models for other sports. The unexpected final Greece-Portugal involving two small countries represents, from a strictly sporting point of view, a triumph for the true values of sport. But was it positive from the point of view of the economy of sport and of television? From an economic point of view, it is a huge problem to cope with the early elimination of France, Italy, Spain, Germany and England, which represent potential audiences of 280 million viewers. Let's be clear: a Greece-Portugal final attracts a potential audience of 22 million viewers. Are these audience levels the ones expected by sports sponsors and advertisers? The answer is clearly “no” and the same applies to Champions' League finals without star-clubs." See also various articles like this: https://www.ibtimes.com/2014-world-...ottom-line-fifa-advertisers-retailers-1606600 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...-sports-dismal-champions-league-viewing-figu/ "The UK market is a massive market commercially and if one of your markets for the top five – England, Spain, Germany, France, Italy – is playing out to audiences as low as that [because of bad performance], you’re going to question the value and you’re going to go straight to Uefa." Consciously or subconsciously it plays a role and we've also seen instances in the past where mass public pressure (and English tabloids) forces referees like Anders Frisk into retirement. When Nike entered football in the 1990s, it was pitched in 1993 to Phil Knight (who didn't care about football so the Europeans needed to convince him) by the dutch Nike football boss as: "We said to him: the world of football fits into together like this. Once in every four years there is a tournament, about one-and-a-half year it takes place in your country. On a drawing board we had put the group allocations, and that is maybe not entirely corrupt but a little bit corrupt. Because the tournament is guided, and that leads to that Brazil, Germany, Italy - if we [as Dutchmen] are lucky Holland because they played well - those advance very far, and then it becomes a final like Brazil versus Italy, or Germany versus... there are only a handful countries that make the world turn around. And then they looked at us, weary surprised to hear the word 'corruption' and that the FIFA might have some business into that. Then I stepped up and said: "No, it is guided. But it moves into that direction so that at the end of the day you get an interesting final." Phil Knight said then after the meeting was finished: "It seems you know and understand a lot, how does it come, blablahblah. Well, you seem to be the one to lead the job." https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3uawei It has also been confirmed by other people that the entry into football was pitched that way to the Americans. So if you ask me what is the 'status quo' then cynically I'd say at the first place it is driven by money (Nike, Adidas, BT, BeinSport are infinitely bigger as Real Madrid, they are the real giants) and the secondarily the international politics dimension (folks like Grondona, Mutko and what perks he arranges for his people). I don't think they are under-represented in The Guardian list for this year, but yourself have given the answer above with your elaboration on clicks and the rest of your story. Mexican players (the language factor) bring more clicks than Swiss players. You've given the answer yourself. I agree with some of the things you say in this post (the quoted part as example) but think we've covered this ground a few times already, so I let it pass now if you don't mind. Of course, ten times as many points always looks unfair because top players are not ten times better than another top player.
Allison has not the best case of his team for being 'the missing piece'. There was already a marked improvement just before his arrival (despite a vastly sub-standard goalkeeper) and Liverpool continued to have the best defense of the league when he was out injured. The truth of the matter is Allison was one of the best goalkeepers this year, but not necessarily better as Oblak or Ter Stegen. It is possible to say Allison gets the nod because of all his team successes, but here the comparison with - say - Van Breukelen in 1988 is informative. Van Breukelen won everything there is to win in 1988, with penalty saves in both the Eeropean Cup and European Championship final, but didn't get as universal acclaim for what he did and his individual contribution. For his full career (and 1990 World Cup previews) he got his fair share of fame, but not for this year. Underrated and shafted in favor of Shilton, Zenga, Dasaev etcetera. With your elaboration on 'clicks' and such you have given the answer yourself. Did I already say until the Bosman ruling 'we' won more European Cups than France and Germany combined; and Italy, Spain and England had only one or two more. 'Unimportant' indeed.
I think the problem is that Courtois was also pretty average in the previous season at Chelsea. So in the last 2 and a half seasons, he's got a good World Cup (probably the best keeper) and a decent half to this season. I think the others have a better 2017-8 to fall back on (if that informs the voting on this one). The same is true of De Gea who was great in 2017-8. Lloris wouldn't make my top 100 but he somehow got onto the Ballon d'Or nominations, I guess as captain of CL finalists.
Except these probably aren't, at least the Guardian's isn't. They've assembled a vast array of different former players, worldwide journalists etc, asked them to select a top 40 and anonymised their voting. I understand why but it takes away accountability and it also allows people to make 'pet' choices. None of those people are doing it in a properly professional capacity. Many of them have probably spent 10 minutes or so doing a list. You can see it if you go through the voting sheet. People have made some terrible selections.
Here a typical commentary from David Winner a few days ago: A book about the idea of Dutch football. Or rather, as Winner writes: "About my idea of the idea of Dutch football." Winner hadn't seen that idea for some time. He recognized Dutch football in many places, such as Spain, FC Barcelona, Manchester City, but no longer in the Netherlands. The 2010 World Cup final was a low point for him. "A nightmare, "Winner says." The Netherlands played terribly. The tradition of beautiful football seemed to be over. The downward spiral started in 2000 and the last ten years the tradition seemed completely dead. If you had called me last year, I would have said the Dutch idea no longer existed at home." https://nos.nl/l/2316810 The pro-German, anti-Dutch machinery is strong the last 20 years, with foreigners as 'experts' and gatekeepers of ideas.
FourFourTwo 100. Fekir 99. Lauturo Martinez 98. Immobile 97. Ben Yedder 96. Odegaard 95. Aspas 94. Tadic 93. Gabriel Jesus 92. Dybala 91. Insigne 90. Ricardo Pereira 89. Lukaku 88. Fernandinho 87. Fabian Ruiz 86. Sancho 85. Icardi 84. Hummels 83. Alejandro Gomez 82. Courtois 81. Chiellini 80. Handanovic 79. Vardy 78. Rodri 77. Maguire 76. Oyarzabal 75. Mahrez 74. Lenglet 73. Luis Suarez 72. Alderweireld 71. Rakitic 70. Marquinhos 69. Szczesny 68. Parejo 67. Neuer 66. Skriniar 65. Keylor Navas 64. Saul Niguez 63. Werner 62. Witsel 61. Koke 60. Bale 59. Sule 58. Eriksen 57. Kroos 56. Reus 55. Ramos 54. Pogba 53. Gnabry 52. Verratti 51. Ziyech 50. Frenkie De Jong 49. Cazorla 48. Varane 47. Thiago Silva 46. Wijnaldum 45. Thiago Alcantara 44. Vertonghen 43. Busquets 42. De Ligt 41. Di Maria 40. Casemiro 39. Mertens 38. Benzema 37. Aubameyang 36. Carvajal 35. De Gea 34. Jose Gimenez 33. Kimmich 32. Alba 31. Modric 30. Son Heung-Min 29. Fabinho 28. Pique 27. Pjanic 26. Alexander-Arnold 25. Robertson 24. Ederson 23. Neymar 22. Griezmann 21. Laporte 20. David Silva 19. Koulibaly 18. Kante 17. Bernardo Silva 16. Hazard 15. Aguero 14. Firmino 13. Alisson 12. Ter Stegen 11. Kane 10. Mane 9. Sterling 8. De Bruyne 7. Lewandowski 6. Oblak 5. Mbappe 4. Ronaldo 3. Salah 2. Van Dijk 1. Messi
This was Marca's version for the best of 2019. As always, quite a random list and the top 10 (the order of which was selected by a public vote) is odd. Marca 100. Villa 99. Akram Afif 98. Nicolas Sanchez 97. Moise Kean 96. Odsonne Edouard 95. Maddison 94. Ezequiel Palacios 93. Almoez Ali 92. Gomis 91. Sardar Azmoun 90. Seferovic 89. Maguire 88. Ibrahimovic 87. Everton 86. Onana 85. Stefano Sensi 84. Bennacer 83. Rodri 82. Lucas Moura 81. Zaniolo 80. Rodrygo 79. Nicolas Pepe 78. Insigne 77. Abraham 76. Gnabry 75. Lukaku 74. Raul Jimenez 73. Bruno Henrique 72. Depay 71. Rashford 70. Dani Olmo 69. Jovic 68. Alejandro Gomez 67. Dani Alves 66. Vela 65. Fabian Ruiz 64. Varane 63. Ben Yedder 62. Odegaard 61. Ederson 60. Achraf Hakimi 59. Vardy 58. Haaland 57. Zupata 56. David Neres 55. Giroud 54. Origi 53. Havertz 52. Kante 51. Lauturo Martinez 50. Fede Valverde 49. Gabriel Barbosa 48. Gabriel Jesus 47. Di Maria 46. Kroos 45. Immobile 44. Pjanic 43. Ramos 42. Aubameyang 41. Pique 40. David Silva 39. Sancho 38. Ziyech 37. Marquinhos 36. Koulibaly 35. Eriksen 34. Wijnaldum 33. Van de Beek 32. Henderson 31. Mahrez 30. Quagliarella 29. Casemiro 28. Robertson 27. Luis Suarez 26. Bruno Fernandes 25. Oblak 24. De Bruyne 23. Lloris 22. Tadic 21. Joao Felix 20. Firmino 19. Griezmann 18. Son 17. Alexander-Arnold 16. Aguero 15. Ter Stegen 14. Bernardo Silva 13. De Ligt 12. Lewandowski 11. Hazard 10. Alisson 9. Sterling 8. Salah 7. De Jong 6. Mane 5. Mbappe 4. Ronaldo 3. Van Dijk 2. Benzema 1. Messi
I'm still looking to get the Josimar Topp 50 list but this is the combined position of the lists to date: Villa 1 Fekir 1 Aouar 1 Akram Afif 2 Nicolas Sanchez 3 Moise Kean 4 Odsonne Edouard 5 Chilwell 5 Barella 5 Aspas 6 Gueye 6 Upamecano 6 Ezequiel Palacios 7 Alex Sandro 7 Almoez Ali 8 Dzeko 8 Gomis 9 Maddison 9 Sardar Azmoun 10 Allan 10 Seferovic 11 Ricardo Pereira 11 Dele Alli 12 Coutinho 13 Wan-Bissaka 13 Zaha 14 Marcelo 15 Stefano Sensi 16 Bennacer 17 Onana 17 Pukki 17 Zaniolo 20 Rodrygo 21 Nicolas Pepe 22 Everton 23 Brandt 23 Ibrahimovic 24 Oyarzabal 25 Kepa 26 Lenglet 27 Pavard 27 Sane 28 Lozano 28 Alderweireld 29 Isco 29 Rakitic 30 Dani Olmo 31 Jovic 32 Szczesny 32 Parejo 33 Lucas Hernandez 35 Vela 36 Keylor Navas 36 Umtiti 37 Jorginho 39 Achraf Hakimi 52 Ben Yedder 42 Odegaard 44 Handanovic 45 Giroud 46 Origi 47 Hummels 47 Abraham 48 Courtois 48 Neres 49 Fabian Ruiz 50 Fede Valverde 51 Alejandro Gomez 51 Insigne 51 Koke 52 Lucas Moura 53 Arthur 54 Vertonghen 57 Cazorla 60 Godin 60 Bruno Henrique 63 Bonucci 64 Lacazette 68 Havertz 73 Jimenez 75 Chiellini 76 Bale 76 Witsel 76 Dani Alves 78 Rodri 79 Quagliarella 80 Alaba 80 Lloris 81 Zupata 81 Carvajal 82 Gimenez 85 Gabriel Jesus 87 Depay 90 Maguire 95 Gabriel Barbosa 101 Dybala 103 Lauturo Martinez 106 Haaland 106 Neuer 106 De Gea 108 Rashford 110 Saul 112 Skriniar 116 Pogba 117 Verratti 119 Cavani 122 Lukaku 135 Werner 136 Thiago Silva 142 Sule 149 Mertens 153 Icardi 157 Thiago Alcantara 157 Bruno Fernandes 161 Reus 161 Eriksen 169 Immobile 174 Henderson 176 Busquets 184 Mahrez 190 Fernandinho 194 Alba 200 Modric 223 Varane 226 Marquinhos 227 Kimmich 230 Di Maria 231 Vardy 231 Gnabry 242 Kroos 245 Neymar 249 Pique 263 Van de Beek 263 Fabinho 268 Pjanic 276 Ramos 280 Casemiro 281 Laporte 281 Sancho 282 Tadic 287 Joao Felix 288 Ederson 301 Luis Suarez 308 David Silva 309 Wijnaldum 318 Ziyech 319 Kante 322 Kane 335 Koulibaly 352 Aubameyang 361 Benzema 379 Robertson 381 De Ligt 395 Oblak 398 Son 401 Ter Stegen 402 Griezmann 406 De Bruyne 407 De Jong 411 Alexander-Arnold 412 Bernardo Silva 431 Firmino 432 Aguero 433 Hazard 453 Alisson 454 Lewandowski 465 Sterling 467 Mbappe 476 Salah 476 Mane 478 Ronaldo 483 Van Dijk 496 Messi 498
15 goals+10 assists in 18 matches this season for neymar all the while completing the 2nd most dribbles in Europe If hazard had this output in a 40+ game season theyd be calling him world class,pfa contender etc.... Neymar is on the cusp of something great in his career He needs some defining moments and in order for that to happen he needs to be match fit come the business end of the campaign Neymar is great Within a modern day context and will also (very) soon be within a all time context
He is on the cusp for 3 years now. Unfortunately few injuries stopped his moments. 2015 copa (if i remember cirrectly?). 2019 copa. 2018 and 19 ucl. And he wasnt 100 percent in world cup 18. Not to mention 2014 wc.. Such a shame, but hopefully he can grab few highlights. Talent wise he is the best of the rest since ronaldinho. Comfortably more talented than hazard. I am not sure how people can argue otherwise.
Hazard already did something similar in Ligue 1. Only without the incredible competitive advantage that Neymar and Mbappe enjoy https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.besoccer.com/new/amp/neymar-highest-paid-ligue-1-player-789439 The highest paid non-PSG player in Ligue 1 is the 12th highest paid player in the league. The 11 highest paid players in the league are all PSG players. Any accomplishment there really needs to be taken with a truckful of salt.
Hazard 11/12 albeit fantastic was nowhere near neymars current level Their dbs calcio and whoscored ratings are worlds apart Like in different dimensions in all honesty
Neymar lacks UCL as franchise player, Copa América and World Cup... titles and big moments. Statistics, consistancy and overall play he has to enter in a TOP10 of all time, but still needs more. Btw, his overall play is close now to Messi, in fact a bit more involved in build up plays (passes to the penalti area and to the final 1/3 of the pitch), but not quite there in terms specially of finishing, but OK. He abuses of the turnovers as well, but part is because he is fragile and don't want duel with french ligue 1 players (that are by far the most violent among the TOP5 league players). I don't think he can avoid injuries tho, also mantaing the focus. PD: Alisson still the best GK in the Premier League, it is not a coincidence. If we look at all the key moments, record against the arguably best shooter Messi, difficult saves, ball distribution and saved goals, he has to be the best goalkeeper since he is in Europe, as he was in Brazil too (with Internacional). Simply phenomenal!
Lille were not as stacked as this PSG side, in relation to their respective competition. What is really in different dimensions is their supporting casts and the gap between them and their competitions. It was a surprise Lille won the league, it is a surprise if PSG don't win the league with a double digit points gap.
Hazard in lille was a proven world class talent on his way to becoming a world class player Neymar in 2020 is an elite world class performer with a full trophy set(and tangible contributions in all the major titles he has won for Santos,Barcelona and now PSG) They(those 2 versions)are not comparable in any way shape or form The underdog argument is fallacious at best Its like saying shearer 94/95 for blackburn is inherently better or at least comparable to Henry 03/04 Because the invincibles>>blackburn rovers Without taking into consideration the difference in skillsets and end product At least shearer 94/95 had 31 goals and 16 assists so his end product was actually not inferior to TH14 Very much unlike Neymar vs hazard As ive said previously i think they(aswell as Gareth bale)were in the same ballpark up until 2014/15 After which neymar left them in the dust
Is Neymar better than Hazard? Sure. Will Neymar go down as having been the greater of the two players? Very likely. Is Neymar miles ahead / in a different dimension or whatever other hyperbole being used? Nah. Every single trophy Neymar's teams have won in Europe would have been won w/without him. That's how good Barca and PSG are. They won't even need to replace him with an equally talented player in this hypothetical situation.
Because Hazard plays more economical and to his strengths, and doesn't put your team off balance. Neymar can't do what he did for Lille. Put him into Lille and I doubt you get the same result. Thread: Hazard has to be the most underappreciated player who's visibly elite. Sure, his Wikipedia page doesn't look as good, but the absolute value he adds to every attack (haven't seen it at RM yet tbf) is immeasurably immense.— Ashwin Raman (@AshwinRaman_) February 4, 2020 Robustness news: Eden Hazard is the only attacking midfielder/forward in PL history to play in 7+ seasons and make at least 30 appearances in each campaign. Only three other players have done this: Pepe Reina, Des Walker & Paul Ince.— Duncan Alexander (@oilysailor) June 6, 2019 While Hazard was all the time the most fouled player of the league. That is luck, but it is also the art of not doing silly rabonas and going into blind alleys. At the same time he can do better in the Champions League but at tournament level and league level he was/is superb. In the matches they played against each other you can't say Neymar clearly looked more talented. Is it coincidence Brazil won a tournament without Neymar, maybe it isn't. He puts your team off balance and the pros do not always outweigh the cons. Despite grating people in the wrong way he is obviously talented but his numbers and highlight reels are better than his actual importance. There isn't a schism I think.
Intellectual maneuvers are needed to compare Neymar with Hazard. However talented the Belgian may be, the Brazilian is much more impactful (as he was generating more xG + xA than the belgian in the confrontation between them in WC18, with the brazilian returning from injury), as he is also more impactful than Griezmann, Dembele or Coutinho for example. Neymar would probably do better than Hazard at Chelsea, Lille, Santos and anywhere, my opinion. Now, Hazard can prove me wrong, he will have the freedom to arrive and put astronomical figures in a Real Madrid that is very competitive team again, as a protagonist, so let's see what would be his weight there. But maybe I agree it is the first time that he is now in a better situation (having the role of protagonist in one of the two most prestigious clubs in the world, he had a protagonist role at Chelsea but meh in Europe for example, irregular in the league) something that Neymar didn't had at Barcelona and is only having now at PSG in a much less prestigious and violent league. Neymar is having a better season than Hazard btw. PD: Neymar doesn't cause any off-balance in the team or if he causes, the positive impacts are still much more rewarding than the negative ones and the results with him on the field are better as he had top GoalImpact at the moment. In fact, Brazil was the team with the best defense and attack according to the expected goal metric in the WC2018. What happens is that the Brazilian team started to get something stronger in 2016-2017 with a lot of players peaking in 2018, 2019 (Casemiro, Coutinho, Jesus reaching some level etc) and with the decline of Chile and others.
His problem is the growing number of turnovers, but again most of it is because the CxB is bad, in the Ligue 1 he doesn't need put his foot in the duels to won that competition, so he is basically avoiding injuries now. But still he is P99 in most of offensive things. He is leading the stats of pass to the last 1/3, to the penalty area, line breaking passes, deep progressions and so on. He will certainly lessen the issue of turnovers in the Champions League KO, if he can play them of course. He would probably be more committed in that respect if he played in the Spanish league or another more prestigious league too, as he once did.
https://www.quora.com/Who-is-a-better-player-Eden-Hazard-or-Neymar There are 'studies' out there that suggest Hazard is very similar to Messi in style (link 1, link 2). Some place Neymar way lower, others arrive to a different conclusion (better than Hazard, even better rank than Messi). This shows the difficulty of assessing. At the least I think we can recognize Neymar is more productive with goals and assists, quite possibly athletically more gifted (or nurtured), but also loses the ball (almost) twice as often and that on dangerous places too. As such, I think Hazard is a better fit for 'smaller' teams and Neymar for bigger teams. Hazard is more economical in his style (but relative lack of goals, assists, and the CL remains legit criticism, and Mourinho had criticism too). Overall Neymar is slightly ahead (in particular if Hazard 'fails' now at Real Madrid and doesn't find the same sharpness) but Hazard has an edge in the tournaments and the league seasons. It's madness how Real Madrid buys up the Brazilian talents for 50+ million (Rodrygo, Vinicius etc.). Power of marketing.
Cost-Benefit. OK, Neymar has more turnover than Hazard (I'm not sure if twice as much in his career average), but the best clubs are not paying and offer the best conditions for the best players be more economical, but to make a difference (high cost with big rewards), the best clubs like Real Madrid, PSG, Barcelona, Juventus etc they can afford difference makers. Talking about Hazard vs Neymar, I find this link comparing both among other players (Messi etc) with Wyscout data. https://thecomeonman.github.io/PlayerSimilarityFromAggregatedData/ Data from Oct 2018 to Sept 2019 to use in this exercise.