Euro 08 Qualifiers: Other Teams [R]

england's talent (that i know of) who have the potential to play fluid football and make england a top international team :

scholes
barry
wes brown
hargreaves
bentley
rooney
ferdinand
walcott
lennon
owen
bridge
king
woodgate
gary neville

they don't have talents at the level of mcmanaman, gascoigne, ince, platt, anderton etc yet, but should soon with these players and with others i'm unaware of.

joe cole doesn't get in because he doesn't have good enough vision.

 

Firstly, the style of play in the EPL is quite a bit different to international, CL and leagues on the continent.

Gerrard can pull off miracles sometimes in the EPL. The style of play is conducive to it. Much less often in the CL and never internationally.

Even in the EPL (nevermind the CL), Liverpool's play would be more fluid without him. It's like they accomodate his all-action, "schoolyard" style and wait for a miracle from him. It'd be more cultured, fluid and would maintain a good passing rythmn without him, and would play like a normal team where people move and everyone passes and goals are scored.

That's why there's fuss about where he should play. Benitez wants a cultured team. There is no way Gerrard has the skills to be a good CM to play that way. That's why he bought Alonso, Sissoko, Mascherano. So he puts him on the right to roam, which still "accomodates" his style in the middle of a team trying to play passing football with a consistent rythmn. But the normal fan doesn't get that, and keeps saying "Gerrard's best in the middle". Yeah right.

He gets praise because he has friends in the media a LOT in England, he is LIVERPOOL FC captain, the things he does in terms of tackling and workrate are appreciated over the top in the EPL style, and he can occasionally come up with a miracle play in his schoolyard, bursting style.

Over the years, Liverpool have done what they've done by accomodating him with the right players around him, and letting him occasionally come up with a miracle in the EPL. In CL it's been rare. Internationals - never because England haven't had the players to accomodate him even like Liverpool does.

Here's a quote from Sven that I'm sure is brushed under the carpet :

"Sven, why didn't England play like this?"

Answer : I never had a player like Elano.

Without him Liverpool would be better than they have been. Just watch - if he gets dropped this season...

So all I have to say is...

 

Sigh your ignorance is astounding.

Yep because you need all that to succeed (a little tip theres more than one way to play the game).

Ok any matches to back your claim up? no because there are very few, Kaka "ran rings around him" in the CL final (ok he didn't but for the sake of the argument) but what your saying is that a defensive midfielder came on where liverpool didnt have one and they suddenly could defend and could support players like gerrard? how ********ing obvious honestly the entire team didn't play well surely you can't blame it on one player. Yes Gerrard surged forward scored a goal, (didn't)dive for a penalty and set up several chances, kept milan quiet on the left side of the pitch all from rightback but thats not playing well no thats a 5 rating out of 10 what a shit player!

Ok he did nothing apart from set up 2 goals (ok 1 was incorrectly ruled offside) and scored 2 goals but thats whats called a poor performance.

Yep hes not good in the CL despite being liverpools top goal scorer in it leading them to 2 finals in 3 years but not a top CL player is he?

SCHWEINSTIEGER plays for Germany GERRARD plays for England, you can't argue that Germany are far better than England in one point and then not take this into account.

Whether or not players perform for England has never been due to their abilities. Fact of the matter is that players who are good technical players performed have performed worse or slightly better for england as gerrard: mcmanaman, scholes, hoddle, waddle, barnes.

Ok so Liverpool play better without Gerrard and have produced better results right? can you give some examples please cause at the moment you're taking shit to be honest.

Infact you go on to say that Benitez will drop gerrard and they'll play better with alonso but the irony of that is that alonso last season had been dropped in the CL and shock liverpool played better with gerrard and mascherano in the middle.

Fact of the is that even though you disagree Gerrard over the last 3 seasons has been one of the best players in the champions league but yes he hasn't made much of an impact internationally but then he plays for england a country that for a long time has been badly mismanaged and is irrelevent since international football hasnt been the pinacle of football for a long time now.


Honestly go post your opinions in the liverpool forum people who know far more about liverpool and its players than you and see if they share the same opinion.

 

Um, what? Dude, do you even WATCH the Premier League? Wes Brown, David Bentley, Owen Hargreaves, Jonathan Woodgate and Gary Neville don't deserve to be anywhere near a "fluid", "top" international team at this point. And the assertion that the majority of the rest of them have more creative value than Joe Cole is debatable, if not laughable. Walcott, Squid? Walcott? Really? How many times have you really seen him do something special for Arsenal?

 

Hmm, interesting point of view. Everyone someone doesn't reply to one of my posts they obviously agree with me.

What sense is there to reply, you'll always have the last word and are never wrong. It's kinda tiresome. No offense.

 

I've given up entirely...there is no swaying him.

 

Then again, although he seems to run this Germany propaganda forum here (which is curiously called Bigsoccer - shouldn't it be SuperFussball or ScheissEPL, or BigSquidward?) he still lets other people post every now and then. Surely that must count in his favour!

 

I enjoy squid's enthusiasm for German football and knowledge of its' history but when it comes to his rhetoric on English football, its rather subjective and extremely biased. It just doesn't come off well. It doesn't bother me anymore really.

 

mate, it takes 20 minutes to watch a player and see if he's got the vision and touch on the ball to play in a fluid way in a team.

that's how long it took me for gareth barry. 20 minutes againt germany.

and it's the same way i judged kroos. i watched him for much longer of course but that's incidental.

cole has good dribbling but sometimes his touch is poor and vision as well. sometimes. he can improve that.

the problem with england is that they have a players with touch and vision, but they get pushed aside in the reckoning for the "big name" players, whose weaknesses are compensated in their top club teams by the foreigners so that they can play to their strengths.

come the national team, their weaknesses are glaringly exposed every time. They can't play to their strengths because there's no foreign teammates to allow them to.

why do mourinho etc know how to use lampard best? answer : because he's got all the right (foreign) players around him. England don't.

there's guys for smaller clubs who have really good touch and vision, but they don't play for the big teams becaues of the foreigners so they get ignored.

you think barry is a one off? there's many more.

man utd are the only "top" club who have the type of english player that i am talking about.

 

How can I have the last word when you haven't had any words?

Try to answer my question.

 

Given up? You never ever presented one good argument directly against my points.

All you've said is "Steven Gerrard has an amazing will to win which for me puts him above everyone else...I'm an everton fan and I can still say this"

Try to answer my question.

 

No, I'm the one who can present an argument and there's not many replies because either it isn't read properly or nobody can argue back directly against my points.

So you too, since you put your nose in this

 

Why? Just because I don't toe the popular line of "bad management...out of position..."?

Answer my question if you can.

 

Yes there is, and you can in the EPL. I am talking about international and comparisons with the best CL players who bring their game EVERY game. Not sporadically in the CL like gerrard.

My point :

When hamman came on, he did not do a "DEFENSIVE" role.

What he did was : took the ball with control without panicking, passed it accurately, moved to take a pass back, initiated passing move all to TAKE CARE OF THE BALL. And he also tackled when needed.

Gerrard could not do this. THIS is my MAIN point about his game.

This allowed Gerrard to run forward.

Yes the entire team did not play well.

He did dive and it was blatant, but that's not the point of the argument anyway so it's irrelevant.

But if the entire team did not play well in half 1, then why praise gerrard only in half 2?

Look closer at the game.

I am saying : He was poor in half 1. So was everyone else. In half 2, he impacted in HIS way and was very good. BUT, hammann was as important if not more. Others were also very good in half 2.

Look closer and see in what WAY Gerrard impacted the game. He always has been able to in THAT way; often in the EPL. But in CL much less often and never in internationals.

In CL, scoring a goal or 2 right at the end should not brush over the poor general play in the way that I'm talking about which is important to internationals. Yes he's a good CL player. But not a top one. Maybe at least if he did impact in his way every game or every other game he would be. But it is more sporadic.

My point is that the TOP INTERNATIONAL players can do THAT way often enough in league, CL and interntionals AND also have very good touch, short passing, control etc, which Gerrard is not so good at.

Comprendez?

No, poor performance came before that. Or around that. His general play.

It's what stops him from being able to be a top interntional player.

Ok, Liverpool are better than any German CL club so....

get it now?

Let's analyse each player separately from the results of their clubs. 11 players in a team. You can play VERY well personally and still lose.

are you kidding. Mcmanaman - euro96 MVP. impressed so often in an england shirt.

scholes - you can see now how valuable he was.

don't even go there with hoddle, waddle and barnes. They all played significantly better than gerrard. Just because they didn't win trophies don't dismiss them.

They got as far as the current lot have, but in more convinving style, playing better football.

I can't give you examples, but what I mean is that Liverpool have often played better quality football and have got good results, or better results in games he has not played in - which aren't many, but often when come about I have noticed this.

Badly mismanaged? No. Just picking the wrong players to play. Yes.

International football not the pinnacle? lol. Then go on sweep the world cup and euros please england.

I mean, all the top french, italian, argentinian, brazilian, dutch etc players who play for these big clubs can actually now be put into ONE team together, and you're telling me it's not a higher standard or at least as good a standard????? lol

Cyrs023...we're going round in circles, because I've explained all this to you in that thread in the dutch forum.

You said you don't have time to read it properly, but please do! Because it explains everything you want to know.

there's no point asking me these things here, when i've explained them before already.

please go read that dutch forum posting before you ask me anything else

Because i don't want to repeat myself.

 

For the record, Liverpool are my favourite english club for historical reasons.

If Mcmanaman and fowler were german, I'd start them both in the NT.

I have nothing against Liverpool or england (in fact my whole point about gerrard is to say that england would be better without him).

I just prefer to analyse closer than what the media does.



It seems like everyone gets their panties in a bunch and panics when I say that Gerrard is not a top international and neither a top CL player. It comes across as a "Gerrard is my favourite player/awesome player. Questions are not appreciated".

I am not saying he's not a good player. He is very good in the EPL for Liverpool.

But let's break down his game and see WHAT makes him good in the EPL style of game, and his weaknesses even there, and WHAT makes him less effective in the CL, and WHAT makes him virtually non-effective in Internationals.

Break down his game, and answer my question about him in the quote thing to fraulein, hertha and FR; anyone who's willing to do that.

 

You write a lot to say a lot of shit. You are the only person on a germany forum who doesn't rate gerrard, infact i'd say you were the only person on this entire forum that doesnt put gerrrard into the 50 top players in the world right now. What does that say? 1. you are right and everyone else is wrong and everyone gets their information dictated to them by the media or 2. you're wrong.

Listen you have already demonstrated you know virtually ******** all about english football so why persist in commenting? You make points that england are poor because chelsea use 1 english player in a central midfield three (despite their best players being english and 4-5-6/11 of their team being english) but you ignore inter who won the italian title using 1 italian player, whilst on the other hand Man U won the english title whilst playing majority with domestic players.

As for the dive? true or false: A foul inside the box is a penalty? (true) Pulling someones arm back is a foul? (true) preventing a clear goal scoring oppotunity is a foul and a red card? (true) why do you think the milan players did not protest the penalty? was it because they were thankful that gattuso did not get sent off? Look gerrard went down easy but that is not the defination of a dive.

So gerrard wins 2 finals for liverpool but because he did not pass the ball properly he's did not have a good game? thats ridiculous... honestly do you read what you write before you post?

Mcmanaman had 5 good games for england thats it gerrard has about the same stop making stuff up and you'll stop being called out. Scholes never played that well in an england shirt (mainly because he was shifted to the left wing so often). Again hoddle never played well for england neither did barnes why do you think they are regarded as enigmas? waddle played well in 1990 but never again.

You cant give examples of liverpool playing better without gerrard because they dont exist and by the way liverpool play boring defensive football not because of gerrard but because of benitez.

And yes international football is not the pinacle of football anymore thats obvious. Is italy better than inter or ac? is england better than the top 4? is germany better than bayern? is germany better than arsenal, man u, chelsea or liverpool? is brazil? Honestly there are at max 9 good internatiional teams whilst there are 20+ club teams at that level.

You know very little about english football and don't seem to understand what a box to box player is fact of the matter is stop commenting on stuff you are ignorant on. You have 0 facts to back up your opinions. You have this obssession with the media it's embarrasing you make up stuff that they are supposed to be saying you say that everyone that disagrees with you is a mindless idiot who gets all of his/her information off the media. Why do you think gerrard was voted the best player in champions league in 2005 by the managers who made the last 16? people who know way more about football than you or I why would they vote that if gerrard had a poor game in the 2005 final (and thats rated as his best game in the tournament)? Why have Manchester united, Ac milan, real madrid and chelsea in the past confirmed that they would bid for him if he became available if he isnt a top CL player? are they influenced by the media so much that they would spend 30-50 million on a player that isnt good enough?

Because you state an opinion doesn't make it right, I disagreed with it then and I disagree with it now.

Stop rated players based on your percieved talent rating system and rate them on performance.

 

cyrs023 :

breathe

calm down

read my post properly.

you say for eg that I am saying that he didn't have a good game. No, I said he had a very good 2nd half of the CL final! In HIS OWN way that is not very conducive to international football, and is also not produced consistently enough in CL football either. He does in the CL, but not consistently enough.

But I said that he is a very good EPL player because he does produce his way of football enough there!!

Read carefully :

Please, go and read my posts in the dutch forum (and re-reading my last post CAREFULLY might help as well), and then get back to me.

Or just shut up and stop talking beside the point of my posts.

You clearly did not read my posts there. It explains EVERYTHING that you brought up in your last post.

Why should I bother replying when you are talking BESIDE the points that I am making!

Obviously you're upset enough by my comments about gerrard, so at least take the time to read the dutch thread to see that I am not saying what you THINK I am saying about him.

 

oooh, and international football is the pinnacle yes

consider this :

If you rate the top 20 teams from club and international, then the international counterpart would beat the club counterpart.

for eg. The best international side would beat the best club side.

But the 5th best club side might beat the 8th best international side.

Because international teams do not have the restrictions that club teams have. Only nationality. And countries like italy, brazil, argentina, france, holland, germany etc already produce the players for the best club teams.

Now what if the best italian players were put together into ONE team instead of being spread around in clubs?

Yes, Italy would beat AC. Many AC and Italy supporters themselves can see that and say that.

Germany would beat Bayern. Germany are better than bayern. Nobody on this forum would deny that. The only advantage bayern have are is the fact that there's luca toni to partner klose instead of whoever.

And also, players, approaching world cups and euros don't think : "man, it's just the world cup - who cares".

LOL.

The world cup and euros have far more prestige and history than any league or the CL. It's the competition that players want to win and they know it's the one that will put their names into history more than any other.

PS.

If there are 20 top level club teams, who are they?

4 english clubs
2 italian clubs (not counting juventus)
3 spanish clubs
1 german club
1 french club

= 11

Now think about the international sides, who do not have money restrictions, and can pick 11 players from anywhere, without squad limits or financial limits or the trouble to sign and negotiate for players.

Only nationality is a factor but for most countries, that's not a big deal as there are huge player pools you can pick from, and for most of the countries, all their players are spread amongst the top clubs anyway.

And when a club signs a player, he is theirs for a long time. If he plays badly, it affects the club's form. For an international team, you can go and pick out 1 player who is playing brilliantly for a crap club. For eg. barry. If a player from a "top club" is not playing well.

italy
france
germany
brazil
argentina
holland
portugal
spain
croatia
mexico
sweden
romania
czech republic
ivory coast
england
scotland

and more!

look at the euro qualification groups and look at the teams doing well at the top of the groups.

Anyway, there is certainly no way that you can say that quality wise, international football is any LESS than club football.

And add in the fact that World cups and Euros are much more prestigious and have much more history than any league or the CL. Players want to win those more than anything. It puts their names in the history books more than any league or CL win.

 

"The only advantage" aside from Ribery, Sagnol, Lucio instead of Schweinsteiger, Jansen/Friedrich, Metzelder. Yeah.

 

hee hee, when i saw your name i KNEW this would be the comment you picked on.

I think that Metzelder and lucio are comparable to be the same. Mertesacker is better than both.

then there's lahm.

ok sagnol is better than friedrich, but not by much.

In midfield, Ballack and frings work better than ze roberto and van bommel.

Schneider is comparable to ribery. I would rather have schneider by a little for his better vision though.

I would drop schweinsteiger and put in borowski. Or hitzlsperger. or pander. or streit. or khedira

Bayern meanwhile have to play schweinsteiger. bayern can't call up players of that calibre to replace schweinsteiger.

Ok, strikers bayern have the advantage. Altho klose-podolski do work very well and kuranyi and gomez are better than podolski.

But advantage bayern there.

GK - no contest

and depth as well - germany have more depth as shown in the schweinsteiger case.

Anyway, it's close, but advantage germany by a little for starting XIs, and by quite a bit for the benches.

But actually, ignoring these kinds of comparisons based on player by player, if you just think about who would win based on quality of play attackingly and defensively and consistency over a long time, it would have to be germany.

 

Again stop making stuff up you did not post clear points on the dutch forum, they did not answer what I wrote because they were wrong. Gerrard is not a top CL player? then name 30 players in the CL that have had more of an impact in the last 3 years?

Honestly why don't you post these opinions in the liverpool forum?

because they are wrong and you're scared they'll get ripped to shreads. It's fine you have the courage to post in a forum where very few people who know gerrard (and have seen most of his games) look but isnt it an indication that you're wrong when everyone else here disagrees with you?

Again i'll repeat the point: Just because you state an opinion doesn't make it right, just because you back in up with 2-4 pages of writing (which contain no facts) doesnt make it correct.

If you want to be a patronising little ******** then fine but the fact of the matter is that you are talking about something you are very ignorant about: English football, English players and the England national team. And you show it by picking players who you rate because they have the talent that you think they have and making up performances for them (see mcmanaman).

And what gives you the indication that your points upset me? because ive sworn? I find all your points laughable to be honest.

If international football is the pinnacle why is the world cup plagued by cheating, defensive and broing football? why does the standard of play only equal the champions league when it gets to the last 8 teams?

There are 9 at max good international teams:

Holland
Germany
Portugal
England
France
Italy
Argentina
Spain
Brazil

and on these level there are 4+ english teams, 4+ spanish teams, 3-4 italian teams, 1-2 german teams, 1 french team etc. The reason you rate International football higher than CL is simply because germany is doing well internationally and shit club level.

Again I'll state the point so it gets through to you:

Just because you state an opinion doesn't make it right, just because you back in up with 2-4 pages of writing (which contain no facts) doesnt make it correct.

 

I don't want to intrude on an already heated discussion, but in squidward's defense, I do think that performance for one's country as well as one's club is an essential part of assessing a player's talent and accomplishments.

 

No doubt, but when you say something like "England would be better off without Gerrard" it comes off as extremely simplistic and shortsighted for various reasons.

 

Well, if one were to argue that Barry is a key part of the team at this point and Lampard could play the counterpart attacking midfielder role better than Gerrard, I would find that an acceptable statement. Maybe not true, but realistic (and in a game where you can never really simulate one situation twice, realism is the closest we can come to truth in making such predictions). I'm not saying that Squid knows nearly enough about Premiership football to have any authority on whether or not Lampard (or Barry, or Scholes, or whoever) would work better for England than Gerrard, but if backed up with reason it's not an entirely simplistic view. Just wanted to point that out.