Gareth Bale is...The most expensive player ever?!

[The Neviller]

If your stats are intended to show that Huth or Ivanovic were better players then Bale last season, then no, your stats don't count for shit.

So what do your "11 goals for a left winger" stats count for? Stats always count for shit. You used them, I showed they were bollocks. Thanks for agreeing with me.

So back to Bale, PFA player of the year? Well deserved? Tell me why exactly. Bearing in mind his 11 goals now mean feck all, and the award is for premier league games, meaning his hat trick against inter means feck all, what exactly did he do to deserve this award and this hype, other than run very fast?

 

[The Neviller]

"etard" is not a word. That's why I said you took at "R" and put other words on the end.

"Retard" is a word, but you kept the "R" from Redwood, so it was not a full word substitution.

"edwood" is also not a word.

Let me know if you need anymore clarification of what you've written and what you haven't.

You really are thick. What other words did I put at the end of AlwaysR? Etard? That's not a word now is it, those are letters.

Carry on.

 

[The Neviller]

No. I just made a point, you said I was wrong, so I pointed out where you had.

Just me being right and you being wrong.

Glad we worked it out,

sincerely,

edwood.

Despite the fact that I didn't, did I genius? I said he deserved it more than Bale. I also wrote in that post "Did Nani deserve to win it? Maybe."

So "edwood" show me where I said Nani should have won the award.

 

[AlwaysRedwood]

You really are thick. What other words did I put at the end of AlwaysR? Etard? That's not a word now is it, those are letters.

Carry on.

Yes, sorry.

I was laughing so hard at your "retard" witty comment that I made an error. Meant "letters."

Anyway, if you'd like to teach me how to make such hilarious letter changes, please show me the way. I'm very interested.

 

[The Neviller]

Yes, sorry.

I was laughing so hard at your "retard" witty comment that I made an error. Meant "letters."

Anyway, if you'd like to teach me how to make such hilarious letter changes, please show me the way. I'm very interested.

You could call me The Nippler or something of that ilk. See, it's hilarious.

 

[AlwaysRedwood]

So "edwood" show me where I said Nani should have won the award.

I guess posting several comments about stats showing Nani was better, while whining about said award was nothing of the sort.

You are correct again.

Those posts were just....uh...for....

 

[AlwaysRedwood]

You could call me The Nippler or something of that ilk. See, it's hilarious.

I would but I have a healthy sense of shame.

 

[Cheesy]

So his fellow professionals know nothing about football and you know everything - right?

How many games did you actually see Bale play in last season (and I'm not talking about MOTD highlights) out of the 39 he appeared in?

And you realise he scored 11 goals (not too shabby for a left winger) - right?

It's not that his fellow professionals know nothing about football, it's just they probably made their selection based off of the media hype as well. They had more important issues instead of looking at the performance of each contender in great depth.

As another example to point out the flaws in your argument, did Giggs deserve to win the player of the year award in 2009?

 

[The Neviller]

I guess posting several comments about stats showing Nani was better, while whining about said award was nothing of the sort.

You are correct again.

Those posts were just....uh...for....

Do you read threads before you comment?

You do know that Glaston used Bale winning said award as a way of showing Bale was consistent, to which I responded that his winning of the award was an endorsement of the hype rather than proof of consistency, then went on to show stats, as initially used by Glaston, to show that Bale was way way down the list of productivity for said season, when a substantial amount of players, Nani included, were much higher?

You didn't read those parts though did you?

 

[The Neviller]

I would but I have a healthy sense of shame.

You hide it well.

 

[Boss]

It's not that his fellow professionals know nothing about football, it's just they probably made their selection based off of the media hype as well. They had more important issues instead of looking at the performance of each contender in great depth.

As another example to point out the flaws in your argument, did Giggs deserve to win the player of the year award in 2009?

Nope...but it was fun watching the scousers get riled over it.

 

[Ole'sbodyguard]

Do you read threads before you comment?

You do know that Glaston used Bale winning said award as a way of showing Bale was consistent, to which I responded that his winning of the award was an endorsement of the hype rather than proof of consistency, then went on to show stats, as initially used by Glaston, to show that Bale was way way down the list of productivity for said season, when a substantial amount of players, Nani included, were much higher?

You didn't read those parts though did you?

Using stats is abit of a red herring in this debate though, is it not?

For a start, and I have yet to see this refuted, the PFA award's voting is done during the midway point of the season, so the stats should really be limited to then rather than the entire season. I'm fairly sure this is still the case but open to be proven wrong.

Furthermore, the Players who voted for the award probably could not give a toss about stats or who was the most consistent player. They all would have their own individual reasons for handing in their vote. Media hype is probably one factor but is not a plausible explanation alone for him winning the award IMO.

Stats are useful and I personally don't think Bale was a particilarly deserving winner but there have always been winners like him during the history of the award. There was nothing unusual with him winning it.

 

[GlastonSpur]

So what do your "11 goals for a left winger" stats count for? Stats always count for shit. You used them, I showed they were bollocks. Thanks for agreeing with me.

So back to Bale, PFA player of the year? Well deserved? Tell me why exactly. Bearing in mind his 11 goals now mean feck all, and the award is for premier league games, meaning his hat trick against inter means feck all, what exactly did he do to deserve this award and this hype, other than run very fast?

You miss the point. Going by your stats alone, Huth and Ivanovic were apparently better players than Bale, when clearly they weren't.

But my citing 11 goals for Bale last season was not intended to show (by themselves) that his winnng the PFA award was (IMO) far from being a joke. You have to look at everything, most importantly seeing a player in action regardless of goals or assists. And on that basis Bale was clearly, at the very least, a worthy nominee for the award.

In fact I only cited his 11 goals in response to the earlier charge of "inconsistency", since 11 goals is far from being a shabby return for a left winger.

I stand by my earlier statement: Bale would be welcomed even now into the first XI of almost any team in the world.

If Bale continues to develop, how many Caftards would be truly shocked if Barca came calling for him next summer? I know I wouldn't.

 

[Cheesy]

Using stats is abit of a red herring in this debate though, is it not?

For a start, and I have yet to see this refuted, the PFA award's voting is done during the midway point of the season, so the stats should really be limited to then rather than the entire season. I'm fairly sure this is still the case but open to be proven wrong.

Furthermore, the Players who voted for the award probably could not give a toss about stats or who was the most consistent player. They all would have their own individual reasons for handing in their vote.

Stats are useful and I personally don't think Bale was a particilarly deserving winner but there have always been winners like him during the history of the award. There was nothing unusual with him winning it.

Stats can be useful in certain situations, but TN was simply proving that the stats Glaston gave us were flawed, and could easily be manipulated. You'll get stats which tell you Bale was productive last season, while you'll get stats which tell you he was distinctly average. When judging players as footballers, it's often better to steer clear of stats because they don't prove anything.

 

[GlastonSpur]

... the stats Glaston gave us were flawed...

No they weren't. I said that Bale scored 11 goals, which he did.

What you deduce from that stat is up to you.

 

[Cheesy]

You miss the point. Going by your stats alone, Huth and Ivanovic were apparently better players than Bale, when clearly they weren't.

But my citing 11 goals for Bale last season was not intended to show (by themselves) that his winnng the PFA award was (IMO) far from being a joke. You have to look at everything, most importantly seeing a player in action regardless of goals or assists. And on that basis Bale was clearly, at the very least, a worthy nominee for the award.

In fact I only cited his 11 goals in response to the earlier charge of "inconsistency", since 11 goals is far from being a shabby return for a left winger.

I stand by my earlier statement: Bale would be welcomed even now into the first XI of almost any team in the world.

If Bale continues to develop, how many Caftards would be truly shocked if Barca came calling for him next summer? I know I wouldn't.

I would be shocked if Barcelona came calling for him, when you look at the array of attacking talent they have. When Neymar arrives there, they'll have Messi, Villa, Sanchez, Pedro and Neymar himself, all of whom can play across the frontline. Why would they then spend a massive fee on Bale when he probably wouldn't make it into their first team?

 

[Cheesy]

No they weren't. I said that Bale scored 11 goals, which he did.

What you deduce from that stat is up to you.

You tried to use that stat to backup the fact that Bale was a player who deserved the player of the year award based on those stats, when they don't really prove anything, and some of them came outside of the Premier League, which the award was judged on.

 

[Bryan_Munich]

Barcelona have scouted him twice and Guardiola sees him as an attacking LB.

 

[Boss]

I don't think Bale's style of play suits Barca, he's way too gung ho.

We would be much better suited at Madrid, whether he's as good as Di Maria is another story.

 

[The Neviller]

Stats can be useful in certain situations, but TN was simply proving that the stats Glaston gave us were flawed, and could easily be manipulated. You'll get stats which tell you Bale was productive last season, while you'll get stats which tell you he was distinctly average. When judging players as footballers, it's often better to steer clear of stats because they don't prove anything.

Precisely. Stats are bollocks. Glastons "11 goals proves Bales consistency" is shite, when you look at the lesser players on that list who were more productive.

He's a good player, though inconsistent, and his actual ability has been blown out of proportion somewhat by a hyperbolic press keen to praise him for his Britishness, an award he didn't deserve to win and an over reaction by fanboys.

I've never said he isn't good, he just isn't as good as Glaston says he is, or as good as the media said he was this time last season.

 

[BaldwinLegend]

I don't think Bale's style of play suits Barca, he's way too gung ho.

We would be much better suited at Madrid, whether he's as good as Di Maria is another story.

This is so true. I'm starting to have a theory about Barca - they have such a deeply grooved style of playing that it's impossible for people who transfer into the team in their 20's to integrate with it, unless they're Pique or Fabregas. Even Villa was struggling a lot before injury. It's going to take quite a special player to come into that team in their 20's and fit in and I don't think Bale is that player.

He'd be much better suited to United...

 

[africanspur]

Ole'sbodyguard has written two excellent posts there, which better explain why Bale won the award than anything else I've read. And yep, the votes are indeed still done mid-season.

The award was undeserved for his season performances as a whole, I will say that but to suggest that players, who will actually, you know, play against him and see him in the flesh as well as on tv, may be slightly more suited to make judgments on players' abilities than us.

I think AlwaysRedwood is spot on with the awards as well. Most of the posts about Bale on this board since his award have seemed to revolve around him being a) over-rated and over-hyped, b) how Nani is significantly better and c)specifically, how Nani should have beaten him to the award.

If Bale were ever to move to Barcelona, I think he could potentially be moved to left back to be honest.

 

[africanspur]

Dani Alves has made that right back spot his own and he is 28...

 

[The Neviller]

Is Bale good enough defensively to go back again? Is that not the reason he was moved further forward in the first place? Spurs bought him as a left back, and he didn't particularly excell there, did he?

 

[Cheesy]

I wouldn't say that he's good enough as a defender, to be honest. There's a difference between a full back who's good at getting forward, and one who is incompetent in defence. There's a reason why Bale was made a winger. He should stay there.

 

[africanspur]

He played at leftback for 3 months from Jan-April 2010, where he was our best player in basically every match and was moved up when his attacking qualities were too much to be restricted to a leftback role. He did alright defensively actually.

The best thing about Bale at leftback was that the other team couldn't man-mark or even double mark him. And by the time he'd get to the halfway line, he'd already be at top speed and rather hard to get the ball off. So his attacking runs were fecking lethal.

At Barcelona, he wouldn't have to do too much defending would he? May be a bit of overkill in the biggest games but I think their possession play would allow them to get away with playing both Bale and Alves as fullbacks in their average fixture and basically camping them in the opposition half all game. Both have the pace and athleticism to get back when necessary too.

 

[Ralaks]

I think he could succeed as a left back for Barcelona, it's very different compared to playing a full back in the premier league. He could work well as a left sided Dani Alves imo, would be better in attack than whatever they have right now.

Also gives them a better option of trying out the three man defense again perhaps, maybe Guardiola still sees that as the way forward?

In fact, imagine Bale making runs like Alves does constantly, that would be fecking lethal.

 

[Ole'sbodyguard]

Ole'sbodyguard has written two excellent posts there, which better explain why Bale won the award than anything else I've read. And yep, the votes are indeed still done mid-season.

The award was undeserved for his season performances as a whole, I will say that but to suggest that players, who will actually, you know, play against him and see him in the flesh as well as on tv, may be slightly more suited to make judgments on players' abilities than us.

I think AlwaysRedwood is spot on with the awards as well. Most of the posts about Bale on this board since his award have seemed to revolve around him being a) over-rated and over-hyped, b) how Nani is significantly better and c)specifically, how Nani should have beaten him to the award.

If Bale were ever to move to Barcelona, I think he could potentially be moved to left back to be honest.

Cheers.

If the votes are still done mid-season then the reason Bale was in the top six and won are relatively easy to understand IMO. Winners like this have happened a fair few times in the past.

I think using the PFA award as an example of Bale being overhyped and overrated is harsh on him. He can't do anything about the fact that votes are made mid-season and he can't do anything about how players make their decision either.

I also don't buy the argument that he only got votes because of the media hype. It's a relevant factor but an unconvincing explanation as to solely explain WHY he won the award. Media hype does not explain all the old past winners who either won because they were great from August to December or who picked up votes due to other factors(such as Hughesie, Pally, Ferdinand, Ginola, Giggs and Teddy).

For me, most the arguments in this thread would be far more relevant to a discussion on the merits of the Footballer writers award, not the PFA one, which I think is much more closely aligned to how a fan or pundit would evaluate a player. Considering Cantona won it in 95/96 I don't think they are hamstrung by the mid season voting either, which for me is ridicilious.

 

[The Neviller]

The thing is, I haven't even said I don't rate him, I do, he's a good player and he'd be an upgrade at United to Young or Valencia. He'd play on the left at United with Nani on the right, with the other two as backup, if he were to come here. And IF United were to sign him I wouldn't say it was a bad signing as he's not good enough, I've never said he isn't good enough for United. He is a good player, and could go on to be even better, but he's still over rated, and massively so, as well as over hyped. Bale is a good player, but not as good as suggested, and somewhat inconsistent. He's also a bit predictable in that he's mostly about knocking the ball and running. It works for him so fair enough, but it's what he's best at, there's no doubt about that.

 

[Ole'sbodyguard]

Personally, I think it is undeniable that Bale was overhyped by the media after the second half of last season.

I also think this has led to him being under-rated and abit overcriticised by posters on the CAF.

I'd love to have Bale at United and think we could develop him into something fantastic and someone who could be a threat against any team in the world. I reckon he's the second best winger in the league currently after Nani and that they gap between them is not as big as some Caftards like to make out. He needs a full season of consistent performances though and to continue adding the variety to his game which he seems to be developing at the moment. Nani now has a full season of consistent football behind him(last year) and has carried that into this season.

I prefer Nani style and the type of player he is but it's harsh on Bale for him to be pigeon holed as one dimensional and predictable. He's got more about him than that.

 

[Bross]

Bale was certainly well worth being one of the short-listed nominees for the award. Whether he should have won it is a more open question, but his winning it was very far from being a "joke" - which was the point I responded to.

It was a joke.

 

[Ole'sbodyguard]

It was a joke.

Why was it a joke?

Do you also think it is a joke that players like Mark Hughes(88/89 not 90/91 when he was magnificent all year), Gary Pallister, Les Ferdinand, David Ginola, Teddy Sherringham and Ryan Giggs have all won the award when there were a fair few others who could have been seen to have been more deserving?

Also can you name me six more deserving players than Bale limiting this from August to December, when the voting was done?

Also do you think the PFA might have different criteria and reasons for voting than Internet posters, or pundits?

It becomes a much finer debate when the context of the voting is recognised, and the past history/who are voting is considered.

 

[Bross]

AlwaysRedwood and The Neviller with a late contender for the "Spastic Discussion of the Year" Award

 

[RedThaiDevils#7]

All I understand is that, few posters think Bale is overrated ( Okay considering the latter stage of last season he wasn't playing that well there was an excuse for that as he wasn't showing Inter-rape performances ) but this season he isn't getting all the hype buy has done tremendously well... So what we should say is that he was a bit over-hyped at the end of last season but right now, he's turning into some player and is underrated in a way... So its best to just let things unfold this season... Bale has been improving as a player, his kick and run style is fine as long as it has end results which he's certainly been improving...

He and Nani would be a dream combo now but I doubt that we'd have the power to lure him to Old trafford if Spurs reaches the CL again, also he might want to try his abilities in Spain.

 

[Bross]

Why was it a joke?

Do you also think it is a joke that players like Mark Hughes(88/89 not 90/91 when he was magnificent all year), Gary Pallister, Les Ferdinand, David Ginola, Teddy Sherringham and Ryan Giggs have all won the award when there were a fair few others who could have been seen to have been more deserving?

Also can you name me six more deserving players than Bale limiting this from August to December, when the voting was done?

Also do you think the PFA might have different criteria and reasons for voting than Internet posters, or pundits?

It becomes a much finer debate when the context of the voting is recognised, and the past history/who are voting is considered.

Its a joke when the award is used in the context of arguing that Bale was in fact the best player of last season, which is what people like Glaston are trying to say in this thread. I can understand Bale winning the award under the circumstances of the players being idiots and not voting for the actual best player because they are biased against players like Nani because he has a history of being a big fanny, or Vidic not getting many votes because as a CB, only opponent strikers are likely to vote for him.

Its not a valid representation of who the actual best player was over the course of a season. Giggs' award was equally a big joke. I personally dont understand how Rooney won it over Drogba in 09/10 either, though he was amongst the top 2 performers that season at least. I wasnt around watching football closely when Hughes, Pallister, Ginola and Ferdinand won their awards.

The award is the only (somewhat) respected end of the season award in the Prem and will be used historically to see who was the standout player of each season. In 50 years time, people will see the list of winners and think Bale was the best player in the 10/11 season, which is a joke.

I would have Nani, Nasri, Kompany, Vidic, Tevez ahead of Bale from August to December. And even then Bale wouldnt necessarily be my 6th pick, just one of the many "non-standout" players below that top 5, with players like VDS, VDV, Modric, Berba etc

 

[Ole'sbodyguard]

Its a joke when the award is used in the context of arguing that Bale was in fact the best player of last season, which is what people like Glaston are trying to say in this thread. I can understand Bale winning the award under the circumstances of the players being idiots and not voting for the actual best player because they are biased against players like Nani because he has a history of being a big fanny, or Vidic not getting many votes because as a CB, only opponent strikers are likely to vote for him.

Its not a valid representation of who the actual best player was over the course of a season. Giggs' award was equally a big joke. I personally dont understand how Rooney won it over Drogba in 09/10 either, though he was amongst the top 2 performers that season at least. I wasnt around watching football closely when Hughes, Pallister, Ginola and Ferdinand won their awards.

The award is the only (somewhat) respected end of the season award in the Prem and will be used historically to see who was the standout player of each season. In 50 years time, people will see the list of winners and think Bale was the best player in the 10/11 season, which is a joke.

I would have Nani, Nasri, Kompany, Vidic, Tevez ahead of Bale from August to December. And even then Bale wouldnt necessarily be my 6th pick, just one of the many "non-standout" players below that top 5, with players like VDS, VDV, Modric, Berba etc

If Glaston is seriously arguing Bale was the best player of last season he is clueless but I don't that his argument.

Attacking players normally win the award so I reckon you are right that centre backs and also keepers are hindered in the vote. I reckon Nani's gamesmanship might have counted against him getting some votes from players as well but then Ronnie was abit like that in 06/07 and it did not stop him winning the award. It's certainly a relevant factor, mind you and is one of the reasons why the PFA award is a very different award than some other ones. Cheers for an opinion that was not solely based on media hype

I reckon Giggs won the award in 08/09 as a reflection of the level of respect footballers had for him due to him still being a top player at his age and doing that after close to two decades in the game. It's not the criteria I would use but I would not say that makes him winning the award a joke. It's what his peers thought most relevant in a season when their were no real standout contenders unlike some years like o6/07 when Ronnie and Drobga were consistently good from day one or 07/08 when Ronaldo was on another planet from day one.

Hughesie winning the award in 88/89 was during a season when United finished mid table and the most consistent players over the course of the season would have mainly been from Arsenal, and Liverpool. He scored 14 league goals, not especially prolific. He won the award because he had given so many centre backs and others their most difficult game that year going on the media comments at the time and some of the player comments. There some genuinally top players players during that period as well and a number of Arsenal and LFC players had excellent seasons(e.g. Adams, Merson, Smith, Barnes, Beardsley, etc). For me this does not make Hughesie's win a joke but a reflection that professional footballers don't and never have voted for the award the way fans, the media or pundits would do.

Ginola probably won in 99 because so many United players had very good seasons that the vote was split(e.g. Yorke, Keane and Becks) whereas Teddy and Ferdinand had excellent half seasons but had mediocre second halfs of the season.

The PFA award should never been seen as who the standout player was during that year due to it's voting. I still think it's worth a degree of respect because it's an award voted for by the Players but it's not a conventional award by any means.

I'd probably agree with your six but would have Bale as the sixth player. I would have not given it to him but it's more understandable as he was one of the better players during the first half of the season. Like I said before I think his form at the back end of the other season also would have been a factor in how some cast their votes and of course the hype his displays against Inter generated would have put him over other contenders in other people's eyes. If it was based on the whole season it would look ludicrious but as the votes are done it's abit more understandable.

 

[AlwaysRedwood]

AlwaysRedwood and The Neviller with a late contender for the "Spastic Discussion of the Year" Award

If you took a word of that seriously, I think you might be the spaz.

 

[Bross]

I agree with everything in your post mate. I guess whats really bugging me is that there is no real valid award at the end of each season which really showcases who the best player was over the course of a season. As you say a lot of other factors play in to the PFA award, and in the end, unless its absolutely obvious like Ronaldo in 07/08, the players rarely get it right, which means that future generations will look back and think Bale was the best player of 10/11.

I think there should be some award where captains, managers and selected journalists cast their votes, similar to the World Player of the Year award. But then again, the Football Writers Association voted Parker as PotY, ahead of ... *drumroll* ... Gareth Bale...

 

[Bross]

If you took a word of that seriously, I think you might be the spaz.

Doesnt matter if it were a genuine discussion or if you were trying to have a little fun "banter". It's still a spastic discussion that clogged up almost an entire page adding nothing to the discussion.

 

[Ole'sbodyguard]

I agree with everything in your post mate. I guess whats really bugging me is that there is no real valid award at the end of each season which really showcases who the best player was over the course of a season. As you say a lot of other factors play in to the PFA award, and in the end, unless its absolutely obvious like Ronaldo in 07/08, the players rarely get it right, which means that future generations will look back and think Bale was the best player of 10/11.

I think there should be some award where captains, managers and selected journalists cast their votes, similar to the World Player of the Year award. But then again, the Football Writers Association voted Parker as PotY, ahead of ... *drumroll* ... Gareth Bale...

It would be good for a differnet award to conceived. Having the PFA award voting actually done closer to the end of the season would be a much bigger help. Normally the Footballers writers award is a fair choice but they also have their anomalies(like Scott fecking Parker).

I disagree though that anyone will see Bale as the best player of 2011 just because he won the PFA award. It's only 15 years ago but I don't think anyone who watched even a cursory selection of the key moments or read anything about 96 would have anyone other than Eric as the country's top player that season. Similarly I don't think anyone who did any reading or saw any of the key moments from 88/89 would have Sparky as the top player that season.