The latter can be statistically proven though.
Jamie Carragher: "2006-09 is the strongest the Premier Leagues ever been”
- Thread starter FujiVice
- Start date
It was the strongest league in the world for those few seasons.
The top 8 is more competitive today than those years though.
The top 8 is more competitive today than those years though.
He's right. I saw a PL season review of 2007/08 and 2008/09, and the quality has really gone downhill.
Chelsea were a side that could manage itself. Essien was top quality, I still remember him man-marking Gerrard out of a CL tie.
Arsenal played some brilliant football, everyone goes on about Pep raising standards but they were far more entertaining with Fabregas, Hleb, Rosicky.
United had the perfect blend. They could turn it on, but grind out wins.
Chelsea were a side that could manage itself. Essien was top quality, I still remember him man-marking Gerrard out of a CL tie.
Arsenal played some brilliant football, everyone goes on about Pep raising standards but they were far more entertaining with Fabregas, Hleb, Rosicky.
United had the perfect blend. They could turn it on, but grind out wins.
No it can’t.
For reasons which some are known and others aren't English clubs did really well in Europe during this era. The other big clubs were going through transitions and Italian football had collapsed due to the scandal. I wouldn't say those teams were better than the what City and Pool are now.
Right now is pretty much the perfect time for another prem takeover with the big 2 in Spain acting the fool and Italian sides still struggling to put it together. It's not yet because big clubs in England outside of City and Pool are terribly run.
Right now is pretty much the perfect time for another prem takeover with the big 2 in Spain acting the fool and Italian sides still struggling to put it together. It's not yet because big clubs in England outside of City and Pool are terribly run.
Recency bias makes it seem like we were all watching cloggers 10-15 years who had no idea how to trap the ball. Nostalgia gets a lot of criticism but recency bias is right up there too
Disagree with him.
Carragher’s argument is based on the assumption that more english teams were challenging for the european title and therefore that makes the PL in that era stronger.
However he’s ignoring the fact that the top spanish, german and italian(?) teams from that era were not as dominant as they have been in the past decade. So its not necessarily the fact PL was stronger back then but rather the rest of europe was not as strong as they have been recently.
Having said that i do agree with Carra on the fact that the 08-09 liverpool team were good enough to win the league.
Carragher’s argument is based on the assumption that more english teams were challenging for the european title and therefore that makes the PL in that era stronger.
However he’s ignoring the fact that the top spanish, german and italian(?) teams from that era were not as dominant as they have been in the past decade. So its not necessarily the fact PL was stronger back then but rather the rest of europe was not as strong as they have been recently.
Having said that i do agree with Carra on the fact that the 08-09 liverpool team were good enough to win the league.
Good point. I’d never thought of it that way.
A PL team in the CL final in 2006,2007,2008,2009. 2 of them in the 2008 final.
3 of the 4 CL semi finalists in 2007,2008,2009 were from the PL.
The PL was ranked number 1 by UEFA rankings.
https://kassiesa.net/uefa/data/method4/crank2009.html
The thing is, less that a year ago we were all rewatching these “classic” games and although I wouldn’t go as far as saying they couldn’t trap a ball, the general quality of play seemed miles behind what we see nowadays.
It’s almost inevitable that we will be thinking the same thing about now in 15 years but that wouldn’t be recency bias it would be reality. It’s like saying that commenting on how Tekken 2 look likes garbage or that Jesse Owens was a tortoise compared to Usain Bolt is recency bias. If the average quality of football doesn’t improve over time then there’s something seriously wrong.
Hold on, @renandstimpyfan83 is about to statistically prove football is better now.
"there"
Jamie Carragher
Jamie Carragher
Especially when you have players that were playing in that era still performing just as well in this current era.
Ronaldo and Zlatan for instance.
Ronaldo in 2009/10 - (Madrid) 33 goals in 35 games
Zlatan in 2010/11 - (AC Milan) 21goals in 41 games
Ronaldo in 2019/20 (Juve) 23 goals in 24 games.
Zlatan in 2020/21 (AC Milan) 14goals in 16 games
granted both players improved as they got older but I’m sure there’s other players that cross over era’s that will prove this point.
Not sure that proves much other than the decline of Serie A (and how VAR and the rule changes it’s inspired is making a mockery of the game with the pathetic number of penalties being given).
Eh? A 34 year old Vardy is a menace in this league. Salah is as “one dimensional” as Torres and rips this league to shreds. Torres would be scoring more now playing against John Stones & Maguire rather than Terry, Rio etc.
Using the EPL as an example Milner was performing the same level he was in 2018 as he was in 2008. I’ll try think of more players that cross over era’s before they’re legs went or when they retired.
Of course he’s right, Chelsea won the league with 93 points in 2017 with their shittest title winning side by a fair distance.
Liverpool and City have since utterly battered the 90 point mark.
Weak as piss this league for a while now.
Liverpool and City have since utterly battered the 90 point mark.
Weak as piss this league for a while now.
Is he? He’s still got a decent engine but he doesn’t stand out at all and doesn’t even play every week for Liverpool despite their first choice midfielders playing at CB currently. The fact that such a technically limited player as Milner played as a winger for a top team in the early 2010s shows how football has moved on even in that short time to be honest.
I think the PL had more teams among the best in the world back then, but that the league as a whole is better now.
There is a bit of a paradox with saying this at the same time as teams in the last few years have completed 97-100 points seasons, but I'll put this down to the evolution in tactics.
The combination of high pressing, tactical fouling and high possession with attacking full backs and hard working midfielders have proven extremely effective when you have superior players to the opposition.
There is a bit of a paradox with saying this at the same time as teams in the last few years have completed 97-100 points seasons, but I'll put this down to the evolution in tactics.
The combination of high pressing, tactical fouling and high possession with attacking full backs and hard working midfielders have proven extremely effective when you have superior players to the opposition.
2013-2017 was definitely a low period for the league, with some very average champions. 2017 onwards has seen outstanding City and Liverpool teams though.
No there weren't. Arsenal played for that 4th spot and always got it so really, there were only three spots available
Completely disagree, very good City & Liverpool teams have utterly smashed a weak as piss league.
Milner was an ever present in Liverpool’s 97 point haul in 2018.
That’s how weak this league has been.
I’m talking 2018 which would have been the year they won the CL with him as a first team player aged 32. Of course he isn’t going to stand out now being 34 years old and his legs going but if the game has moved on so much then surely he wouldn’t be featuring at all.
The English sides in 2007-08 especially were unreal. Arsenal knocked out of the CL by Liverpool, who were themselves knocked out by Chelsea, who lost to us in the final.
I’d say so. I’ve thought for a while that Sir Alex’s 07/08 side was his strongest ever from top to bottom. Chelsea had a core of Cech, Cole, Terry, Lampard & Drogba. We had Gerrard, Torres, Alonso & Mascherano. Arsenal has Fabregas and Van Persie.
From 2005 to 2009 there was always an English side in the CL final as well.
From 2005 to 2009 there was always an English side in the CL final as well.
You say this but teams in the bottom half aren't getting more points now than they did back then.
United are the only PL team to win both the CL and PL title in one season......twice!
That’s more due to our decline as a team rather than increased quality of the league. If you dropped our 07-09 team, with Sir Alex, in today’s PL the only teams I would worry about us facing would be Liverpool and City.
In terms of positions 5-15, Spurs, Everton and Leicester are far superior to what they were (or whoever Leicester’s equivalent was back then, I would probably say Villa), but outside of them, for me the reason why the other teams seem to have upped their game is because the level of the top teams have declined so much. I don’t look at Crystal Palace or Burnley and see top quality that would have been that impressive against Chelsea or arsenal from that period, I just see it as Chelsea and Arsenal being significantly weaker now.
Not sure on that.
In 2008/09 Spurs finished 8th (after that woeful start) and Man. City in first season of takeover with still a mix and match team came in 10th. Both finished top 5 the next season.
Agree with Carragher, just look at the european results in that period and the spines of all the top teams were stacked with so much quality whereas you look at the defensive units and none of them are that strong compared to just over a decade ago.
More often than not, the mid-table teams back then were also full of internationals.
Price tags that clubs splash around nowadays is fairly irrelevant due to the massive amounts of inflation since those days. Back then a 30m pound signing was considered expensive for a top club - it more or less had to be a complete package of a player to warrant such a fee.
He started 19 games so not exactly ever present but I take your point. Liverpool’s midfield has always been workmanlike under Klopp as their creativity comes from other areas though.
You might as well say the league between 2006 and 2009 was weak because Fletcher was a regular for United, or Kuyt for Liverpool. There’s always been room for workhorse players in good teams.
So the Champions League was weak as well as the Premier League then? If the example you’re using is a season when two English teams reached the final and the PL champions were knocked out by an English team, that’s the only conclusion I can draw.
Chelsea and Arsenal ARE the midtable teams though so the comparison doesn’t really work. You should be comparing the Arsenal side with someone like Fulham from the late 00s.
The top ten as a whole is stronger than its ever been in my opinion.
City and Liverpool (when they’re not in an injury crisis) have fantastic defensive units though. Admittedly, United’s and Chelsea’s were better (though the tactics certainly helped for the latter), I wouldn’t say Liverpool or Arsenal’s back fours were anything special. In fact, Arsenal’s defense was notoriously poor.
Those were the years when England teams were dominating the UCL semi finals & finals. So he's not wrong
Those years were weak for football on the continent. Don't buy his theory
No, the issue is the likes of Fulham and Brighton try to play a style of football that’s beyond the quality of players at their disposal, so generally get hammered when up against the decent teams, and the likes of City and Liverpool can now get 95+ points annually, something just as good - and probably better - teams 13 years ago couldn’t.
Pulis-era Stoke, Bolton and Blackburn etc played to their own primitive strengths, so therefore made games more competitive.
At the top maybe but even that's debatable depending on what you think about Arsenal during those years. Overall there are so many clubs that back then in their wildest dreams wouldn't have thought they'd have the quality in their squad they have today.
Agree, everytime someone says modern football is 'better', particularly compared to a period as recently as 10 years ago I'm left scratching my head and asking what has changed so much? What is 'modern football'?
To try and use the clincher that football is always said to be better back in the old days is no different than to say that anyone using that chestnut is one who is a victim of recency bias.
Carragher is spot on though. City and pool getting 100 points or so doesn't mean they are one of the best ever in the league. You could use that logic to say that the team with which mou finished second in 2018 was as good as the treble winning team. Points total don't tell the whole story, id thought it would be pretty much common knowledge by now.
Milan and Inter won Champions Leagues within 4 years of Calciopoli, while Roma were a serious Champions League outfit then too; it’s naive to cite it as an example of why English teams flourished during that era.
Chelsea should/would have beaten Barcelona and reach another final if UEFA didn’t have an agenda against them, and do everything they could to ensure Pep’s doped-up dwarfs got to the final.
That Liverpool midfield 3 of Mascherano, Alonso and Gerrard that never won the league is an upgrade on what City, Liverpool and United currently have at the top of the table, as were any 3 of Essien/Makelele/Ballack and Lampard.
English football had a post-Ferguson decline of about 5 years, but looks to be heading back to where it once was.