Re: Re: I'm sorry, I totally agree, you can play good and attractive ( the two are not neccessarily linked )soccer and win at the same time. Italian clubs in the 90s played very well and won, Real played very well from 99 through now and have won. But, the line has been crossed and now many clubs are fantastic going foward when everything is going their way, but can be complete crap when the chips are down ( Arsenal and Real 2002 I'm looking your way. . .). It took teams like Milan and Juventus, employing lots of attacking players at once but asking them to do the dirty work as well to find this out. Its all about balance. Even when Real had Karanka and Campo in the backline they had RC always getting back, Hierro was still a rock and Redondo ( a minor diety ) doing the business at back. Who will find the right balance this year? Real WILL find a way to keep the goals out. Juventus will hit their stride. Milan will eventually have to revert back to the side of early last year to get results and Manchester United will always be able to turn it up a notch when it counts.
Go ahead, give name. Better RB than Thuram? Better Defensive mid than Vieira and Makelele? Your answer is a simple negation, without any arguement. Talk when u have some.
Their are lots of players who are arguably as good as Thuram at defense, Viera and Makelele in midfield and Henry up front. For you to say they are "simply the best" is mere hyperbole, as if there were no equals or peers at all. I'll name some. Puyol, Zanetti are as good as Thuram. Davids, Van Bommel, and Emerson are all as good as Viera or Makelele, the latter not even being THAT good. He has no offensive qualities, even Gattuso can do what he does. Pires hasn't been the same since his injury, nice try though. I'd name Vicente, Van Der Meyde, Figo, Beckham and a host of other wide players as his equal if not better. Van Nistelrooy, Vieri, Shevchenko, Raul, Ronaldo are all as good if not better than Henry. Don't mistake your weak, subjective opinions for fact. Duly noted. Man U have had the better or Italian sides in the last five years, with the exception being Lazio in 99? Ever since Man U came from two nil down versus Juventus in 98 they’ve have Juve’s number.
Look at the posts in front of yours. The Madrid fans keep changing the topic to "we may not be the most complete, but we're the best" thread. You're entitled to your opinion, I suppose. What's up with me? I'm good, thanks. Watched Chelsea demolish the Wolves, and Ohio State survive Bowling Green. But back to the topic. Of course its COMPARABLE. Becks isn't THAT good. (He is a good player, but he's no offensive juggernaut.) Figo is on the downside of his career. Zidane is unmatched, yes. But Ronaldo? I'd probably take Sheva over him right now. Raul is one of my favorite players, actually. Are Real's midfield/forwards better? Sure. But is it light years ahead of Milan? No, of course not! Real is better, but Milan isn't that far behind. Well then, we're in complete agreement.
Well, I was with you for a bit there.......... but that's simply absurd. Zidane - I agree. Henry - Vieri, Ruud, Sheva, Mutu (as you'll soon see), Raul all have a good claim. Makelele - good, but not that good. Thuram - Puyol and Zanetti, as someone has already mentioned. Jawz, I believe. Pires - that must be a joke. His form since his injury has been disappointing. [/B][/QUOTE] Oh, what NONSENSE! Desailly is getting up in age, (although I agree on Gallas), while Silvestre has no business in that sentence. Nor does Trez, who's very overrated. [/B][/QUOTE] Who's always been prone to stunning gaffs. Dacourt has failed to impress, Sagnol is no longer that good, Wiltord is crap, as Japorea showed, and Cisse has yet to play well for France. Mexes is very good. The funny thing is that I agree with you, but you are going to draw a lot of heat with rants like that. France has a phenomenal team, but its not as good as you make it out to be. (I also think they need to find a good partner for Henry.) I agreed with the rest of your post, but I have to disagree with you there. Makelele is a phenomenal player. He hasn't shown off his offensive skills because he hasn't needed to - with Real or France. However, he's a real rock in the middle, and actually has a good touch - I just saw him in action against the Wolves, and he had a phenomenal game. Good passer. He's much better than Gattuso. Also, Davids has jumped the shark, while Van Bommel just isn't that good.
Chelsea have it all to do. They shouldn't be involved in such a debate because only Desailly has 'done it all' they have some players of experience but they don't have a single player in their team or squad you could dub the best in the world in that position. Chelsea have looked really impressive to me so far this season and i still think they have a shot at the EPL title this year..but the CL is what counts when talking about 'in the world' and Chelsea are nothing but babies in that respect and man for man they aren't comparable with Real, Man U, Milan and a few other teams even Arsenal!
Well, I suppose if we ignore the experience of Petit, Veron, Crespo and Makelele (I think they have a few plaudits between them), you're right, Chelsea are totally inexperienced. Btw, how are we not comparable to Arsenal? Our defense is better, our strikers are better(Henry is only one player), our midfield is at least as good........huh? Or were we supposed to lose at home in the CL 3-0 to prove our equality to the Gooners?
[[ Certainly not Puyol. Zanetti can be pretty strong but dont have the polyvalence of Thuram (Center back is his natural position). It was debatable when Cafu was at his prime. Now, it cant be contested that Thuram is the best RB in the world right now and one of the 2 or 3 best "general" defenders. You must be joking when you dare comparing Vieira or Makelele to Van Bommel or Emerson. Davids is probably as good as Vieira and Makelele when he isnt losing his nerves. Ask the dutch about this. Makelele is a pure defensive midfield. His job (which may change with his new team's tactic) was to get the ball and to give it in good condition to creative players. Work he did perfectly for Real, France and his previous clubs. This is such a lieu commun to say that Pires isnt the same since his injury. Just (re)watch Pires in confed cup. Btw, if you want to find player better than him at his position try to find players who DO play at his position like Giggs. Figo and Beckham play on the RIGHT side of the field. Get a clue. Henry isnt a pure "striker" as Van Nistelrooy. But as a forward, he has many advantages on those u mentionned. 1) He can play on the left side, as a second forward or as a striker. 2) He can make his own goal attempt like no other. 3) His assists.
Desailly is getting old in age that is a sure thing but his experience compensate his age. I dont follow his play for Chelsea every week, but i have seen every apperances for his NT and he is as good as before. + he can play as a def mid as his did for Milan years ago. I personaly rate Sylvestre a very lil above Gallas as a CB. + he can play very well as a LB. Trezeguet is just comming back from injury. His come back is so far very impressive. Dacourt just got recruted by AS Roma. Must not be that bad. Sagnol ... Ok, no offense, but here u need to get better infos. First of all, he is very young. Second, he cant be "not longer that good", as he kept progressing EACH MONTH. Third, he is the absolute first choice as Bayern's RB. Fourth, each time he plays for France, he is fantastic and give tons of assists. Fifth, he isnt that far from Thuram as a RB. Wiltord is underrated. May he just overperforms for France NT, which is the same as we are talking of France NT. I agree on Cissé and his difficulties to integrate France gameplay. Whatever, there is still a tremendous potential. I admit that some of my "facts" can be discussed (Pires is one of them). Whatever, i m trying to show (and i beleive it) that, OBJECTIVLY, France is that good.
Brain hurts....someone called Silvester better than Gallas......someone said that being "recruted" by Roma equals quality (they finished in midtable in the SerieA last year), someone said that Wiltord OVERPERFORMS for the France NT (!!!!!!!!!) despite his utterly inept showing at Japorea where he was abominably awful.....Desailly can play midfield........ You're not Matt Scholer, but wow. I've never seen such rose colored glasses. France is good, but to say that Willy Sagnol is one of the top 10 players at his position, or that Pires is THE best, is, well.......makes brain hurt........le Alphonse's posts starting to come into perspective - maybe they're not so bad........... P.S. If France is THAT good, how did they manage such an impressive haul at the last world cup?
1) Sylvestre slighty better than Gallas is not only my point of view but also Santini's (french National Coach) opinion. 2) Dacourt isnt Vieira. However, are every midtable teams for 1 year hopeless? Are every players in those team *#*#*#*#*#*#? Is Totti that's bad? Just no. 3) Wiltord is not a player i really appreciate. But, every time he plays for France he is doing quite well, prob more that just "well". Funny is to see that he has scored almost as much than Henry or Trez for France. 4) Desailly cant play midfield? Are u smoking bad stuff? Just watch back some matches of Milan few years ago when Desailly was playing there... 5) About Sagnol ... You havent seen Bayern regulary right? Is Bayern a such bad team? He is first choice there without contestation and, from what i read, really appreciated there. He is in France as well considering his amazing performances for NT. 6) Pires best at his pos is a debatable fact as i said before. He might be and i think he is. 7) France and last WC. Fatigue, Zidane's and Pires' injuries dont explain alone this massive failure. Well, it happends. Hard to find explanations when everything went wrong. However, i m absolutly convinced that a team's quality cant be judge on a single tourney's victory or failure. France won 4 of their last 5 official tourneys.
Makelele is not that experienced even tho he's 30 years old and has played at Real he's not been a 1st teamer for his country until very recently, nor has he reached the status of the likes of Davids, Keane or Vieira. Veron has had an erratic career and has never been THE best in his position. Crespo, see Veron and Petit was at his best when he was with Arsenal. I guess you must have something in your eye huh? on current results yep Chelsea are apparently the better team. But Arsenal have won things and know how to win things. In a way it's unfair to compare the two beings as Neo-Chelsea are a fledgling unit but when talking about teams on paper you MUST include those who have been there and done it. Like i said Chelsea have it all to do this year.
Chelsea have to be up there as the most complete team, if only because of their phenomenal strength in depth. I can only see them getting better as the team gels. The clear thing of this thread is how many teams there are with amazing sides.
Bwahahahaha Makelele has won a couple of CLs with Real, has started for his country for a while, and Real fans will admit that he was the crucial lynchpin to their side last year (go see their board. Crespo never that good? Never mind the fact that he led the SerieA in scoring (twice, I believe). Veron? Three years ago you could easily make the case that he was the best in the world when he ran Lazio's midfield. Don't forget, at the time he was considered much better than his teammate, a certain Pavel Nedved. Veron's "erratic" career began when he moved to England. It was certainly not erratic before. Who cares if Petit was best for Arsenal? You commented on experience! I would say Desailly was better when he played in Italy, but you brought him up too! You missed the point of your own post! Well, lets see, has Arsenal ever done better than Chelsea has in the CL? (Chelsea reached the semis fairly recently, actually.) No. So how exactly have they been there and done it all? This is mostly a thread about being the best in Europe and domestically, about which Arsenal know very little.
You are about to tell me that if Roy Keane, Patrick Vieira or Davids had been at Real they wouldn't have done a better job too right?.... Crucial to real because he was the only player in midfield who would stay back...Crucial in terms of world status...i think not. Don't get the two confused. Don't alter my words to suit yourself. I said never the best in the world in his position. Crespo is a very good player but he has not and will never be on par with the Ronaldo's of this world. Don't get it twisted there's no shame in not being the equal of such a player. lol@3years ago.. who cares about 3years ago? 3years ago Tony Adams was still at Arsenal and Romario was looking to go to world cup '02 ¬_¬ Oh yeah and a certain Mendieta was one of the best players in the world. Ahem ¬_¬ So what? that is where he plays now. And that is what matters not what reputation preceded him from THREE years ago. Experience coupled with STLL being great in your selected position. Ala the players of Real, Milan & Man U. LoL Desailly was a legend in Italy and easily in the top 3 best defenders on earth and is easily an all time great. He may not be as fast as he was but his positional sense is even better then it was because it has to be. VERY similar to Maldini. These are not players who will ever be dropped whilst they are of benefit to the team. Desailly holds Chelsea together. He is unquestionably the highest decorated player to ever play there and he commands respect from all. That has no similarity whatsoever with any of the new players - in what way have i 'missed the point of my own post' when what is stated is a fact? Not to mention Desailly's multi lingual skills means he is the best able to communicate to a number (if not all) of players on the pitch or in the squad. Who else can do that? ..... Do keep up 007. ¬_¬ Desailly isn't even part of this discussion. Don't use his name again - lol. Chelsea are not regulars in the CL. Automatically that negates them. Leeds have gotten to a CL semi-final too..and your point is what? Are you going to say now that Arsenal are an inferior team to Leeds? Oh ya...those bwahahaha's...i've heard there are things on the market that can clear that up...
You missed the point of your post by pointing out how a player's reputation is more important than his current form. First, you comment on how a player's performance now is all that is relevant (who cares about 3 years ago! - see your comment on Veron), and then go back to discussing how Desailly was a legend in Italy. Well, which is it? Is it the experience? Or is it the current form? I love Desailly, but he's clearly past his best. Still very good, but like Malidini, clearly past his best. So which is it? Besides, the comment of "who cares about x years ago" is asinine. 3 years ago, Crespo was FAR better than the "Ronaldo of this world", as you put it. Ronaldo was injured, sure. But according to you that's irrelevant, right? Oh, and to say that "X would have done as well as Makelele at Madrid" is irrelevant. Fact is, Makelele was there. And played very well. Who's to say he's not underrated because he hasn't had the chance to display his offensive skills? Its a stupid argument. Veron was disappointing at ManU - Keane might not have fit well at Real. Who knows? No, you twit. You proved my point for me. Arsenal's regular appearances in the CL has shown only that they can't win there. Teams like Leeds and Valencia and Leverkusen have done better despite not being "regulars". All that means is that being a regular in the CL is neither a pre-requisite for doing well, nor a determining factor. Give Stoke City Chelsea's current squad, and they'd have a shot at the CL too.
lol i give up with ya Desailly has no relevance to any of the other players at Chelsea plain and simple. He is, was and always will be a legend. No other player at Chelsea is anywhere near that status..get it now? I never knocked Chelsea but they aren't worthy mention in the same breath as some of the other teams until that squad acrtually does something major. Names on a teamsheet are 'nice' but until they're a proven unit it doesn't count for much. The Arsenal thing i see 50/50 the consistant factor of getting there season in season out should start to prove to be a vital factor. If the 1st teamers at Arsenal stay together a few more years they should start to make similar process to that of Man U who when they first joined CL kept getting owned badly until they came of age in the Juve tussles. Until Chelsea are regulars peopl can asily claim one semi final in xxxx years as a fluke...the same as Leverkusen being in the final etc, etc.
Yes, since you can't even figure out your own point, the easiest thing to do is give up. What does that have to do with anything else? Desailly clearly isn't even the best defender at Chelsea at the moment. What does his legendary status have to do with anything? In a thread about the most "complete" team, what does the presence of a great, great player who's on the downside of his career have ANYTHING to do with it? (If Chelsea drag DiStefano out of retirement, would you say that now makes them better? He's certainly a legend!) Well, my counterargument is that plenty of teams have done well in the league or in the CL without being "always there", while other teams like the Arse have always been there, and have NEVER done well. Look at Valencia recently, Leverkusen, etc. All have gotten further than Arsenal. No good team can be discounted just because they didn't play in the CL regularly. Dortmund in 97 is a good reminder of that. Oh, and as for names on a teamsheet being "nice", that's the whole point of the thread. The most complete team - not the team most likely to win the CL. How much more time does Arsenal need? They've kept almost the same squad for years - what exactly are they waiting for? True. But until Arsenal do anything in the CL it just goes to show that constantly being in the CL means little.
oh man, my point is very clear. You are the one who seems a little hazy, yet you insist it is I who doesn't know what his point is...... Respect. Desailly's legendary status makes him an unquestionable captain who commands his troops in a way no-one else at Chelsea could do. Before all the superstars came in this close season John Terry was a worthy deputy but...Hernan Crespo or Veron responding to him?? i think not..But because Desailly is what he is no-one at Chelsea can or will question him. And again i repeat, Desailly is the only one who can speak the langauges or a langauge in common with every single player in the squad from the manager downwards! comprende now? or are you going to completely overlook what i said last time again. lol If you see it that way then ok. But I don't. You don't gather status as an elite team until you are worthy of it...not off a blip..or a good one off season. No it's not. How can you have one without the other? people argue that Real and MAn U aren't complete because of their defensive lapses yet who can beat them when they are on fire? There is no more awesome sight in football then either of those teams at the peak of their performance. That makes them complete in the attacking sense of the word. By your logic Barcelona should dominate La Liga every season........ It took Man U a long time to get the formula right. It's only fair Arsenal are judged over a similiar time-span - they are not buying the world...they are learning from scratch...therein lies the difference. No. As stated above when you're building from scratch it takes time to learn how and when to play. Right now Arsenal haven't worked out how to tactically attack and defend, it takes a while to play in a completely European style - which Man U have in European games. The consistency of being there season in, season out is that there will (or should) come a time when the team (if they keep the core base) grow as a whole unit and then they should be judged with the Cynicism you seem to have toward them. D.S