Is Suarez in the same bracket as Henry? | If so, is he better?

Really? He has played 49 times and scored 53 for Barcelona. He almost took Liverpool to winning the league, Sturridge/Sterling don't quite look the same without him (assuming fit).
Same Sterling that earned a himself £50m transfer the season after he left and Sturridge who still retains the best goals per minute record in Premier League history?

Him carrying Liverpool is a myth hence why they were are perennial midtable team the season before Sturridge's arrival.
 
Same level but Henry shades it for me. Some people in this thread are forgetting how good he was. On his day, he too was unstoppable.
 
Last edited:
Henry was part of one the most hated teams for United fans.
True. But as someone said history forgets a great players rough patches. Not many people will remember Henry's cnutishness simply because that was over a decade ago. But Suarez is still playing and so we can see him every week and analyze and dissect his performance
 
Funnily, I feel the exact opposite.

Henry had a knack for turning up with absolutely outrageous goals like the one he scored with his back to goal against us, but I don't think his impact on the general team play is as big as Suarez's.
Absolute nonsense. Henry is the most complete forward to play the game alongside Ronaldo.

Have you watched Suarez at Barcelona? He's a glorfieid poacher these days, all the playmaking goes through Neymar & especially Messi. There's a reason he's scored so many despite his erratic finishing.
 
Same Sterling that earned a himself £50m transfer the season after he left and Sturridge who still retains the best goals per minute record in Premier League history?

Him carrying Liverpool is a myth hence why they were are perennial midtable team the season before Sturridge's arrival.

Sterling hasn't even been 1/4 of the player since and Sturridge has barely played enough mintues to make that stat relevant.

Out of that SAS combo, the only name that deserved a capital was Suarez. He lifted the others to play out of their skin, and was the easily main driver for their title charge. Not to forget he's gone out and stepped up at Barcelona to a level better than Henry did.
 
Can't emphasize this enough. Suarez dragged them to a place they had no business being at.

When Arsenal declined after the Invincible season, Henry couldn't do anything about it. Also had a trophyless season at Barca with a team that had Ronaldinho, Eto'o and Messi.

Compare 2011 Uruguay with 98-2000 France. No contest. Suarez all day, seven days a week.
What kind of argument is that? Is Suarez to blame for Liverpool not winning a single trophy during his three and a half years there?

For the record, I think they're pretty similar. Henry was better to watch, and had a better all round game, but both were unstoppable at their best. Suarez last season scored more goals than Henry's ever managed in a single year, but I'd argue that has just as much to do with the way top level football has changed in the last decade, with all the talent consolidating at a small number of clubs. I'd pick Henry, but then he is my favourite player of all time. :wenger:
 
I have no doubt in my mind that peak Henry would score 50+ ggoals for this Barca side. Henry on the wane scored 30 in a Barca team not as direct as this side.
 
Suarez best season for Liverpool might just be the most overrated season ever.

He was very very good, don't get me wrong, but I've just seen it called the best individual season of the PL, which is such absolute bollocks.

In PL only, Henry was comfortably better.
Exactly. That argument also ignores how long Suarez was in the Premiership - there's no reason to ignore the rest of his time in the league.
 
He had probably the best individual season seen in the PL, outscoring Henry's best season. Again, without taking pens or free kicks. At one stage that season he'd scored around 20 goals in 10 games.
Drogba scored 29 goals in 31 starts with no penalties in 2010 while scoring crucial goals against United, Liverpool & Arsenal in the title run in.

Suarez scored 31 goals in 33 starts with no penalties and bottled it when it mattered most against Chelsea's B team at Anfield.

I'll take Drogba's season ahead of Suarez's.
 
For me Suarez is the better player. If I could choose between a 26 year old non-biting, non-racist Suarez and a 26 year old Henry, I'd take the former. Close though.
 
Absolute nonsense. Henry is the most complete forward to play the game alongside Ronaldo.

Have you watched Suarez at Barcelona? He's a glorfieid poacher these days, all the playmaking goes through Neymar & especially Messi. There's a reason he's scored so many despite his erratic finishing.

I'm using his performance at Pool in his last two seasons as a barometer. Everyone defer to Messi in play making at Barca nowadays.
 
Suarez best season for Liverpool might just be the most overrated season ever.

He was very very good, don't get me wrong, but I've just seen it called the best individual season of the PL, which is such absolute bollocks.

In PL only, Henry was comfortably better.
Because he "carried them" apparently despite Sterling easily being Liverpool's best player in the run in while Suarez went missing against Man City & Chelsea B.

He put up great numbers but couldn't finish it off like Mahrez & Vardy did last season.
 
In the Premiership, Henry is the best there has been.

Overall, Henry did it for longer. At their peak, I'd call it a dead race.
 
Suarez is a better goal scorer and Henry is a better player as far leadership and importance of him in the team is concerned. Also Henry was more professional than Saurez could ever be. Henry never bit any one either.
 
As someone who's seen Henry play more often for France and Barca than Arsenal I'd say Suarez is in a higher bracket and it's not really close.
 
Like Henry a lot and obviously rate him very high in his pump, but for me both him and Suarez are on the same level. Each has advantage over the other in certain areas but to me they are at the same level overall.

Suarez can surpass him obviously if he keeps the level he was on last year.
 
Henry was better. Apart from being a brilliant goalscorer, Henry's overall influence on Arsenal's game was incredible. He was part playmaker, part winger and part striker for then, not to mention a leader and icon player. In that sense of being more than a striker, there are similarities to Messi in Henry, even if not to the same extent.

As someone who's seen Henry play more often for France and Barca than Arsenal I'd say Suarez is in a higher bracket and it's not really close.
I respect the view that Suarez is better, but there's no chance he's better and "it's not even close".
 
In terms of skill and ability then for sure yes but with every other aspect of being a professional footballer and human being then no. He's got alot better than he use to be but he will always be a little dirty rat to me.
 
Henry played in a great Arsenal side.

Suárez elevated Sterling, Henderson and Courinho to a title challenge.
Going by that logic, Bale and Suarez are better than Ronaldo and Messi.

That Liverpool team was really good. Everything fell into place. There's no reason peak Henry, Ronaldo, Messi, Ronaldhinio couldn't match what Suarez did there.
 
I don't know much about Henry, but Suarez constantly makes world class tricks look easy.
 
Even as a Liverpool fan I will admit that Henry was the better player. Henry in the Prem was ahead of his time. He was the best player I have ever see live and I think some people forget how good he was in his prime (23 assists as a Forward :lol:).
 
That would still be around 16 goals in 25 matches against stronger opponents, and he contributed a lot more than just goals. Liverpool have been around EL or midtable level for years and Suarez would have dragged them to a title if not for a slip.

And Henry didn't? That's my point. Henry is arguably the greatest striker to play in the league and yet he also he has the record for the most assists in a season. His all-round ability was exceptional. That's why I don't see much merit in the fact Suarez's best season saw him score 31 goals to Henry's 30. Henry never played in a team as weak as Liverpool so it's unfair to use that against him. Worth noting in 2013/14 Liverpool scored over 100 league goals, but when Arsenal went unbeaten they only scored 73, with Henry bagging 30.

It doesn't matter who his goals come against, you can only beat the teams put in front of you.

He had probably the best individual season seen in the PL, outscoring Henry's best season. Again, without taking pens or free kicks. At one stage that season he'd scored around 20 goals in 10 games.

It does matter who his goals came against if you're going to argue he had the greatest PL season ever. Suarez's record against the biggest and best sides was underwhelming, simple as. He didn't score once against the other top three sides that season. That for me is a pretty big factor. Perfectly reasonable claim Suarez had the best PL season ever, not for me though.

As a sidenote, not sure why you'd discount free-kicks, it's an incredibly tough skill to be able take them well. Penalties I can understand, although that also can be unfair as the player who took it might have earned it.
 
And Henry didn't? That's my point. Henry is arguably the greatest striker to play in the league and yet he also he has the record for the most assists in a season. His all-round ability was exceptional. That's why I don't see much merit in the fact Suarez's best season saw him score 31 goals to Henry's 30. Henry never played in a team as weak as Liverpool so it's unfair to use that against him. Worth noting in 2013/14 Liverpool scored over 100 league goals, but when Arsenal went unbeaten they only scored 73, with Henry bagging 30.



It does matter who his goals came against if you're going to argue he had the greatest PL season ever. Suarez's record against the biggest and best sides was underwhelming, simple as. He didn't score once against the other top three sides that season. That for me is a pretty big factor. Perfectly reasonable claim Suarez had the best PL season ever, not for me though.

As a sidenote, not sure why you'd discount free-kicks, it's an incredibly tough skill to be able take them well. Penalties I can understand, although that also can be unfair as the player who took it might have earned it.
Great statistic. People keep bringing up this point about Liverpool being trash but they were an excellent side that year, especially in attack, as evidenced by this particular stat.
 
Maybe Henry did it over a longer period but there is not much there. At their best, both of them are as good as it gets in terms of strikers with the exception of Fat Ronaldo. After those three, I would rank Ruud, Shevchenko, Agüero, Lewandowski, Zlatan and maybe Shearer as the best forwards of the past 20 years or so.
Van Basten, Müller, Puskas, Romario are easily better than anyone bar Ronaldo, who you mentioned.
Romario also is one of the forwards of the past 20 years, and he is on a different level to Ruud, Lewa etc.
Sheva proved himself to be a ridiculously prolific striker in the best (and, what's important, great defensively) league in the world - Suarez dominated average Premier league (with atrocious scoring record against big teams btw) and he is now steamrolling through La Liga with the likes of Messi, Iniesta and Neymar at his side.

Henry was playing at a much stronger league and he has creativity Suarez lacks, even though he matches him (and maybe even is ahead of him already) at goalscoring. At the end of his career he probably will be in the same tier as Henry and Sheva, but I won't say that he is now.
 
Suarez was/is a hard worker with less technique. He was a mediocre player in Nacional and failed tests at teams such as Flamengo and Mexican clubs. He went to Holland and worked his way from the bottom.

Henry was always a virtuoso, since he was a teenager it was a sure thing he would be great.

I don't know, I just prefer the virtuoso types vs the hard working guys. So for me Henry is superior.
 
Going by that logic, Bale and Suarez are better than Ronaldo and Messi.

That Liverpool team was really good. Everything fell into place. There's no reason peak Henry, Ronaldo, Messi, Ronaldhinio couldn't match what Suarez did there.

Was it?

Because they've been average without him. Sterling didn't look as good without him. Henderson has never recaptured his form from that season either.

The only player who has benefitted from Suárez leaving is Coutinho who became the player they built around instead.

I don't know what place Ronaldinho has in the conversation. Very different player to the other four.

Or Ronaldo and Messi. They are a level above everyone else.

I would personally have Henry ahead of Suárez as a personal preference, but Suárez is a Ballon d'Or calibre player.

Bale would score a lot more goals if Madrid weren't built around Ronaldo.
 
Was it?

Because they've been average without him. Sterling didn't look as good without him. Henderson has never recaptured his form from that season either.

The only player who has benefitted from Suárez leaving is Coutinho who became the player they built around instead.

I don't know what place Ronaldinho has in the conversation. Very different player to the other four.

Or Ronaldo and Messi. They are a level above everyone else.

I would personally have Henry ahead of Suárez as a personal preference, but Suárez is a Ballon d'Or calibre player.

Bale would score a lot more goals if Madrid weren't built around Ronaldo.
Yes, it was. They were cracking in attack that season. Suarez didn't magically make Sturridge fit, make Sterling turn into ( at the time) possibly the teenager around, give Henderson the ability to play delightful creative passes or make Liverpool press teams into submission. Everything came together that session. Whatever the names people find average, the team itself was brilliant offensively. Suarez played a huge part in it but so did a lot of other things coming together at the time, one of it being what Rodgers got out of everyone and his tactics. Obviously not possible without Suarez, but he didn't exactly lift mediocrity to absurd heights like some think.

As someone mentioned, that teams scored over a 100 PL goals with Suarez getting less than a third. The rest didn't just come out of thin air. The level of cohesion in the team was supremely high. Thankfully they couldn't defend very well. As he also posted, Arsenal only scored 70 odd goals in their invincible season with Henry bagging 30.

The point I'm making, and it appears obvious to me, was that Liverpool were brilliant in attack as a team.

And yes, all those players I mentioned were relevant because the logic of using Suarez's efforts with Liverpool to beat another player with, is flawed. We've never seen Henry play in a team whose names sound dull but whose attack is excellent during the season. My guess is that Henry would just as well given he was the best PL player I've ever seen.

Your bale point has no relevance whatsoever. Why even mention that?
 
Van Basten, Müller, Puskas, Romario are easily better than anyone bar Ronaldo, who you mentioned.
Romario also is one of the forwards of the past 20 years, and he is on a different level to Ruud, Lewa etc.
Sheva proved himself to be a ridiculously prolific striker in the best (and, what's important, great defensively) league in the world - Suarez dominated average Premier league (with atrocious scoring record against big teams btw) and he is now steamrolling through La Liga with the likes of Messi, Iniesta and Neymar at his side.

Henry was playing at a much stronger league and he has creativity Suarez lacks, even though he matches him (and maybe even is ahead of him already) at goalscoring. At the end of his career he probably will be in the same tier as Henry and Sheva, but I won't say that he is now.
I think you missed the part when I said "past 20 years". Clearly if we go as far back as Müller there are plenty more names to be considered. Since the mid '90s however, I think you are being unfair on Suarez when you imply that it's easy at Barcelona. How many top forwards we have seen go there and struggle to adapt and dominate the way he did? Last season, he was the best player in a team that included Iniesta, Messi and Neymar in it. As for his PL exploits, I agree that the PL is not as tough tactically as the Italian game but that's not the only criteria to judge him on. The fact remains that he carried an average side to within a game of the title. I don't think Sheva ever reached the same heights as Suarez in 2014 or in 2016.
 
Both in the very, very top tier bracket, Henry did it over a longer period.
 
No he's not in the same bracket. He's in the same tier as Ibra, Shevcheko amongst others.

Henry is several levels above.

Several levels above :lol:

That's just the PL hype. Internationally and in club football outside England Suárez has outperformed Henry in a big way, and Suárez's best season in the PL is arguably the best season in the PL history.

In terms of the average strikers goals per season in LL how does Suarez compare? How about the strikers playing for the top 2-3?

He's one of only 3 players to score 40+ goals in La Liga. Hugo Sánchez (1990) and Telmo Zarra (1951) are the only others to score 35+ and they managed that just once each. Eto'o in his best season scored 26 goals in 34 games vs. Suarez's 40 in 35 games. Romario's best was 30 goals in 33 and Ronaldo's best was 34 in 37.

Here's the top scorers list:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_football_top_scorers