Jordan_mufc
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2016
- Messages
- 473
What, so you rate Phil Neville higher than Steven Gerrard then ? Now that's truly absurd.
Rooney In Paris has got it right.That's not what he said, at all.
What, so you rate Phil Neville higher than Steven Gerrard then ? Now that's truly absurd.
Rooney In Paris has got it right.That's not what he said, at all.
I must've missed that completely.It's basically because he had that bad game against us in the CL. That's how these dumb awards work. You can have a perfect season, be MOTM 5 times in the CL and score 12 goals (Messi) but have one quiet game and suddenly whoever the key player is of who wins it is deserving of the award. Never mind if said player had bad games himself that just happened to not cost his team.
Had Sterling's goal counted against us in the CL and you go on to beat Liverpool (pretty sure you would have done) then it's a City player that gets the award. You dominated Liverpool domestically so nobody could argue otherwise.
A bit of an overreaction. Given that the awards are seasonal I don't see what the problem is and VVD had/is having an immense season I'm not sure what the issue is. Most individual awards in literally every sport are given in the context of teams success. This is nothing new. Of course Messi is the better player but that is completely irrelevant when giving out a seasonal award that already has a precedent for factoring in team success. There's nothing to really moan about.It wouldn't matter if Messi scored 20 more goals each season, they'd give the award to whoever won the CL. Even if Messi won all the domestic trophies.
Hence why the competition is dumb. Messi was so much better than Van Djik both domestically and in Europe, but he doesn't win it because of one quiet game. VVD was worse at the Nou Camp than Messi was at Anfield.
Giving it to one player over another because they won a trophy if the two players are close (as it was with messi and ronaldo) is one thing, giving it to VVD over Messi because he won the CL is another level of stupidity.
Your argument makes no sense. Would van Dijk have won anything if he stayed at Southampton? Of course Terry and Kompany only won things when they played in a better team, because that's how football works mate.I've covered the reason why Terry & Kompany have won numerous titles. Mega-rich owners spending mega-money prior to which both players were simply good players in an average side. Without that type of spending neither player - unless they were transferred - would probably have never achieved what they did in the game. I asked you a straight-forward question as to whether or not you thought any differently. It was kind of a rhetorical question anyway because I think we both know the answer. What is it with you City fans anyway ? You seem very touchy & defensive when it comes to spending money. At the end of the day it is what it is. But the fact that the clubs that spend the most money generally do better than those who don't. I think most people would see that as highly relevant. I just see it as very relevant when discussing the impact certain individuals have on their respective clubs. You on the other hand would rather bring Spurs into the equation ????? A club - despite your assertion - has pretty much a very similar true spend to us over the past 5 years.
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1
I'd have him over ronaldo easily, who is not in Messi's echelon anymoreThese awards just dumb now IMO. VVD is a fantastic CB and probably the best in the world currently but World Player of the Year over Messi and Ronaldo? Come on, have a word.
Because City's success right now is not because of money it is because of Pep. Just like Klopps success in the CL was due to spending a quarter of a billion last year. The team that spends most wins most, agreed.I've covered the reason why Terry & Kompany have won numerous titles. Mega-rich owners spending mega-money prior to which both players were simply good players in an average side. Without that type of spending neither player - unless they were transferred - would probably have never achieved what they did in the game. I asked you a straight-forward question as to whether or not you thought any differently. It was kind of a rhetorical question anyway because I think we both know the answer. What is it with you City fans anyway ? You seem very touchy & defensive when it comes to spending money. At the end of the day it is what it is. But the fact that the clubs that spend the most money generally do better than those who don't. I think most people would see that as highly relevant. I just see it as very relevant when discussing the impact certain individuals have on their respective clubs. You on the other hand would rather bring Spurs into the equation ????? A club - despite your assertion - has pretty much a very similar true spend to us over the past 5 years.
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1
You missed when they won 3 trophies domestically and you won none? Ok.I must've missed that completely.
How do you quantify the contributions of defenders and attackers and come to the conclusion that VVD contributes more than Salah/Mane? You are conflating subjective impressions with objective facts.I'd have him over ronaldo easily, who is not in Messi's echelon anymore
VVD is playing with the likes of Salah and Mane who are world class forwards (it's probably only Messi who clearly stands out as a better attacker than Salah in world football atm) and he still clearly stands out as our best player.
For me it's more of a 'from week to week' thing impression. Van Dijk manages to stand out as a performer on a regular basis.How do you quantify the contributions of defenders and attackers and come to the conclusion that VVD contributes more than Salah/Mane? You are conflating subjective impressions with objective facts.
The perception that VVD is more important to your team than Salah is based on a dubious reasoning: Liverpool have massively improved after VVD's arrival, hence it is because of his arrival..
Yet you seem to have missed that City and Guardiola have a poor record in Europe while Klopp has never lost a CL/EL knock-out tie at Liverpool, yet you'e pretty sure they'd have beaten us (not to mention they should've gotten past Ajax first and wouldn't have faced us directly).You missed when they won 3 trophies domestically and you won none? Ok.
Because they're just better than you. In both head to head games last season in the league they proved that and they'll probably do it again this season. Regardless of the competition I'll always back City to beat Liverpool and would always rather play Liverpool than City. By all rights they should have beaten us in the quarters but that's knockout football, we had everything go our way, whereas in the final everything went your way. City would have beaten Ajax comfortably 8/10 times.Yet you seem to have missed that City and Guardiola have a poor record in Europe while Klopp has never lost a CL/EL knock-out tie at Liverpool, yet you'e pretty sure they'd have beaten us (not to mention they should've gotten past Ajax first and wouldn't have faced us directly).
They dominated on a whole domestically, they didn't particularly dominate us. Should've won at Anfield but fecked it up themselves, and the game at the Etihad didn't deserve a winner. In a lot of our meetings since Klopp and Guardiola are present, it's been Liverpool that was the better team (bar our 5-0 drubbing a few seasons ago).
No City player would be in the Ballon d'Or conversation if they had won the CL since there was no one who particularly stood out last season. I mean, was B. Silva great? Was Laporte? Sterling? Yeah, I guess - but it would've been Messi without a doubt that would win it.
Sterling winning it over Messi, please Also firmly disagree that City deserved to win against us at the Etihad, and not everything went our way in the final. We had a lucky break 1min in and we comfortably played it out after that.Because they're just better than you. In both head to head games last season in the league they proved that and they'll probably do it again this season. Regardless of the competition I'll always back City to beat Liverpool and would always rather play Liverpool than City. By all rights they should have beaten us in the quarters but that's knockout football, we had everything go our way, whereas in the final everything went your way. City would have beaten Ajax comfortably 8/10 times.
You're the top two clubs in the country. You went out of both cups to focus on the league and they still won the league whilst winning both the cups to boot. Should have beaten you away and they were fully deserving of the three points at the Etihad, were the better side. Yes, in the past Klopp has come out on top but last season in both meetings I thought City looked comfortably the better team.
Sterling easily would. His goal wins it vs us, he scores a goal or two vs Ajax and maybe one in the final, and he's right bang in the Ballon d'or conversation. People were talking about him deserving it on here at the time. If City win a quadruple then that gets recognised with a Ballon d'or award for one of their top players, period.
I know what the mass perception is like. I question its veracity. Generally speaking, perception is not a simple window to reality but tends to be heavily influenced by preconceptions and narratives. In this case, the perception of VVD is heavily influenced by the narrative that he almost single-handedly transformed Liverpool from also-rans into proper challengers for the big titles. It's a simplsitic and thus wrong narrative. VVD was a very important piece of the puzzle but other such very important pieces are Alisson, Salah, Mane...For me it's more of a 'from week to week' thing impression. Van Dijk manages to stand out as a performer on a regular basis.
That's not just me. There is a MotM/top3 vote tallied after every game from five different liverpool forums and Van Dijk came out top for the season.
Yes, it's ridiculous and yes, it could happen. These awards are based on whatever team is the most successful. VVD winning it over Messi is laughable to nearly anyone who isn't a Liverpool fan, believe me.Sterling winning it over Messi, please Also firmly disagree that City deserved to win against us at the Etihad, and not everything went our way in the final. We had a lucky break 1min in and we comfortably played it out after that.
I agree with you on the Van Dijk / Messi argument that initiated this, but I'd back us against City in a KO tie. It's understandable that you'd disagree. But the Champions League, Anfield, City's recent results in Europe, Guardiola's recent results in Europe, yeah... Not for me.
They deserved to win at Anfield, so it's a moot point.Also firmly disagree that City deserved to win against us at the Etihad.
except for the coaches and journalists who voted. and bookies who have assumed it is likely vvd would win. I guess they are all Liverpool fans. Have a rant about corrupt refs and how we'll finish fourth now that VAR is here (bonus points for VAR also being corrupt) and you can leave the thread with top marks.VVD winning it over Messi is laughable to nearly anyone who isn't a Liverpool fan, believe me.
The coaches and journalists voted for the guy considered the key player/who had the biggest hype train of the team who won the CL. Which is pretty much what they're always gunna do.except for the coaches and journalists who voted. and bookies who have assumed it is likely vvd would win. I guess they are all Liverpool fans. Have a rant about corrupt refs and how we'll finish fourth now that VAR is here (bonus points for VAR also being corrupt) and you can leave the thread with top marks.
This is getting a tad boring. I am sure there is some run somewhere where we scored more than city. Doesn't make our attack more prolific than theirs.I know what the mass perception is like. I question its veracity. Generally speaking, perception is not a simple window to reality but tends to be heavily influenced by preconceptions and narratives. In this case, the perception of VVD is heavily influenced by the narrative that he almost single-handedly transformed Liverpool from also-rans into proper challengers for the big titles. It's a simplsitic and thus wrong narrative. VVD was a very important piece of the puzzle but other such very important pieces are Alisson, Salah, Mane...
Numbers tell us that after adding VVD, Alisson and Fabinho to the first team Liverpool improved by only 4 pts in terms of xG. Last season you have outperformed xG by 14 pts! Which means that you scored more goals than expected and conceded less than expected. How come? Well, your forwards were very clinical and your keeper was outstanding.
I repeat my question: if you have (nearly) the best player in the world at the heart of your defence and arguably the best keeper and some of the best fullbacks in the world, why did you concede in the run in twice as many goals as City who are suposed to have inferior defensive players? In the last 14 games City conceded 4 and you 8 goals. How come? Note that Fernandinho (and KDB) missed half of those games and Laporte missed also 2-3 league games. If VVD is such an incomparable defensive beast, why did City outperform you in the run in defensively wise?
Messi was better than vvd, but you're tying yourself into some sour grape knots with all this "sterling would have won it if so and so".The coaches and journalists voted for the guy considered the key player/who had the biggest hype train of the team who won the CL. Which is pretty much what they're always gunna do.
Most people can accept that this is a stupid way to assess who actually had the best season, but it's mostly only Liverpool fans who argue it's fully deserved over Messi.
I've said over and over again in this thread that these awards are trophy-dependant since it would be Messi for 15 years straight if it was just the best player in the world, mate. You just come across as very bitter towards Liverpool and Van Dijk if I'm being honest.The coaches and journalists voted for the guy considered the key player/who had the biggest hype train of the team who won the CL. Which is pretty much what they're always gunna do.
Most people can accept that this is a stupid way to assess who actually had the best season, but it's mostly only Liverpool fans who argue it's fully deserved over Messi.
He would have done if they won the CL. One of City's players would have been recognised with that award if the team wins the quadruple.Messi was better than vvd, but you're tying yourself into some sour grape knots with all this "sterling would have won it if so and so".
It is in some cases, but it seems more like a popularity content to me. For instance Sneijder didn't win it after winning the treble with Inter Milan.I've said over and over again in this thread that these awards are trophy-dependant since it would be Messi for 15 years straight if it was just the best player in the world, mate. You just come across as very bitter towards Liverpool and Van Dijk if I'm being honest.
I can't say I remember too much from that game but it's weird that people say they deserved to win because they missed a penalty. They might've been better than us that game but if you don't take your chances and miss your own penalty, I'm not sure you "deserve" anything.They deserved to win at Anfield, so it's a moot point.
City won 25 form 30 pts against the top 6, Liverpool 19 from 30. It's obvious they were better in the big games despite having more injury problems than you.
How can you see that a CB is better than the keeper and the forwards when all of them are world class? Of course, your perception is influenced by narratives, it's how human minds work.This is getting a tad boring. I am sure there is some run somewhere where we scored more than city. Doesn't make our attack more prolific than theirs.
I don't think my perception of what I see happening on the pitch at match day is particularly influenced by perceptions of how he transformed us, etc. He plays real good and that's what I see. More often than not, I see him playing better on the day than our attackers.
If you want to wikipedia the discussion, go on ahead, but I find that too boring to participate in.
So .. the best player in the world would be consistently recognised as the best player in the world? There were a couple of years where I'd argue Ronaldo deserved it (or at least it was close) but otherwise sure, we shouldn't just give the award to somebody because we're bored.I've said over and over again in this thread that these awards are trophy-dependant since it would be Messi for 15 years straight if it was just the best player in the world, mate. You just come across as very bitter towards Liverpool and Van Dijk if I'm being honest.
They had also two other pen non-calls, especialy against Aguero in the first half. They were better.I can't say I remember too much from that game but it's weird that people say they deserved to win because they missed a penalty. They might've been better than us that game but if you don't take your chances and miss your own penalty, I'm not sure you "deserve" anything.
Did we deserve to win at the Etihad because we had a shot that was 2cm from crossing the goalline? It's closer than City got to a goal at Anfield.
I'm 99.9% sure that Sneijder wins that one if Robben scores his 1v1 with Casillas despite the fact that it wouldn't change a thing about Sneijder's 2010 season - that's how slim the margins are, but of course trophies going to influence the opinion of journalists. It's a team sport after all and you can only do so much as an individual.It is in some cases, but it seems more like a popularity content to me. For instance Sneijder didn't win it after winning the treble with Inter Milan.
By watching them every week and asking myself who was better/more important to the performance on the day. I think observing what happens on the pitch is far more influential for any conclusions than narrative.How can you see that a CB is better than the keeper and the forwards when all of them are world class? Of course, your perception is influenced by narratives, it's how human minds work.
We are more reliant on our defenders for our clean sheets than city are. City defend differently to us by virtue of superior possession and stopping counter attacks early better than we do. We have a fair number of games where we see out games by sitting deeper and defending out of possession. I would expect VVD and Allison to be more tested on that basis than city's backline, so not surprising that is what happened. VVD is better than Laporte, but he is also more important to how we play than Laporte is to city.The bare numbers indicate that despite the perception that you have superior defensive players than City they outperformed you defensively wise and won the title. Unsurprisingly, you have no answer to that, it doesn't quite fit the narrative and is a bit too easily brushed aside by pundits and fans.
I felt that was in terms of the execution a perfect away performance by City, they ground you down into submission then got their pen, Mahrez ruined what would have been a textbook description of how to play away at Anfield.I can't say I remember too much from that game but it's weird that people say they deserved to win because they missed a penalty. They might've been better than us that game but if you don't take your chances and miss your own penalty, I'm not sure you "deserve" anything.
Did we deserve to win at the Etihad because we had a shot that was 2cm from crossing the goalline? It's closer than City got to a goal at Anfield.
I agree VVD was better than Laporte, City's defensive organisation is probably more efficent than yours. That said, they leave more free spaces for the opposition to exploit and while the opposition sees less of the ball, if they manage to get it in behind the defenders, it's more difficult for the defenders and they seem more exposed than yours.By watching them every week and asking myself who was better/more important to the performance on the day. I think observing what happens on the pitch is far more influential for any conclusions than narrative.
We are more reliant on our defenders for our clean sheets than city are. City defend differently to us by virtue of superior possession and stopping counter attacks early better than we do. We have a fair number of games where we see out games by sitting deeper and defending out of possession. I would expect VVD and Allison to be more tested on that basis than city's backline, so not surprising that is what happened. VVD is better than Laporte, but he is also more important to how we play than Laporte is to city.
I am not saying narrative plays no part. Salah is a good example. He was still our best attacking player last season, but got very little credit for carrying the attacking burden for us in the first half of the season because he wasn't putting in record breaking numbers like the season before. Just that I don't think it is the main factor for watching them week in and week out. The claim I making based on it is just to compare him to our other players. I feel pretty solid on that comparison being based on how I see their performances.I agree VVD was better than Laporte, City's defensive organisation is probably more efficent than yours. That said, they leave more free spaces for the opposition to exploit and while the opposition sees less of the ball, if they manage to get it in behind the defenders, it's more difficult for the defenders and they seem more exposed than yours.
I don't quite agree with your claim to have a narrative-free perception of games but you come across as a fairly moderate and reasonable poster. Disagreements are inevitable, expecially with so different preferences and perspectives. For me VVD is an outstanding defender but the hype is strong as well and he get a bit more credit at the expense of the other top performers in your team. Alisson is probably as important as VVD and I think the same is the case with Salah who not only scores many golas but, unlike Mane, contributes many assists.
He's notI don't quite agree with your claim to have a narrative-free perception of games but you come across as a fairly moderate and reasonable poster.
My mom is indeed a terrible poster, her Facebook activity is horrendous.Your mom is not.
Grass.
What about her Tinder activity?My mom is indeed a terrible poster, her Facebook activity is horrendous.
okies i confess maybe the way I presented that idea came across silly. Do the completey different skillset of Messi mean he is a better footballer than the skillsets of VVD? I guess we tend to judge players based on attacking skills, so in this case defensive players can rarely get the recognition they may deserve.And post of the year goes to... The weird section that is. Yeah, Messi is probably a worse goalie than Ederson is a striker as well. Terrible footballer that Messi guy. Can only play world class from midfield and forward. Is vvd a world class fullback, midfielder and winger for instance? Doubt it.
I don't think many footballers' feelings will be hurt if you tell them Messi is the best in the world. Maybe Ronaldo would, but that is only because he is the only one capable of justifying a comparison. VVD had a great season, no doubt, but I think only a very small minority would claim he is an overall greater footballer than Messi.okies i confess maybe the way I presented that idea came across silly. Do the completey different skillset of Messi mean he is a better footballer than the skillsets of VVD? I guess we tend to judge players based on attacking skills, so in this case defensive players can rarely get the recognition they may deserve.
I know they already do this but maybe best overall footballer awards should be scrapped in favour of the best GK, Defender, midfielder, forward, that way fewer feelings will be hurt.