No … seriously. Go and see. He he he ,,, and I keep telling you that you don’t stand a chance of getting anywhere near me on that issue. Offended? Like I said, you’d love that. Of course you would. That was the original purpose of your presence here … a little bit of joshing, a bit of stirring - nothing too tasty, just enough to get the place energised. And that’s lovely. Really. Everyone needs a hobby. But you made the same mistake all beginners in the art made. Too much, too young. You tried to get serious, you tried to actually win the arguments you helped create. And you fucked it up, in the main because you don’t know what you are on about. As you now know, giving it some is one thing. Sticking with it quite another. Now, if it is a true balm to you to believe I am offended, then fine. So be it. The reality of the situation has now been explained to you on three separate occasions and, if anything, you’re the only one getting into a bit of a huff. Chill, mate. Seriously. So you know far less about football than most of the other people here. No biggie - we all start somewhere.
My brother can tell you that too. But then again, my brother doesn't like the game and only knows what he picks up when I'm at his place and force him to watch SkySports News or whatever game is being shown. As has been asked before, if you want to offer up those insights, please have a reasonable argument ready to support your statement. And not as Lanky put it, an argument comprised of "he scores lots of goals". But as an aside, I do notice that with the exception of Viera, the players you mention are all attacking players and therefore easy to "analyze" with handy OPTA stats found at a site like PlanetFootball. Your diatribe began with Owen's goals per minute pace, nowhere have you offered any insight that can be discussed and/or debated in a civilized manner.
If by "here" you mean this forum... yeah, no biggie. If you mean bigsoccer as a whole... wow, Wildman really is "special." Of course, we knew that when he used to have "Manchester United" as his favorite team, then came back as a Real Madrid supporter after several people pointed out the problem with his "English football sucks" post while pretending to support an English corporatio.... I mean, team.
Well, it's like I keep saying. He's not too bad at the gentle initiating of a bit of banter, but as soon as it turns to more substantial matters, he really needs to learn when to quit. I mean, it's a bit sad, really.
Matt, I'm not sure what qualifies one as being 'knowledgeable' about football. Is there some sort of secret handshake, club or something similar that I might join to get this knowledge? Knowledge of quality players and knowledge of the games history are different things. Seriously, I do have a fair amount of knowledge. I've played the game at very high level. Do guys like Johan Cryff,Neeskens , Pele, Gerd Mueller, Carlos Alberto, Beckenbauer ring a bell with you? Or perhaps these guys may be more your cup of tea...Charlie George, Trevor Francis, Brian Kidd, Rodney Marsh.
Wow. Looks like somebody went to a History of the NASL webpage and copied some names down. He's learning, alright.
No Lanky, you're missing the point - he played with all these people in the NASL! No, no ... not the NASL. The Bundesliga, the First Division and the Eredivisie! No, not those - the World Cup! Obviously. He was their equal, he was amongst them, watched them - he lives and breathes the game and has been doing since the 1970's. The hollow boast puts his age at at least 50, he's been in the game for as long as I have been alive and ... and yet. He has never heard about Heysel ... He knows nothing of the game's history. He has, as yet, to prove his hilarious claim to 'know players' by anything he has posted. Anywhere. Ever. Obviously. That's really sad, Wildman. Seriously, some times it's best just to go 'OK, you got me. I'm off'. I mean, this is pathetic. Really. Truly.
I don't know about the rest of you, but those three sentences completely overloaded my bullshit detector.
Well, yeah. That was several posts ago. Wasn't it Teddy Roosevelt who said, "If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."? Damn, Dr. Wankler. I don't know which line to take out of my sig to replace it with yours.
You didn't get blasted Don, you got treated like the Bigsoccer pet you are. Now go fetch the stick, there's a good boy.
Matt, you are still confusing knowledge of football history with the knowledge required to judge quality players. I'm not sure what I've done to irrate you guys. I stated my opinions just as you've stated yours. I thought differing views would be treated with a little more openess.
Umm, if you want an exchange of opinions, don't be surprised when yours are subjected to criticism. The fact that you expect us to say, "well, he has different opinions than we do" and leave it at that on a DISCUSSION board is pretty freakin' juvenile. Thing is, when it comes to debate most of us are irritated because we're probably ordinary, decent folks, but when we enter into a debate with you we feel like we're clubbing baby seals.
For one thing, you said a certain Mr. Owen was past it. That irritates people on a LIVERPOOL forum! Go figure! Since then he has scored three in three games. Care to take back your statement about St. Michael or do you have any substantial information to back up your claim he is finished. Please respond to 1-800-I-Don't-Give-a-shit
My good Doctor, now we are getting somewhere! I don't mind a little debate and that is excatly what I thought these boards were for. Matt and few others called me a troll and a gobstopper for differing opinions, but that's okay. I call them as I see them. To tell you the truth, no one has really debated me on much. If calling me a troll or a gobspot is a debate, I've been clubbed.
I've lurked on a thread a bit and I figure I'll add my 2 cents. See, Matt & friends aren't calling you a troll because of your opinions. It's because those opinions are tired and uninformed. And when others have called you out on it, you have neither defended yourself nor conceded that you were wrong. You think Owen is in decline. Fair enough. Give a good reason. 1. Injury prone? As other posters have already said, he has been more or less healthy this season. 2. Loss of form? Happens to every player, and his lack of scoring is more symptomatic of the team's struggles, not his own. 3. Comparison to Henry, et al? Henry and Owen are two very different types of forwards on two very different types of teams. Also, see #2. 4. "Strike rate"? Even you admitted that this was a meaningless stat. Also, see #2. 5. Heskey? Neither here nor there. I have yet to see you rebutt these arguments. So either you are completely oblivious to the flaws in your arguments or you are in fact trolling.
Kopi, let's see what he does in league play before we declare him back to form. A few years ago, he was probably the best in the league. Let's see how the rest of the season goes. You have to admit when a striker goes as many games as Owen did without goals, that something is not right with his play.
You haven't shown that you're able to judge quality players outside of looking at a stat sheet. You haven't irritated me in the least. Quite frankly, I'm amused by your attempts to justify your existence. See pages 2-4 of this thread to remind yourself of the non-existent debate, which involved your attempts to back up your theory - that Owen has lost it - first by mentioning his past injuries (which really haven't been a problem over the past two years), then by posting a statistic which claimed he was the 30th best striker in the Premiership (behind such luminaries as Agustin Delgado and Carlton Cole - what no Carl Cort?), then by saying that the stats don't tell the whole story. You're not a troll. You're an idiot. There's a big difference, though they're not mutually exclusive. A troll will intentionally post inflammatory material with the intention of starting an argument. You post stupid material and complain when your arguments are shot down, albeit with some rather strong language from several people who happen to know a thing or two about the sport. Oh, and if you speak to your old buddy Der Kaiser any time soon, please tell him Dave says "Hi." He'll know.
Only in maybe two or three games did he have quality service (or at least defenses which allowed him the space to run rampant) and fail to do anything with it. So many of the poor games we've had this season run into each other so I can't remember them, but I think the first leg of the Sheffield United WC semi was one of the most glaring. Right, men? Don't look at numbers. Watch the game.
Ship, here goes. 1) Okay, you say he's not injury prone this year. Than, I say a lousy 10 goals so far this year is not very good for a guy considered by you guys as the best. 2)Could it be that his LACK of scoring contributes to the teams troubles? When he misses a good chance is it team troubles? When he misses a PK is it team troubles? 3) Agreed. Owen and Henry are different strikers on different teams. I think Henry is a more complete striker, but I'm sure that will brand me as a troll. 4) Strike rate per min. played, is useful when taken into context, with enough minutes played, goals scored etc. It's not perfect, but it does have it's place. 5) Heskey? Is he supposed to be a goal scorer? 4 goals?
Let's see, the last league game he played in, he came on as sub, played the last 20 minutes or so and scored. It was against Birmingham away, we lost 2-1. That was one of the three games I was referring to. He just scored in the Worthington Cup final in a high pressure situation against Man U with Roy Keane breathing down his neck and the cup on the line. But he's finished, right? Look, I am not comparing him to Henry. To me, Henry is the best player in the league right now. No question.
1). What does his strike rate have to do with his injuries? How many games you've missed as a result of injuries is a more telling stat. Owen has not missed too many games over the past 2.5 years, and that includes games with the England squad. This is an indication of a healthy player. There is no point in bringing this up again. 2). Contrary to what you wrote earlier, a striker cannot do it all by himself. A quick glance at your goals per minute shows the high number of Arsenal players on that list (and that doesn't even include Wiltord or Bergkamp). This shows the strength of their midfield and their commitment to an attacking style of play in addition to their finishing skills. Liverpool a) have not had exceptional play from their midfielders this year, and b) are more defensive-minded than Arsenal. His PK problems I will grant you. However, he has never been an especially good taker of penalties (slightly over 50% for his entire career), and, as such, cannot be seen as indicative of a loss of form. There is no point in bringing this up again. 3). Henry is a more complete striker. He's one of the best strikers, if not the best, in the world. But, if you noticed, he didn't do squat during the World Cup except get sent off. France's midfield, lacking Pires and Zidane, were crap this summer. Noticing a pattern? But acknowledging Henry's brilliance does not mean that Owen has to be degraded. There is no point in bringing this up again. 4). If you're a baseball fan, think of goals per minute as being somewhat like RBIs. If the hitters in front of you are better (and behind you, too, because it's more difficult for a pitcher to pitch around you), you will have more opportunities to drive in runs. In soccer, if you have creative midfielders, your strikers can score goals. There is no point in bringing this up again. 5). What does Heskey's strike rate have to do with Owen's loss of form?
Lanky, good grief. I only stated that I thought Owen was lousing some of his 'touch'. I have not degraded him. When he's on, he can be deadly. My point to the discussion was to give my opinion that he's been out of form for a large stretch this season. Maybe he's snapping out of it these last few games. Man you guys are sensitive.
Well, you stated that part of the reason he will never perform at the highest level was because of his propensity to get injured. He appears to have gotten over his growing pains. Therefore, a moot point. Let's move on. Yes and no. Owen has hurt the team, but not as much as the team has hurt Owen. He has missed good chances, no doubt about that. But some of the goals Dudek allowed during the slide were inexusable. The defense looked horrible. The midfield was inept, especially with Didi and Stevie G out for long stretches. I hate this comparison, but here goes. Owen is more dependent on his midfield to create his chances whereas Henry plays more of a hybrid winger-striker role. The entire team suffered during the slide but more so for Owen because his performance is tied to the performance of the rest of the team. How is the view from the cross? Henry is clearly the best striker in the Premiership. No doubt about that. But Henry also has the benefit of playing on a dynamic attacking side with a supporting cast that includes Bergkamp and Pires. You're right. Strike rate is only useful when taken into context. Except when you mentioned the stat, you just presented the table and basically said "Look at Owen all the way down the list. And look at the no-names ahead of him." You only brought up context when others called you out on it. When I think context, I would probably include, say, service from midfield, strike partner and style of play. Strikers don't play in a vacuum, you know. Thank you for supporting my argument. I hate to keep making comparisons, but for simplicity's sake, here goes. Henry has Bergkamp, Van Nistelrooy has Solkjaer (sp), Jimmy Floyd has Gudjhonsen. Owen has.... Heskey.