by Dean Sat Apr 16, 2011 6:22 am
dena wrote: Fanatic wrote: dena wrote: Dean wrote:You know it's funny, people try to make out English people are 'biased' etc...
Then you have Dena coming in with the typical 'Oh I'm not surprised by this'
but what did occur was a typical 'i have nothing to say here, but lemme make fun of your nationality' post, in which you responded with a '
'
And forget what Steve posted about "better individuals"?
He was the one who started to put this thread of course so don't give me that crap.
Steve is in this too I never pardoned him from his contribution to the thread, takes two to tangle.
Dean wrote: dena wrote: Dean wrote:You know it's funny, people try to make out English people are 'biased' etc...
Then you have Dena coming in with the typical 'Oh I'm not surprised by this'
Who did I try to make look like a dick, in saying I wasnt surprised the thread turned this way, I was saying that I wasn't surprised that this thread turned into one in which members would attack each other player allengecies INSTEAD of a real comparison thread in which stats, attributes, and achievements are compared, none of these things occurred until page 3, but what did occur was a typical 'i have nothing to say here, but lemme make fun of your nationality' post, in which you responded with a '
'
I have nothing against English football, what is there to be against in the first place?
You can't 'really' compare players by statistics, statistics are one of the most mis-leading things in football and that's why I don't follow them much. Also you can't compare players on achievements either, that's silly and you should know that.
Unfortunately, the best way to compare players, is off knowledge and your personal opinion of the player.
Nah I think that's crap. Stats when used in the proper context generally reflect a player's performance over given time, problem is people don't like use to stats in their proper context ie. someone when making a case for striker x vs. RVP will say, "well, RVP only scored 20 goals this year, my striker scored 35" when in actually, RVP has missed half the year and has a fantastic ratio. Achievements can also be used properly, once again, in context. Having debates based on personal opinion leads to what this thread is. "My player is better" "No he's not" "Yes he is" "No... he's not"
No it's crap Dena, it's one of the most known things in football, stats are overrated, they 'help' and can be used to 'back up', but generally they are mis leading.
Darren Bent over the last five years is one of the top three goalscorers in the Premier League (Drogba and Torres being the other two)
He's in the top three over a five year period in the toughest league in the world, now WHY is he currently at struggling bottom half of the table Aston Villa? Why was he at Sunderland? Why was he at Charlton?
I mean surely those 'stats' suggest he's a top player and should be playing at a top club no?
So no it doesn't give a reflection of how good a player has been over a period of time, because going by that logic, Darren Bent is one of the top strikers in world football. Stats say he is?
Achievements? Seriously how can they be used to reflect a players pure ability? It's nonsense.
Because by including achievements, you have to take into context the team the player was playing for etc... when that should't be done. When you see how good a player is, the team he plays for, how many medals he's got etc... has to go back of the mind and shouldn't be used in determining how good a player is or is not.
You need to judge a player on the pure ability of the player. His strengths, weaknesses, what he can and can't do... what talents he possess' in certain aspects of the game... the list goes on.
[28%] 
Gerrad was better in my opinion, but slightly.
