How would you compare yaya toure 2013/14 with George weah 1995/96? Im not asking for a direct comparison which obviously isn't possible or fair Rather who do you deem to have been more valuable and influential on their team? Talent is subjective so I will not dwell on that but it's worth mentioning toure (like weah)was a great ball carrier in his prime, maybe less adept in tight areas but not by too much id imagine I ask because I remember toure vividly from that season and he was such a force of nature,almost unplayable and the end product he produced from such a deep position I believe deserved more recognition ( A PFA award wouldn't go amiss especially considering he was on a title winning team)
I agree he would have been a worthy PFA winner, he was by far the hub of his team and also chipped in with a strong number of goals and assists (also excluding the penalties and free kicks - for which he had a phenomenal conversion rate btw). What cost him is City surfacing only at the tail end, being at the background previously, and that Toure had 8 goals and 5 assists after the voting was closed. There was frequent criticism about his defensive discipline and positioning at the time, and him taking liberties in ground coverage (for perspective though: his defensive stats still far superior to David Silva). He did have a bit of a free role but used it well. It is not an easy comparison indeed. Milan for example scored 83 goals in all competitions (60 in the league) while Manchester City scored 156 (102 in the league). I think Weah was more important for his team, largely because Milan was less stable to begin with. Weah his 11 goals (no free kicks and penalties) and 10+ assists was really a big factor behind their championship win, and many of those goals and assists in narrow wins came against the so called 'Seven Sisters'. Weah was fast, strong, an adapt dribbler, pressed the center backs and also acted as extra defender when necessary. Cross between Drogba/Heskey and Ronaldo Fenomeno. Manchester City on the other hand scored an insane amount of goals (they also conceded 55 goals). Toure was an important factor behind it, he was the hub of his team, had the most assists of his team and 2nd goalscorer, but telling is City winning 7 of the 8 games he missed, plus a 2-2 draw against Sunderland. This also includes an away win against Bayern Munich, where they scored three. So rather than who was better I think Weah was more important (Serie A was at a peak then, and not in the middle of the 1980s as is sometimes claimed). If you let both players swap teams then I imagine City still wins and Milan doesn't, but hard to tell of course and not sure. As said Yaya had a strong end of the campaign but those weren't really the strongest teams.
If Coluna or Ben Barek had not played for Portugal and France respectively (due to the political circumstances of the time) they could have been touching the top of this classification, but without a doubt the best player to come out of Africa has been by far Eusebio da Silva Ferreira, Weah (despite his greatness) is very far from Eusebio as a player.
On the topic of whether Eusebio can be considered an African or European player (I see that this has been discussed in the thread) I think there are arguments in favor of both points of view and it will depend on what each person wants to give more importance. For those who say that Eusebio should be considered “European” they undoubtedly have arguments in favor since: - The player defended the colors of the Portuguese national team and never did so with that of his native country, Mozambique. - Furthermore, his greatest successes were achieved in Europe defending a Portuguese team, Benfica in the 60s, without a doubt the best Benfica in history. And if Eusebio has gone down in history it is for what he did with Benfica and with Portugal, not for what he did in Mozambique. But I think that those who want to consider him “African” also have arguments for it, such as: - Eusebio came to Portugal when he was 18, not when he was 2, 5 or 10, but when he was 18, and until then he played soccer in his country of birth. - At the age of 15 he made his debut in the highest category of Mozambican football and for four seasons he played 42 games and scored 77 goals, that is, he was a very important player in that championship despite his youth. And in 1960 Eusebio won that tournament, the Mozambique Provincial Championship with his club, Sporting Lourenço Marques. That was a provincial championship and not a national one because Mozambique was a Portuguese colony, but for practical purposes it can be considered the champion of Mozambique. - When Eusebio arrives at Benfica he does not need to adapt, from the first day he is a star and he is thanks to the level acquired in Mozambique because it means arriving in Portugal and suddenly becoming one of the best scorers and players in Europe from the first day. In his first full season (1961/62) he scored 29 goals in 31 games (in 60/61 he started playing just after his team won the first European Cup in the club's history, so he could only play 2 games but still scores 2 goals). Therefore, Eusebio's training as a footballer occurred 100% in Mozambique, he arrived in Europe being one of the best on the continent. - It is true that he never played with the Mozambique NT but only because the political issues of the time prevented it. If his country had not been a colony, Eusebio would almost certainly have represented his country of origin as an international footballer. The most I have found out is that Eusebio played for Lourenço Marques' provincial team, but I don't know if he did it in his youth or senior days. In any case, those were only championships between provincial teams. Therefore, I believe that according to the criteria of each Eusebio fan, he can be considered European or African, simply a matter of criteria. But, did Eusebio feel Mozambican or Portuguese?……. Well, it seems that the latter, at least that's what they think in Mozambique. With the independence of its Metropolis in 1975, Mozambique became an independent country. And here comes the "problem". Eusebio did not set foot in his native country again until 1985 and he did so to visit his mother's grave. 10 years had passed since independence and he had not approached Mozambique, the complete opposite of Mario Coluna who returned to his country of origin and became president of the Mozambican soccer federation and even national team coach. That is why in Mozambique it is said that Eusebio is respected and recognized as the best footballer in its history but that he is not “loved” person because with independence he preferred to continue in Portugal instead of returning to Mozambique. On the other hand, Coluna is highly appreciated and loved by Mozambicans. Coluna returned to Mozambique to help change the country but Eusebio did not do it, so if we ask a Mozambican they may tell us that Eusebio is European and not African…