I tell you what Ramsey will be better than Anderson before too long let alone Fabregas.
Anderson - is he the 'real deal'? | Retires age 31
- Thread starter Jopub
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
You sound like a Liverpool supporter
Pete we talk this stuff on our forums mate. Not here.
He's on a wind-up... or he hit his head this morning (with a pile driver)
Wilshere maybe. Crazy talk to be making those sort of claims about Ramsey.
Every Arsenal player is and will always be better tha United's according to Pete.
However it's always us standing with the trophies. Strange that.
However it's always us standing with the trophies. Strange that.
That's what I think, and hope...
Showing your side up he is, sort him out...
No crazier than suggesting that Anderson will eclipse Fabregas as a CM, much less crazy in fact.
We've heard it all before though Pogue, how many have actually lived up to the hype? a hand full....
Still crazy though.
(After all these years)*
*Bonus points for exact song title, artist and date of release.
Get off Fabregas cock for a minute and read what you have been writing... if you're trying to mirror some of the ott comments we get re Anderson you should know most of those are from spotty teenagers. Must try harder pete...
This suggests you think Andy is better than Fabregas, mate. Nice one.
Rhyming Simon - who also had the line about one man's ceiling being another man's floor.
Arsenal's kids will always be over-hyped, thanks to the location and affiliations of all of the most popular sports journalists. James Lawton being one of the most cringeworthy.
I do think their current crop is the best in a while and that Wilshere is gonna be a phenomenal player.
Ramsey? Probably. The jury's still out but he looks a decent player and when SAF and Wenger duke it out over the same young footballer, chances are he's got what it takes.
Anderson might well turn out to better than any of them, mind you. As has been pointed out loads of times in this thread, he's really played very little senior football and he's already starting to look at home in the Premier League. Definitely a rough diamond but a diamond nonetheless.
All I ever wanted was for someone to take over from the ginger ninja, It'll take some doing but if he can then I'll be happy...
I wanted the same.
As it happens I don't think Anderson will ever be able to do the things that Scholes can. On the plus side, he's already doing things that Scholes never could.
So, he'll be a different player to Scholes but the team might still be just as strong, so long as we work out how to make the most of Anderson's talents.
I hope you're wrong there...
Totally different type of player.
True but he can learn stuff FROM scholes, he'll never BE scholes... I can hope.
This is an exemplary post in two respects. First, it illustrates a common confusion and conflation -- mixing up character and physical attributes. This happens all the time when people talk about sports; it's inevitable, I suppose, in an activity intrinsically about physical accomplishment.
Second, it's a cautionary example of what can happen to your ideas if your brain stops working.
Fabregas is "a powderpuff attacking midfielder." I guess saying this, in order to contrast him with Anderson, makes sense in two respects (allowing, of course, for a rival supporter's hyperbole). (A) that he plays an attacking role as opposed to the quasi-defensive one, which Anderson plays; and we all know that holding midfielders are the hard men. (B) that Cesc doesn't have the same kind of body as Anderson; he is smaller and weaker.
Indeed. I -- and several others -- have already pointed out that Cesc and Anderson are very different kind of footballers.
The stoopiditee comes in with the confusion between physical weakness and mental weakness. What Bilbo seems to believe is that a winning character -- or whatever you want to call it -- manifests itself only in one form -- in that hard-man, blood-and-thunder type. In fact, Cesc is one of the more competitive players out there and has a real will to win -- a will, moreover, that he has brought to accomplishment many many times.
In fact, you could look at it along these lines: Cesc has "by himself" won more games than Anderson has. But again, this doesn't mean he has a stronger character than Anderson. It's because of the nature of his role on the pitch, as the orchestrator of Arsenal's attack.
(Btw, to make a digression into cultural psychology, it occurs to me that Bilbo's ideas are quintessentially English ideas about football. You wouldn't see a Spaniard, Brazilian, or Italian formulate judgments about football along the same lines at all. And, moreover, that that is why English players tend to have the weaknesses that they do, like technical insufficiency and tactical naivete.)
and here's Bilbo again, making the same error. Anderson is in fact much more of the Keane/Vieira type than Cesc is. It's simply not a relevant comparison.
I love James Lawton. He is unbelievably, amazing, spectacularly, brilliantly, wonderfully inclined to get caught up in his flights of poetic fancy and lose all touch with the solid earth of reality.
Thats a spectacular amount of bollocks Jens. And the sad thing is, it looks like you really made the effort too.This is an exemplary post in two respects. First, it illustrates a common confusion and conflation -- mixing up character and physical attributes. This happens all the time when people talk about sports; it's inevitable, I suppose, in an activity intrinsically about physical accomplishment.
Second, it's a cautionary example of what can happen to your ideas if your brain stops working.
Fabregas is "a powderpuff attacking midfielder." I guess saying this, in order to contrast him with Anderson, makes sense in two respects (allowing, of course, for a rival supporter's hyperbole). (A) that he plays an attacking role as opposed to the quasi-defensive one, which Anderson plays; and we all know that holding midfielders are the hard men. (B) that Cesc doesn't have the same kind of body as Anderson; he is smaller and weaker.
Indeed. I -- and several others -- have already pointed out that Cesc and Anderson are very different kind of footballers.
The stoopiditee comes in with the confusion between physical weakness and mental weakness. What Bilbo seems to believe is that a winning character -- or whatever you want to call it -- manifests itself only in one form -- in that hard-man, blood-and-thunder type. In fact, Cesc is one of the more competitive players out there and has a real will to win -- a will, moreover, that he has brought to accomplishment many many times.
In fact, you could look at it along these lines: Cesc has "by himself" won more games than Anderson has. But again, this doesn't mean he has a stronger character than Anderson. It's because of the nature of his role on the pitch, as the orchestrator of Arsenal's attack.
(Btw, to make a digression into cultural psychology, it occurs to me that Bilbo's ideas are quintessentially English ideas about football. You wouldn't see a Spaniard, Brazilian, or Italian formulate judgments about football along the same lines at all. And, moreover, that that is why English players tend to have the weaknesses that they do, like technical insufficiency and tactical naivete.)
and here's Bilbo again, making the same error. Anderson is in fact much more of the Keane/Vieira type than Cesc is. It's simply not a relevant comparison.
I love James Lawton. He is unbelievably, amazing, spectacularly, brilliantly, wonderfully inclined to get caught up in his flights of poetic fancy and lose all touch with the solid earth of reality.
EDIT: I will say though, with regards to your final bracketed paragraph, that this leads me to predict that you have probably never actually played a game of football yourself.
The fact is Fabregas doesn't have the same fight that Anderson has, that's clear to anyone.
We've admitted the same about Carrick lacking that fight, you should be able to about Fabregas.
I have never once heard any Arsenal fan on the planet utter even a hint of a bad word about Fabregas. Which is kind of understandable, given that he is jewel in the crown over at the Emirates, but also somewhat reflective of their own managers failings to see any of the faults in his own squad.
I've read plenty on Arsenal forums saying he should be dropped if he continues to not put the effort in, and a few of them seem to be as sick about him eventually moving to Spain as some of us are about Ronaldo and Madrid.
slowly, now, step away from the ring of power ...
you are an idiot.
after tha daft statement, i won't take anything you say about the game seriously.
you not only have a crystal ball, you also reckon Alan Smith was as good a central midfielder as Anderson. seriously!!!
What an absolute load of shit
We seem to have a group of Arses on a WUM - in this case they are riding peterstorey's syphilitic c*ck.
Jeez. Not like you to be quite so uncouth, FS. Having a grumpy one?
It seemed a(n un)natural extension when I'd typed 'Arses on a WUM' and thought of the WUMmiest poster in the thread - who therefore deserves a bit of extra opprobrium.Jeez. Not like you to be quite so uncouth, FS. Having a grumpy one?
100% hand-on-my-heart honesty, it's not clear to me. I believe - -again, in all sincerity -- that Cesc has tons of fight and determination and character.
I'd be genuinely interested if you could explain why the opposite seems so clear to you. Maybe we are disagreeing over the facts; on the other hand (though I doubt it) maybe by "fight" we mean different things?
When the going gets tough he doesn't step up and take the game by the scruff of the neck, although he does make the team tick. Where was he against Stoke? It's not even the fact that he didn't play well, but players like Keane would have lead their team even when not playing well and set an example of how everyone else should go about their work.
He's not an inspirational character in terms of his attitude and work-rate either.
All things which show a sign of fight.
Why are you comparing a lad, who's barely out of his 20s, with Roy Keane?
Seriously, I don't know how anyone could deny that that Fabregas is way ahead of Anderson, in every aspect of his game, for now. Even if Anderson never gets as good as Fabregas is right now, he could still become a decent footballer. Fabregas is probably already one of the top 6 or 7 best central midfielders in Europe, IMO.
Fabregash is symtopmatic of Arsenal - bunch of feckin' fannies
This much has been established
This much has been established
I'm comparing someone with very little fight to someone well-known for having an enormous amount of fight. Seems a lot easier than going through a list of players and trying to remember someone else at 20 who has plenty of fight, like Anderson.
I agree with the second part, I don't remember reading anyone who did say that Fabregas isn't a better player than Anderson in this thread anyway and it would be stupid to.
So you're focussing on the fight thing only?
Cause I've seen Fabregas pretty much carry his entire team on his back, on a number of occasions, something Ive never seen Anderson do.
But like I said, this is no shame on Anderson. He's a 20 year old rough diamond, who is still finding his feet in the Premier League. It's almost unfair to compare him with someone who is the best player in Arsenal's squad, by quite some margin.
Yeah, that's all I was commenting on.
Fabregas has dominated midfields, Fabregas has dominated games for the entire 90 minutes and he is the difference between a 1 goal win and a 4 goal win in the same way Scholes is to us(as you pointed out before).
He's better in every single technical area of the game I can think of bar dribbling, and he is light years ahead of him in terms of footballing intelligence.
Yup. That's what I think.
On the plus side - for us United fans - Anderson is more gifted, genetically, in terms of natural strength and speed. And he is very talented on the ball. If he can make the most of these gifts - combined with the improvement in decision-making and reading of the game that will come with age - then, and only then, will we be talking about a player who could be better than Fabregas.
Okay. First thing, I guess, is to make this one thing clear: My thinking that Cesc has fight does not mean I think Anderson doesn't, or even that I think Cesc has more than Anderson. I am arguing with the absolute assertion that Cesc is not a fighter. You understand that, I assume.
That's all that's relevant to this thread. So I made another.
https://www.redcafe.net/f7/cesc-fabregas-character-competitiveness-225174/#post5390946
Are you actually going to comment on the footballing issues or are you just going to be rude (and later pedantic)?