Who is better at football between Bruno and Eriksen?

Bobski

Full Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
5,903
Eriksen was Spurs version of Utd Mata for much of his time there, maybe a little better. Good player, but not a game changer, at his peak.
 

DWelbz19

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
28,243
Fernandes is a player who thrives in chaos, tactically. He was Sporting’s best man for a few years when everything ran through him and he was able to put up great G/A’s which would mask the major flaws brought to his game.

Fast forward to the start of his career at Manchester United and the same sort of followed — Ole’s real lack of a system brought the best out of him and allowed the platform for him to do the best and the worst of what he can offer.

Some will say that having a coach like Ten Hag would improve the player, but I just think it would further exemplify his weaknesses. He’s not really a player who can play as a cog in the machine. He’s at his best free as a bird, making high risk high reward plays, breaking the pressing line to chase like a mad man alone. I.E. in “bad teams” like @giorno says. People can chuck chance created and most assists stats and whatever at your face, but honestly the more we resemble a team, the less impactful Fernandes will be.
 

poleglass red

Full Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
2,886
Eriksen was Spurs version of Utd Mata for much of his time there, maybe a little better. Good player, but not a game changer, at his peak.
Always struck as a more extravagant Mata and more refined Bruno. Mata was always neat and tidy in his passing as is Eriksen, but when needed, he can play that killer pass that Mata lacked, certainly in recent seasons. Re Bruno, to me he has Bruno's killer pass but doesn't try it every time he gets the ball. he is more selective in when to play it. I see people pulling out Bruno stats. of course they will look good, every pass he basically plays is an attacking pass. Throw enough shit at the wall, some of it is bound to stick. The problem with the amount of passes that go astray, is they create counters against us, which for a team lacking a true DM, pace at central defence and a keeper rooted to his line has been problematic.
 

Bobski

Full Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
5,903
Always struck as a more extravagant Mata and more refined Bruno. Mata was always neat and tidy in his passing as is Eriksen, but when needed, he can play that killer pass that Mata lacked, certainly in recent seasons. Re Bruno, to me he has Bruno's killer pass but doesn't try it every time he gets the ball. he is more selective in when to play it. I see people pulling out Bruno stats. of course they will look good, every pass he basically plays is an attacking pass. Throw enough shit at the wall, some of it is bound to stick. The problem with the amount of passes that go astray, is they create counters against us, which for a team lacking a true DM, pace at central defence and a keeper rooted to his line has been problematic.
Yes, I think there are definitely issues with Bruno and I wouldn't be against moving in a different direction. The lack of discipline in his game can be a problem, don't just mean the erratic use of the ball, but the positions he takes up are a problem as well, will press at bad time and then not press when it might be more effective. Also the body language, oh the body language.

Eriksen is absolutely a good player, I just don't see him as the type who is going to make a major difference, but he would be basically replacing Mata so can understand the interest, clear upgrade.
 

SirReginald

Full Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
878
Supports
Chelsea
Certainly for G/A Bruno is one of the best around. But if you use your eyes we all know that’s not close to being the truth. Despite this, I wouldn’t say last season was the Bruno that he knows he can be.

Realistically he is somewhere in the middle of that atrocious Bruno and that World class Bruno. He isn’t World class and even if he regains form I can’t see those numbers remaining so high. But he is a decent player.

Eriksen is also a decent player. A better provider than Bruno and takes up better wide positions than Bruno. His crosses always caused us problems. Horrible player to defend against on form.

I doubt he would be a squad player. Definitely be starting games.
 

Caesar2290

Full Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2019
Messages
1,228
Are you sure that's correct?

All the places Ive looked (May not be as accurate as your source though Infogol/ whoscored) say Bruno's was around 79% and Eriksen 81%.

Plus it looks like Eriksen never dipped below 80% in the premier league while Bruno never achieved 80% over a season.

I think their stats are actually quite close in their "Best Season" (for goals and assists).

2016/17 Eriksen scored 8 (0 pens) and assisted 15 while in 20/21 Fernandes scored 18 (9 pens) and assisted 12.

I think they were more or less the same age too.

So the Pens make the big difference, of course there is the fact that there is a skill in scoring them too.

I think people forget just how good Eriksen was. (16/17 highlights)


He could do all the flashy stuff AND control a game.

In saying that Eriksen is older and has his health issues to realistically he won't reach that peak again.
I used FBref for my passing stats.

As for Eriksen, good player, but let's also remember that Mata scored 19 and assisted 35 :eek: in 2012/2013 and yet we saw how he turned out for us a year later.

The reason I'm giving Bruno more leeway is because he played in a dysfunctional team with barely any coaching and managed to produce those numbers, where as Eriksen played in a well drilled Poch side in a balanced midfield and had very similar stats to Bruno.

Let's also remember that his stint at Inter didn't set him apart. Let's also remember that players like Lukaku looked WC, while Sanchez and Young who looked finished here were actually pretty good.

Not to shit on Eriksen, good player. But had Mata not played for us, would this place be saying the exact same thing in comparison to Bruno?
 

DRJosh

Full Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
1,411
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Supports
United minus the Glazers
Really a question of who is the flavour of the day both in the media and amongst the fanbase. Both great players but will very different offerings. Bruno suits a more fluid role while Eriksen thrives in a tactically organised team
 

goatmeister

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 29, 2019
Messages
56
Supports
PSKI
Eriksen is the smarter player and technically better overall. He'll make any team play better but Bruno will gives/create more goals. In another word, you can say that Bruno's play are more individualistic. He was good at papering over the crack 2 seasons past, but last season shows how much he's value to the team plunges when he's off the boil.

Bruno is someone you put on top of already a stable foundation and gives you that edge. Eriksen is someone that will help build that foundation. They both can play together but not as midfielders.
 

Morpheus 7

Full Member
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
3,393
Location
Ireland
Love how fans have completely turned on Bruno, deserves a chance this season. He was awful last year and rightly deserved criticism, like the rest of them.

Eriksen is a good player, showed it in the league but he's slowed down. Even his last season at Spurs, didn't have the same tempo and Italy suited him. Great story him coming back after health issues at Brentford. Rather Bruno still everyday, rotation option is good but still baffled why this area is being looked at. We have areas literally everywhere to address before this.
 

shamans

Hoser
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
16,389
Location
Just want to see Scholes hit a volley.
Love how fans have completely turned on Bruno, deserves a chance this season. He was awful last year and rightly deserved criticism, like the rest of them.

Eriksen is a good player, showed it in the league but he's slowed down. Even his last season at Spurs, didn't have the same tempo and Italy suited him. Great story him coming back after health issues at Brentford. Rather Bruno still everyday, rotation option is good but still baffled why this area is being looked at. We have areas literally everywhere to address before this.
It's just calling out their skills rather than turning on Bruno. At least for me, he is still a class act when it comes to his personality but I don't rate him that high. Also don't forget Bruno has only had what a year of top form in his career (at the top level).
 

ShinjiNinja26

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
7,097
Location
Location, Location
Bruno is being criminally underrated on here lately. Yes he’s been out of form for a while but people forget how good he was when he first came here, literally carried the team. Not taking anything away from Eriksen he’s a very good player, more of a system player I’d say whereas Bruno is a bit of a maverick. When both are at their best I’d say Bruno is much more exciting to watch.
 

Rozay

Master of Hindsight
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
23,388
Location
...
I think those continually referencing the G/A should probably show some consideration to the fact yhat a significant portion of Bruno’s goals are penalties. I appreciate penalties count as goals, but let’s not pretend they are real factors in determining the difference between two players. In his first 6 months I’m sure of his 14 goals, 10 were from the spot, and one was a free kick too. Using sweeping statements on the basis of stats is certainly synonymous with today’s football fan, but in open play, I don’t think Bruno is an outrageous goalscorer from midfield at all, although a good one by most standards.

This season that has just finished that has many holding their hands up saying ‘he had a terrible season’ would have a totally different narrative if you added another 10 pens to it. Certainly that seems to be the difference when comparing to the ‘brilliant 18 months where he carried us’. All O read is 28 G/18 A or something, but half of those are pens and not any reflection of how he has played. Pens cannot be a significant metric of how a player is assessed.
 

Canagel

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
13,343
I think those continually referencing the G/A should probably show some consideration to the fact yhat a significant portion of Bruno’s goals are penalties. I appreciate penalties count as goals, but let’s not pretend they are real factors in determining the difference between two players. In his first 6 months I’m sure of his 14 goals, 10 were from the spot, and one was a free kick too. Using sweeping statements on the basis of stats is certainly synonymous with today’s football fan, but in open play, I don’t think Bruno is an outrageous goalscorer from midfield at all, although a good one by most standards.

This season that has just finished that has many holding their hands up saying ‘he had a terrible season’ would have a totally different narrative if you added another 10 pens to it. Certainly that seems to be the difference when comparing to the ‘brilliant 18 months where he carried us’. All O read is 28 G/18 A or something, but half of those are pens and not any reflection of how he has played. Pens cannot be a significant metric of how a player is assessed.
Also the penalties were being won by others, mostly Martial. If he was winning his own penalties at least you could say that he was doing something in open play.

This is why his goals dried up quick when Martial lost his form and was benched, Rashford started to be benched and #11 was dropped from the squad. It was clearly not sustainable even 2 years ago yet whenever you tried to put his numbers into context people would just throw out these baseless G/A spreadsheets and accuse you of a agenda. Even the majority of his assists at the start where basic passes which were turned into something by our front three but it didn't matter. In open play he has never been that good.
 

Jacob

Full Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
24,664
Bruno has better individual abilities but as a manager, I'd pick Eriksen.

Eriksen is simply smarter, more efficient and mentally stronger, I believe. Also more of a team player.
 

Terranova

Full Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2020
Messages
660
Supports
United/Ajax
I have nothing against Bruno, great player when he feels like it. But Eriksen is just the footballer player in my opinion. He just has the better skillset for the 10 position
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
45,323
Location
Birmingham
As an attacking midfielder, it's not even a contest. Bruno can't even circulate the ball at a high level. At the moment, hes a SS and in that role he's better than Eriksen.
In general, I prefer Eriksen. He's the kind of player that elevates those around him. Bruno puts his teammates in trouble.
 

Lyng

Full Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2012
Messages
1,337
Location
Denmark
They are very different players. Bruno can pull magic out of a hat but is also very risky at times.
Eriksen isn't flashy but can provide a platform for his team to shine.

If we end up having both and Ten Hag gets them working together they can be very difficult to handle for teams.
In other words I would love watching them play together.
 

dan1509

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 26, 2021
Messages
23
They are very different players. Bruno can pull magic out of a hat but is also very risky at times.
Eriksen isn't flashy but can provide a platform for his team to shine.

If we end up having both and Ten Hag gets them working together they can be very difficult to handle for teams.
In other words I would love watching them play together.
Is it really pulling magic out of a hat when you attempt 2938293 through balls per game? IMO he is the type of player who thrives in a team where his teammates are average players and he has a license to just do whatever he wants in terms of positioning, shooting and through balls. However, put him in a better team that wants to hold possession and have cohesive teamplay, and well he is a disaster.

In saying that, I will admit my posts have an agenda when it comes to Bruno because I absolutely detest the way he plays football.