Ehhh what? vs Barcelona: “Kante was not only tackling and recovering balls - which included 13 balls recovery, 12 duels won and eight tackles, but also creating attacks, forging an impressive 96% pass completion. Not to mention three successful dribbles and one key pass.” https://www.footballfancast.com/pre...omised-chelseas-performance-against-barcelona
60 million is entirely fair. You replace him with a younger option and save some dough. That’s what you do. Kovacic is available, and he won’t cost 60 million , for example. I like Jorginho a lot , but let’s call a spade a spade.
I almost cant be bothered but ill play along.... these two players score in the big games and contribute to their teammates, kane offers nothing and doesnt score in big games, but he'll back five against brighton I'll give him that. If koulibaly or the entire chelsea defence cant deal with dzeko, dzeko is better than kane
im gonna be honest I dont like kante and hate the hype around him; the guy's completely not as good as he's made out to be but i'll continue having these dumb arguments with you because this forum is dead he was dispossessed 4 times as a defensive midfielder who has one job: pass it sideways... as the game formed barcelona allowed chelsea and especially kante more space.
completely different players. Kovacic is class though, I doubt madrid will let him go cheap. Kovacic is a hamsik/modric type imo.
You can’t be bothered? Saying Kane is better than Mertens and Dzeko is that outrageous to you? Can’t score in big games? What are you basing this on, exactly? Kane (this season) : vs Top 5 in England : 7 games played, 4 goals/ 1 assist. Champions League: 7 games played , 7 goals/2 assists Kane (last season): vs Top 5 in England: 8 games played , 4 goals Champions League: 3 games played , 2 goals Kane ( 2 seasons ago): vs Top 5 in England : 10 games played, 6 goals Let me get this straight : If Koulibaly and the Chelsea defence can’t deal with Dzeko in a four game sample size , that makes Dzeko undisputedly better than Kane?... What? And Kane offers nothing to his teammates? Kane, Mertens, Dzeko (per game) Defensively: Tackles: 0.5 ,0.8, 0.5 Interceptions: 0.2, 0.3, 0.09 Clearances: 0.8, 0.2, 0.8 Dribbled Past: 0.4, 1.2, 0.4 Blocks: 0.2, 0.1, 0.00 Ariels won : 1.5, 0.1, 3 (come on Mertens, jump little guy, you can get there!) Offensively: Assists: 4, 9, 4 Key Passes: 1.3, 1.7, 1.3 Dribbles: 1.7, 1.2 , 0.7 Fouled: 1.2, 1.1, 0.6 Passing: Passes per game: 17, 26, 20 Pass %: 74 , 74, 71 Long-balls : 1.7, 0.4, 1.2 Through-balls: 0.2, 0.4, 0.08 I mean... when you consider Kane and Dzeko are actually traditional 9’s the comparison is much easier, and it ain’t even close. We could get into Dzeko’s premier league goal tallies vs Kane’s...but what’s the point? Kane murders him , at a younger age too. As for Mertens, he plays a completely different role , but even then, Kane holds his own in most categories associated with Merten’s role. This notion that Kane offers nothing is trash. If you want to see a striker stand around and do nothing, watch Dzeko against a Serie A minnow.
Don’t force yourself, mate. I think this covers it , no? Are you judging him off this one game? He does a lot more than just pass it sideways. Is that why you’re convinced Kane doesn’t score in the big games/doesn’t do anything? You watched the game at Wembley vs Juve and decided? He did score in Turin... nice little comeback from 2-nil down... pretty big game for a dude who’s 24 and plays for Tottenham/England , no? Not really enough to label him as a big-game choker like someone on your list.
trust me mate is really is. very scandalous lol I'm from denmark and about 90% of us dont buy in to the british hype. We are all convinced Eriksen is tottenhams by far best player. Kane is surrounded by eriksen, alli, dembele, with trippier and ben davies as the wing backs, I'd say it should be impossible for him to not score many goals. He is a good striker but I do think he is overrated, not sure why its so important to you to change my mind about that. Much like ronaldo and real madrid, tottenham is built around setting kane up for chances I just think real madrid and ronaldo are just that little bit better. Higuain is a ******** but he is a million times more talented than kane will ever become, back before his serious spine injury (at 22?) he used to dribble a bit like a messi light version but with more pace along with being a clinical finisher, truly ridiculous players that come out of that country. + this fat pig scores against all the big clubs in any league he plays, kane struggles to net important goals in top 6 matches in england and you said it yourself with all those stats that you dighed up the guy never assists/creates anything
I watch a lot of EPL because I have a gambling problem and betting on Premier League is the easiest way to win so why not. I just dont think either kante or kane can play at the absolute highest level which is were people are rating them... You do know that some say kante is better than nainggolan right? I almost throw up listening to that shit. imagine if kane and kante played in El Clasico, they'd be the two worst players on the pitch lol. I do admit they are excellent in the systems they have been put in and I think it's to shoot themselves in the foot if anyone of them were to move to the highest level in form of real madrid, barcelona or munich
Shocker..... the Danes think the Danish player is better. Didn’t see that coming. I’m from Canada and half the country thinks Giovinco is the best Italian player ever , so Giovinco>Insigne. It wasn’t really, until you acted as if Mertens and Dzeko are no-brainers. You claim EPL fans are biased and ignorant, and then you say shit like that. You know Kane is likely a 150 million dollar player, right? Madrid are interested in him. We bought Dzeko for 12 million from that trash league, you know... Yeah, I don’t remember that. He was more explosive, for sure. But Messi-lite? What? Those stats I dug up say the exact opposite of that. Totally different players, but it doesn’t offend me at all. Seems like your EPL bias is just as high as you claim them to be. I can totally understand why people would prefer Kante , and this is coming from a Roma fan. Being objective isn’t so hard. Would they be though? Paulinho , Andre Gomes, Dembele , Benzema ring a bell? Is Casemiro really head and shoulders above Kante? Me thinks not. Claude Makelele had no issues playing for Madrid. Let’s ask him: https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/foot...olo-kante-claude-makelele-midfield-role-name/ You know there’s been endless reports about PSG making Kante their number 1 target this summer, right? I wonder why that is.... As for Kane , this is pretty weird if he’s so overrated: https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...-number-1-target-ramon-calderon-a8230791.html http://www.skysports.com/football/n...-would-like-to-see-harry-kane-at-the-bernabeu http://lebuzz.eurosport.co.uk/viral...-harry-kane-next-galatico-ahead-neymar-34607/ Hmmm seems Madrid think differently. Let me know when Mertens and Dzeko are being heavily pursued by Real.
As I said I watch them play regularly and they are not very impressive to me, again why do you even care what I think? You call me an ignorant when you think Jorginho is just a spade? You clearly dont understand his role. He is arguibly the best on his position in the World because he does so much more offensively than any other cdm since Pirlo, and the fact he can defend too is just a plus. If you hadnt noticed Napoli's midfield have been very inconsistent this season and its often up to Jorginho to do everything both ways, imagine if he had capable and consistent midfielders around him? If Jorginho was to be sold I wouldnt like it because I see how important he is to Napoli every single week. As for N'golo Kante I think he is the last of his kind at the level he plays - a kind that isnt needed at the highest level, again imo. You have to offer more than just ball winning especially if you want to play that anker midfield position imo, which leaves him in the box to box role where I just dont think he has enough going forward to really be up there with the best. Chelsea is the perfect club for him, just excellent agent work. .. Kane is just not a good football player, he is often clunky and has the Allan trademark of looking at the grass 99% of the time which often leads to him shooting from dumb angles instead of finding his teammates. I dont think its unreasonable to say Eriksen has more class, he might not be as "pop" as Kane but if he wasnt from boring old shitty denmark he'd play in Barcelona now. Also Kane often rags his stats from the shittier teams in the league, in this season alone he has scored in 14 different games where Salah has scored in 21 - see this is what class is, scoring in multiple games and win your team points, not just score the 3-0 or 4-0 goals which Kane seems to be an expert at. I'm not trying to offend you, hopefully you know that by now, call me an ignorant I dont care. Just of curiosity who would you least want at Roma of the highest rated EPL outfield players? Hazard, Salah, KDB, Silva, Sane, Kane and Kante? I'm just saying they are overrated, and Kane isn't valued at 150 Dollars its more like 200-300 million if we're gonna use Canadian Dollars. Terrible management Football changed forever after Pep's Barcelona days, Makelele would've been dismantled by Tiki Taka had he still played. Just like Kante in basically every game against Barcelona and City this season, Hell even Roma taught his ass a lesson. Kante is a great ball winner, but highest level of play? I dont think thats where he belongs. Dont get me wrong I dont even think Napoli belong at the highest level, so I'm not out to offend Kante or Kane, they are great at the roles they have in their respective teams but slightly overrated imo.
Not offended at all. We’re just talking football. I called you ignorant in relation to calling EPL fans ignorant. You said Kane doesn’t offer anything to his teammates, I showed stats depicting he offers more than Dzeko and Mertens as a whole. (Didn’t include his pressing/work rate , either). He’ll never have assist totals as high as Mertens , that isn’t what he’s asked to do. Just like Mertens will never be asked to win ariel duels. The fact is, for a prototypical 9 with his size/athleticism (or lack there of), he offers a hell of a lot more than the majority of classic 9’s around. Including Dzeko. You said Kane doesn’t score in big games , I showed stats showing that to be false. You said Kane would be the worst on the pitch in El Clasico and couldn’t play for a big team , I showed how much Real Madrid have been pursuing him. Now he’s clunky and a bad footballer. I mean, there isn’t much else to say. Yeah he’s not naturally gifted or as smooth as others , but he makes it work. He certainly isn’t any worse than Dzeko in the “clunky-ness” department , I can assure you. To answer your question, Silva due to his age. If we’re talking just one game, probably Sane. I would absolutely take Kane and Kante at Roma. If I had the choice of any of them, it would be KDB, though. Without hesitation- I love that guy. To me, it isn’t even close between the 3 of them. And frankly , I think most would agree if they remove bias. ————————— Jorginho is really good, but a star? I’m not entirely sure. The best in the world in his role since Pirlo?.... Xabi Alonso says hi. (Amongst others). I called him a spade in relation to 60 million. That isn’t a ludicrous fee in the slightest. Is he vital and integral to Napoli and Sarri’s system? Of course. He’s the heartbeat of that side. And for the record, I’m a huge Eriksen fan as well. Love his game. Dembele is the most underrated player on that team, however. As for Kante , you clearly think his lack of technical quality prevents him from truly being rated highly. I think that’s crazy. He doesn’t just win the ball and pass it sideways— not in the slightest.
Hey Hustle, have you read Batigol's recent Maradona vs Messi appraisal? And I'm not trolling you, because I think his vision or perception of the two is aesthetics over statistics.
Haha funny you should mention that , I just finished reading the article an hour or two ago . I’m not really a fan using charisma as a way to definitively say someone is better. I think everyone from Argentina agrees that Maradona represented the country better. I dunno, it seemed kinda arbitrary and harsh. If he just said Maradona could take his game to a higher level , I’d rather that. He also played with him , so I’m sure there’s a bit of nostalgic influence. I dunno , what’d you think?
I think Charisma was part of his assessment, but he made good points about Maradona's influence on and off the pitch (less off of it it though, lol) and his movement quality. Messi is as technical, but Maradona moved better. That's a quality over quantity argument. Can't really put a number to it, but I can appreciate that. I thought the same of Baggio, but of course I'm biased. I don't think anyone moved like he did when he was running with the ball. Messi is still in the discussion for me.
Shit, I must have the read click-bait version. The article I read just had him saying Maradona was the rarest talent ever and he had more charisma or some-shit. It was just a small paragraph. It’s so fcuking hard to sift through all the external circumstances and differences in their careers in order to just isolate them as player vs player. You know, just clear away all the noise and figure out who was better. I think Maradona benefited from playing in an era where mystique in sports was still possible . The internet took away all of that for this generation of players. We know too much now , and we have any game/clip we want at our fingertips, plus a thousand talking heads spewing their daily nonsense. Whatever aura Maradona had , I’m not sure it’s possible anymore. I think the best argument for choosing Maradona over Messi is just saying he had another level he could go to , or breaking down their individual qualities. The rest of the stats and shit I could care less about. The game is entirely different now, their leagues were different , the quality of the teams is different , scoring numbers are inflated nowadays... and so on. If people want to look at their careers like a spreadsheet Messi wins every time , but I think there’s more to football than that. I don’t know if a better career or longevity necessarily means you should be considered a better player. I dunno your take on that , but it’s just how I see it. Anything pre mid 90’s , I’ll just refer to you and others. YouTube and Wikipedia doesn’t really answer much in my eyes. I did watch a pretty sweet El Clasico game on YouTube the other day though, it was Messi as a teenager with Ronaldinho and the gang, playing against the galaticos with R9, Zizou et al. Completely star-studded affair , and I thought Messi was the best player on the pitch for whatever that’s worth.
I think these statements stick out the most to me So a few observations. We either go with stats, goals/assists/etc or with aesthetics, or both, or neither and then it just comes down to who made us feel better when we watched them, which is aesthetics again, I think, lol I think Maradona had movements that Messi doesn't. But how do we put a number on that? Again, down to personal preference. I think Messi is as technical, and he has scored a lot more goals, but as you say era's are different. For me Maradona was definitely in an era where defending was certainly more brutal. Messi plays on better teams. No one will ever agree. Batistuta's article was more about his feelings than anything else. That's why I brought it up actually. People who watched them both and often, who pick Maradona, are going to be accused of being nostalgic or old school though. I used to call the older generation that would talk about how Rivera was better than Baggio and Facchetti over Maldini as just old guys who nostalgic and wanted to believe that the game was better in their day. Maybe they were right, never watched much of those other guys regularly enough to say. Maybe now I'm the old guy talking about Maradona, Baggio, Maldini and soon possibly Zidane as the best I've ever seen. One day you'll be the old guy telling the young that Messi is better than the best in the world then. Circle of life stuff, lol. @Falc has the biggest circle of us all though. He was around when Marco Polo brought soccer back from China.
Haha yeah, I picked up on why the article was mentioned. It was a valid inclusion and certainly worth considering. When it comes to comparing players from entirely different eras (especially ones I haven’t witnessed/ Serie A) I’d rather listen to people like you and others here, and try ascertain what I can from it , rather than purely read stats or watch clips. If someone wants to say Pele is the best of all time for example , there’s really not much I can say because I have zero frame of reference. I have a hard time believing he is , but I can’t flat out refute it either. I was having a debate with some French dude on a hockey forum I post on about Maradona a couple weeks ago , and he was bringing up his goal totals in comparison to Messi’s and I just thought it was pointless. Hence, me saying I don’t care about the stats to you. I have no damn idea who was/is better if I’m honest, I just don’t want to hear about Maradona “only scoring 16 goals” as a reason why he’s not as good as Messi. I dunno, he was some dude who scouts youth football in France. Apparently, here are some of the reasons why “Maradona isn’t even top 10” : - “he only had one year of Calcio and 2 good weeks with Argentina”. -“ his impact with Napoli is overrated”. He likened it to Tottenham buying a young Messi and surrounding him with elite players. Said it was “hardly a miracle”. - Of course he brought the drugs up , and called him a “disruptive criminal” - “He cheated to win the World Cup and his team was better than people say” - “Didn’t score nearly enough” - “ Platini was better” - “Messi’s ( and CR7’s) stats dwarf his” Anyways, somehow it eventually turned into a Batigol vs Ibrahimovic debate , which is when I asked you guys what you thought. And then it progressed to him stating Trezeguet was better than Batistuta. His entire rationale was goals per game (Trezequet) and “winning” for Zlatan. The guy was a condescending douche , which was just an outstanding experience . “You never watched him” was probably thrown in my face a dozen times. (Super touchy about PSG as well I might add.) So, I mean, there’s benefits to listening to people who’ve watched what you haven’t, but there’s definitely potential downside as well. As for what you wrote, that was well said.-Minus me telling the young about Messi. I will be telling them about the one they call Marek , or the poet dude with the donkey avatar. ...or Trezeguet.
lol @ Trezeguet, now that's an extreme one. And if you don't mention Marekairo, or whatever his divine name is, then you'll be more laughable than the guy who thought Trezegoof was better than Batistuta. Sometimes you just have to laugh and walk away. I had one guy in a bar once tell me that the game is not being played the way it was meant to be and cited the first competitive match ever, between England and Scotland as the way it was supposed to be played. No video evidence of that game exists, that I'm aware of. So how do you suppose he came to his conclusion? lol... BTW, I've read, and that's all that I believe exists is a few articles, that the English were playing it like a Rugby game, one player would take the ball and run with it as far as he could and the rest would follow and hope to pick up on it when he lost it and continue on to goal. On the other side the Scots decided to not run as much and spread out and pass to each other. No rules existed against that. The English were dumbfounded and the rest is history. How do you conclude the game should be played like that? Which team had it right?
When you say problem, its not something to be taken lightly. How far gone are you? I will share a personal story later when I have time.
I dont actually have a gambling problem, I wish this site had more/better emojis so I can clarify when I'm not being serious. When it comes to gambling though I once won a big amount of money during a 6 month window and since then I havent had much luck, making my bids lower and eventually cutting it down to just "fun gambling" where I bet like 10 dollars every now and then with a 1/10-1/20 bet. If you had a gambling problem I hope you got over it and are happy. That shit ruin lives, no joke.