Topic: The other games today - 2011/12

[johnnypd]

No matter how badly we play there always seems to be a chance we can get a result against most of the sides in the division. I have honestly been surprised just how s*** most of the teams are. All it has taken for us to leapfrog the other clubs in the legaue since promotion is shrewdly buy French/African players on the cheap who are physically and technically ahead of most of the plodders clogging up the league.

as i said, i'm not saying there's better teams out there. in fact i think there's plenty of sides this season who are under-utilising the squads at their disposal due to shitty boards/managers - ie villa, blackburn. Everton seem to have just stagnated a bit more than anything, a couple of players like cahill declined but others like baines have improved massively. there's a few teams haven't turned up this season, but i'm not sure you can say that's because the quality of players or the standard of their football has declined.

there's usually a side each season that sneak up amongst so called better teams and improve more than you'd expect, like everton and villa have done in previous years. this year thankfully it's us.

[johnnypd]

What is wrong with playing two holding midfielders? Everyone was raving about Germany at the World Cup and they featured two in every match. The entertainment and quality of the football has nothing to do with the formations used.

I wouldn't say they did - Schweinsteiger's much more than that. But i do agree with the overall point  - Xavi and Busquets for Barca, or Vieira and Gilberto for the Arsenal invincables. two solid midfielders who give a basis for the rest to work magic.

Couple of decent brazilian sides have gone with two out right defensive midfielders in there, mind.

[leffe186]

What is wrong with playing two holding midfielders? Everyone was raving about Germany at the World Cup and they featured two in every match. The entertainment and quality of the football has nothing to do with the formations used.

I wouldn't say they did - Schweinsteiger's much more than that. But i do agree with the overall point  - Xavi and Busquets for Barca, or Vieira and Gilberto for the Arsenal invincables. two solid midfielders who give a basis for the rest to work magic.

Couple of decent brazilian sides have gone with two out right defensive midfielders in there, mind.

Nothing's inherently wrong with playing two defensive midfielders, but Baba, I don't think you can argue that a formation has nothing to do with the entertainment and quality of the football. It's a combination of the formation and the quality of the players. The quality of the players in the two sides johnnypd named are among the best in the history of football!

[Segun Oluwaniyi]

What is wrong with playing two holding midfielders? Everyone was raving about Germany at the World Cup and they featured two in every match. The entertainment and quality of the football has nothing to do with the formations used.

I wouldn't say they did - Schweinsteiger's much more than that. But i do agree with the overall point  - Xavi and Busquets for Barca, or Vieira and Gilberto for the Arsenal invincables. two solid midfielders who give a basis for the rest to work magic.

Couple of decent brazilian sides have gone with two out right defensive midfielders in there, mind.

Nothing's inherently wrong with playing two defensive midfielders, but Baba, I don't think you can argue that a formation has nothing to do with the entertainment and quality of the football. It's a combination of the formation and the quality of the players. The quality of the players in the two sides johnnypd named are among the best in the history of football!

It is not the formation, but the team philosophy. What is the difference between a compact, combative 4-5-1 and a free-flowing, attacking 4-3-3 other than how the formation is utilised? Many teams use 4-4-2 to have two banks of players in defence and two strikers they can play long ball with. More adventurous sides will allow both central midfielders forward and play open, attacking football.

[madras]

What is wrong with playing two holding midfielders? Everyone was raving about Germany at the World Cup and they featured two in every match. The entertainment and quality of the football has nothing to do with the formations used.

I wouldn't say they did - Schweinsteiger's much more than that. But i do agree with the overall point  - Xavi and Busquets for Barca, or Vieira and Gilberto for the Arsenal invincables. two solid midfielders who give a basis for the rest to work magic.

Couple of decent brazilian sides have gone with two out right defensive midfielders in there, mind.

Nothing's inherently wrong with playing two defensive midfielders, but Baba, I don't think you can argue that a formation has nothing to do with the entertainment and quality of the football. It's a combination of the formation and the quality of the players. The quality of the players in the two sides johnnypd named are among the best in the history of football!

It is not the formation, but the team philosophy. What is the difference between a compact, combative 4-5-1 and a free-flowing, attacking 4-3-3 other than how the formation is utilised? Many teams use 4-4-2 to have two banks of players in defence and two strikers they can play long ball with. More adventurous sides will allow both central midfielders forward and play open, attacking football.

the difference is the quality and the intelligence of the players.

[Kid Icarus]

Is there anyone out there now who doesn't think Messi is the best they've seen? Or even the best in the world?

[Tooj]

Is there anyone out there now who doesn't think Messi is the best they've seen? Or even the best in the world?

 

[Sewelly]

Is there anyone out there now who doesn't think Messi is the best they've seen? Or even the best in the world?

 

Who's better?

[Tooj]

He's the only one.

[johnnypd]

Thought you were going to say Paul McGrath

[Kid Icarus]

Better now imo.

[midds]

Honestly think Messi will become the benchmark by which all players are compared. At the minute it's still Pele. Maradona and Best - in 5 years time it'll be Messi. He's untouchable and unplayable at the minute. He's a joy to watch. 

[Sewelly]

He's the only one.

Messi is everything Ronaldo was but far more efficient.

[Tooj]

Honestly think Messi will become the benchmark by which all players are compared. At the minute it's still Pele. Maradona and Best - in 5 years time it'll be Messi. He's untouchable and unplayable at the minute. He's a joy to watch. 

So true.

[Tooj]

He's the only one.

Messi is everything Ronaldo was but far more efficient.

In what way is he more efficient? Actually not even more efficient, but the fact you've said far more efficient is utterly absurd.

[Mick]

Honestly think Messi will become the benchmark by which all players are compared. At the minute it's still Pele. Maradona and Best - in 5 years time it'll be Messi. He's untouchable and unplayable at the minute. He's a joy to watch. 

I still think Pele is the best but it's getting harder to make a case against Messi.

[Dave]

[johnnypd]

Would've said Messi and Ronaldo were on a similar level a couple of years ago, maybe Ronaldo at his peak slightly ahead as he was a bit more influential for his teams. But Messi's added elements to his game, he's as much of a playmaker as Xavi now, while still maintaining Ronaldo-esque dribbling, skill and end product. So that puts him above the buck-toothed fat one, who also never performed over as long a period as Messi has, not that it was his fault he was basically mal-nourished as a child.

He's had better games than today mind but still scored 4. I remember when he scored 4 against arsenal, which was great, but his game wasn't quite as diversified or influential as it's got last season and this.

[Sewelly]

He's the only one.

Messi is everything Ronaldo was but far more efficient.

In what way is he more efficient? Actually not even more efficient, but the fact you've said far more efficient is utterly absurd.

lol u mad bro.

[Sewelly]

Would've said Messi and Ronaldo were on a similar level a couple of years ago, maybe Ronaldo at his peak slightly ahead as he was a bit more influential for his teams. But Messi's added elements to his game, he's as much of a playmaker as Xavi now, while still maintaining Ronaldo-esque dribbling, skill and end product. So that puts him above the buck-toothed fat one, who also never performed over as long a period as Messi has, not that it was his fault he was basically mal-nourished as a child.

He's had better games than today mind but still scored 4. I remember when he scored 4 against arsenal, which was great, but his game wasn't quite as diversified or influential as it's got last season and this.

This.

[Tooj]

Totally agree with that johnny, you're spot on and one of the things that has really impressed me with Messi is how great of a playmaker he has become. It's great seeing him drop off and pick out a pass.

[Tooj]

He's the only one.

Messi is everything Ronaldo was but far more efficient.

In what way is he more efficient? Actually not even more efficient, but the fact you've said far more efficient is utterly absurd.

lol u mad bro.

I expected a better rhetort.

[madras]

Honestly think Messi will become the benchmark by which all players are compared. At the minute it's still Pele. Maradona and Best - in 5 years time it'll be Messi. He's untouchable and unplayable at the minute. He's a joy to watch. 

I still think Pele is the best but it's getting harder to make a case against Messi.

messi is now alongside cruyff and maradona for me. he has to make a few moves of the totally spectacular  (the dummy on the keeper "genius....what , what genius" against uruguay ?, or the shot from 60yds v czechoslovakia ?)to get up with pele

[Sewelly]

Btw Ronaldo was a t***. No loyalty to the club that stuck by him after injury.

[Beren]

Is there anyone out there now who doesn't think Messi is the best they've seen? Or even the best in the world?

Xavi and Zidane IMO.

I equate 'best' with controlling games though. Also, I don't think the 'international stage' argument is as spurious as everyone would have you believe. Comparing him to the likes of George Best is facile IMO.

Some of his international colleagues currently include Aguero, Higuain, Tevez, Mascherano, di Maria and many other top class players. Don't even get me started on the likes of Colo and Gutierrez

I don't personally believe he is incapable of performing outside of Barcelona, but if he really wants to compete with the ilk of Maradona, Pele and other candidates, what is stopping him from doing the business at the Grandest Stage of Them All,... Wrestlemania! World Cup?

[And I ask that as a very sincere question].

The respective abilities of players are not characterised by success at a single tournament type, they are what they are - inalienable almost, but given Messi's supreme talent, he should be able to replicate his form at a World Cup. I suppose it depends on how you see 'greatness'. Do you have to do great things to be great? Or can you be great without ever fulfilling your maximum potential?

He will be great no matter what now, but if he wants to contest for the title of the greatest - he still has challenges ahead of him. He's got youth on his side, and I hope he does perform at a WC like he is capable of doing.