shows how fickle fans are, they're quick to blame right left center as if they know better
Virgil Van dijk: UEFA Player of the year
- Thread starter VJ1762
- 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?
To play devil's advocate, the current Van Dijk is not the same as the one at Southampton. He has improved massively. He had his share of errors at Southampton but right now he's pretty much error-less. Utterly dominant again against Burnley yesterday.
Barnes and Rodriguez dribbled past him and the keeper had to make saves.
He probably deserves it after last season.
Uefa and FIFA individual prizes should be for the best player each season, which means either Messi or Ronaldo for the last 15 years.
And Maicon came out on top against Bale when Inter beat Spurs 4:3. Messi scored 2 goals and created tons of chances in 2 legs and was clearly superior to van Dijk head to head.
Gerard won every domestic title... aside from the PL. You know, the main fecking thing
Totti actually won a Serie A title and every domestic title. And also the World Cup.
Barnes was mugging him off regularly in the first half, couldn't deal with their long balls and you'll notice they didn't target Matip...
I actually think he's a great player but don't quote that Burnley game as evidence, very lucky not to concede.
Ok
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 wonder whether Liverpool fans themselves believe that VVD was better than Messi last season. The point that if a less known player, say Dembele, did what Messi did last season, he would have been a strong favourite is on the money.
VVD has strongly benefitted form something known to sicentists: if the contribution of the individual players in a team can't be quantified, one individual tends to get a disproportionally big credit for the achievements of the team.
VVD has strongly benefitted form something known to sicentists: if the contribution of the individual players in a team can't be quantified, one individual tends to get a disproportionally big credit for the achievements of the team.
Of course Messi is and has been better.
Van Dijk wins this because a thoroughly deserving candidate has emerged that is not Ronaldo or Messi. Because of voter fatigue, he doesn't need to be better, he just needs to be deserving of it.
Van Dijk wins this because a thoroughly deserving candidate has emerged that is not Ronaldo or Messi. Because of voter fatigue, he doesn't need to be better, he just needs to be deserving of it.
The defensive contribution is very hard to be statistically defined. That's why you have stats/hindsight merchants
always judging players ability by goal contributions. It's something that is set in stone and is hard to argue against.
You can have a shit game and then score a tap in and half of the internet will argue you had a great game.
People are still convinced that Messi's first game performance in the semis was great even though he should have
been sent off after his foul on Fabinho that led to the free-kick that made it 3:0.
Before that changed the complexity of the game completely he was invisible bar a luckily deflected tap in.
The return leg was something else entirely. He had huge influence on the game but his teammates were useless.
About VVD people have this unique perception of him only because when you watch us you see him
stopping countless attacks with enormous goal potential. There is no stat set in stone for that.
His influence can never be measured enough for the stat geeks. That, in turn, leads to comical posts.
always judging players ability by goal contributions. It's something that is set in stone and is hard to argue against.
You can have a shit game and then score a tap in and half of the internet will argue you had a great game.
People are still convinced that Messi's first game performance in the semis was great even though he should have
been sent off after his foul on Fabinho that led to the free-kick that made it 3:0.
Before that changed the complexity of the game completely he was invisible bar a luckily deflected tap in.
The return leg was something else entirely. He had huge influence on the game but his teammates were useless.
About VVD people have this unique perception of him only because when you watch us you see him
stopping countless attacks with enormous goal potential. There is no stat set in stone for that.
His influence can never be measured enough for the stat geeks. That, in turn, leads to comical posts.
That's my way of thinking too. How can you quantify a great tackle by a defender in relation to the overall outcome of a game ? You can't. He made a great tackle & that's it. But that tackle changes the direction of the game. What we don't know though is how. In the 2nd half of the CL final Son burst clear & it looked for all the world that he was going to have a good chance to level the scores, but VVD made up the ground & managed to knock the ball out for a corner. A Spurs equalizer there changes everything. However, there's no stats to really back up the importance of that tackle. Messi scores a wonder-goal & he further enhances his reputation as one of the best ever. The art of defending is seriously under-rated by football fans, especially when it comes to other teams. Not so much so when it's your side though.
The thing with the likes of John Terry & City's Vincent Kompany, people forget that it took a while, & a shit-load of money spent on other players by their club's mega-rich owners, before either of them really came to the fore. Terry was a first team regular even before Abramovich took control of Chelsea, & his team finished 6th on a couple of occasions if my memory serves me right. Only when he was surrounded by better team-mates did Chelsea start winning league titles. Same goes for Kompany. City finished 10th in his first season with 4 points fewer than they had the previous season. It was 4 years before they became English champions with him in the side. That's not to say that neither player was top drawer, because they obviously were. But Chelsea & City would still probably have won what they've won without either player because they'd have just gone out & bought a top class centre-half anyway. United defenders Rio, Vidic, & Stam, came to a club that was already used to winning major honours, so whilst they may have improved the defence, I seriously doubt they changed the future of Manchester United Football Club in respect of putting continued silverware in the trophy room. So when you say the hype regarding VVD is 'still fresh', I'd counter that by saying that time clouds the memory when it comes to players from the past. It's almost like they never, ever, made errors, or had the occasional bad game.
It's nice to see a defender getting recognition - for a change- for what he's done over the past season. It's even nicer when that player is one of your own. Not nice for the Messi fan-boys of course. But I'm sure they'll get over it the next time he scores 10 goals against Liverpool when they're playing on their Playstation. & all this crap I've read on The Caf about VVD having to prove himself before the hype can be justified is laughable. I mean, Phil Neville never proved himself as being a better midfielder than Steven Gerrard even though he has a copious amount of PL winners medals, whilst Stevie has zero.
Fair play.
I think that's doing these players a huge disservice. Not only their abilities on the pitch but also their leadership and presence off it. Terry and Kompany have been at times indispensable to their sides and it's wishful thinking to assume that all the money in the world could have found similar qualities elsewhere. Same goes for Vidic and Ferdinand. I can't comment on Stam as he was a bit before my time. I do not believe that Liverpool could have signed anyone else who has done what van Dijk has done for them, even if there are other defenders who can rival him for quality. To me, it's as much a case of right place, right time as it is about quality. For instance, Vardy when Leicester won the league. Players like Kane and Aguero are undeniably better, but in that side would have they contributed what he did? I don't believe they would. Likewise, Vardy would not have matched their contributions for City and Spurs respectively. I agree with your wider point about judging van Dijk but I took issue with this statement. It undermines the unique attributes that each player brings, and how sometimes a player and a club are a perfect match.
My wider point was that people are wrong to pigeon hole players based on how many, or how few, trophies their club wins whilst said player is with them. I actually stated that John Terry & Vincent Kompany were top drawer players. However, I still stand by my point that Chelsea & City's achievements would not have been curtailed had they not had not been as good as they were. We, on the other hand, would never have given you the fight we did last season without VVD. He's certainly had a much bigger impact for us than Terry, Kompany, Ferdinand, Vidic, & Stam had for their respective clubs. That will still be the case even if he never wins another trophy for us. & I imagine it's the reason he won the UEFA player of the year.
I don't believe City would have won the league last season without Kompany. And certainly not in 2012 either. You're also really, really downplaying Terry's role and contribution at Chelsea. Go look at his individual honours. You really are downplaying how pivotal these players have been. And look how long these players have been at their clubs. To somehow suggest van Dijk has provided something to Liverpool that Kompany and Terry and Ferdinand and Vidic did not for their clubs is incredibly dismissive of the difference these players made.
So why is VVD the strong favourite to win Ballon D'Or if he's no different to those players mentioned ? Considering how few defenders actually win it, doesn't that suggest he must be something special ?
& let me ask you this. Do you think that Terry & Kompany would have won what they have without the massive cash injections that the owners of both clubs have provided over the years ?
I like that. Really good explanation. I actually do not begrudge Van Dijk and think he has become a terrific ambassador for the game. Messi is probably the best player that the world has ever seen. Van Dijk is not that and will never be that, even Van Dijk himself acknowledges the superiority of Messi.
Think you're deifying VVD a little bit here because he was the last piece of Liverpool's puzzle and so it looks as though he is the decisive factor in making the team as good as it is. Just because Terry and Kompany, for example, were at their clubs for a few years before their teams became truly great doesn't mean they had less impact on the end product. They just happened to be brought in first. While it's true that the backline was often shambolic before VVD's arrival, Kompany and Ferdinand also marshalled some pretty make shift defences in their time. And Liverpool's defensive improvement over the last two years has also coincided with the arrival of Alisson and Robertson arrival and TAA nailing down a starting spot.
And part of the reason VVD is in pole position to win the Ballon D'or while those others weren't is because the prize has basically become a player of the year award for the team that wins the CL. That wasn't the case when Terry and Ferdinand won the CL and Kompany hasn't won the CL. VVD also benefits from the fact that Liverpool's goals were split so evenly between Salah and Mane last year. If VVD's 2018/19 performances had coincided with Salah's 17/18 performances, it's very likely that the latter would currently be up for the major prizes, in the same way that Ferdinand's 07/08 was overshadowed by Ronaldo's record breaking season
So because van Dijk has had one season where he is in the running to win the Balon D'Or that automatically means he has contributed something to Liverpool that other defenders have not done for their clubs? Conversely, I could make silly statements like if van Dijk is so special how come he was unable to lead Liverpool to the domestic title whereas Kompany and Terry have done that on numerous occasions.
You're now changing the debate entirely by bringing spending into it. You are aware that the cost of your side that beat Spurs was more than two and a half times the cost of their team? Do you not think Liverpool's ability to outspend a lot of opponents has had something to do with their recent success? The amount a club spends and it generates itself should have no relevance when assessing a player's individual ability, so it's odd that you've brought it up.
In the PFA team of the season the keeper and 3 of the 4 defenders were from Liverpool. Why do Liverpool concede as many goals as City and more big chances if VVD is so special? Genuine question. Are Matip, Robertson, Gomez, Arnold, Fabinho average or not particularly good if VVD is supposed to have such a tremendous impact? Are Ederson, Zinchenko, Otamendi, Walker better than their counterparts?
Ok Laporte? Why not?
If Van Dijk, on top of being the great CB we all know he is, was also a forward that could play at the same exact level as Messi plays, where would you rather have him play? In his current CB position, or Messi's position?
I know, extremely hypothetical, but this says everything you need to know about who's the better football player. Of course every single person in the world would rather have Van Dijk playing up front with the same exact level as Messi, than him playing CB at his current level, as good as it may bel.
I know this may be a confusing post, also English is not my first language, but im sure someone got my point.
I know, extremely hypothetical, but this says everything you need to know about who's the better football player. Of course every single person in the world would rather have Van Dijk playing up front with the same exact level as Messi, than him playing CB at his current level, as good as it may bel.
I know this may be a confusing post, also English is not my first language, but im sure someone got my point.
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.
Can't agree because there is a clear disparity between Laporte and VVD, for example in the air where VVD is two three times the player Laporte is, or in a foot race? VVD is simply a more complete and better CB.
I agreed VVD is better. But he doesn't win this award, or even get close, if City are the ones who win the CL.
They'd give it to a City player basically because the team had a good season. Laporte, Bernardo Silva, Sterling .. any of those, take your pick. None of which would have been anywhere near as good as Messi individually this season but that doesn't really matter in these awards.
No shit sherlock. How many best player awards do you think Messi would have picked up over Ronaldo if Messi scored one or two goals more than Ron every season for five seasons but without a single piece of silverware while Ronaldo won something every season? Duh.
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.No shit sherlock. How many best player awards do you think Messi would have picked up over Ronaldo if Messi scored one or two goals more than Ron every season for five seasons but without a single piece of silverware while Ronaldo won something every season? Duh.
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.
He’s deserving of it
Absurd, there's a clear defined difference between being a passenger and picking up medals or being the heart and soul of a team that wins titles year in year out. Gerrard wasn't that unfortunately. If VVD wants to go down as the best to ever do it, he has to win titles and cups on a yearly basis.
People take awards too seriously, they constitute only a fraction of the legacy of a player. You can go through the list of past Ballon d'Or winners and many of them are far from being regarded as truly great players. Owen won it and Rooney was never close to winning it. Yet Rooney is considered by far the better player. Maldini and Baresi never won it but are in the conversation about the best ever defenders whereas Cannavaro won it but is nowhere near that level.
VVD will need to have 4-5 years at top top level to be considered among the greats. Otherwise, he will be remembered like Cannavaro, very good but not truly great.
VVD will need to have 4-5 years at top top level to be considered among the greats. Otherwise, he will be remembered like Cannavaro, very good but not truly great.
Last edited:
What, so you rate Phil Neville higher than Steven Gerrard then ? Now that's truly absurd.
That's not what he said, at all.
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
Last edited:
I know that. I was simply being facetious. But we could finish runners-up to City over the next 5 years, get 90+ points every season, & only concede 20 odd goals in each of those 5 seasons, yet according to some on here that would negate any talk of VVD being held in the same high esteem of the likes of Terry, Kompany et al.
Like I say, truly absurd.
You're the one being absurd. Most people that still dare to emit certain reservations about him focus on his capacity to maintain this high level over time. In your fictitious strawman scenario, he'd have answered those doubts.