View Full Version : Viera or Gerard!!!!
Milan_Lebanon
08-06-2005, 11:48
Iam sure that AC Milan with Gerard or Viera will be a superb team.....guys Milan need the player who can cut balls and have a strong personality i mean the leader personality ....i know Gattuso is fine but weak in the same time although he's gettin' better.....So ,dont u think?!!
gerrard is exelent leader
Gio-mania
08-06-2005, 13:25
dunno.......
they are fine players.......
but im not sure if we could find use of these players- pirlo,gattuso,seedorf,kaka would be at jeopardy- and think where our subs would be- no chance of playing at all.....
i like it when awesome players come to milan. but i believe we have many- adding some underdogs would be nice.... jankulovski and vogel are good examples.
but unlike real and chelsea we have a good enviorment so one or two leaders or stars wouldnt hurt....
Viera allready played for Milan once and given that we have Pirlo in his natural position, I doubt that he would improve the team.
Gerrard may be a different story, but I find it highly unlikely that Milan would make a move for him.
shoryuken
08-06-2005, 14:22
Both are heavily ovey-hyped anyway IMO. I think our midfield is fine for now in any case. :dcool:
zlatanov
08-06-2005, 14:32
Both are heavily ovey-hyped anyway IMO. I think our midfield is fine for now in any case. :dcool:
agree. if we do need stregthening in midfield I think there are better players out there for much cheaper.
Anyway, if I had to chose between these two, I would go with gerrard for he is younger and more eager.
shoryuken
08-06-2005, 14:36
And also, despite tiring last season, our midfield has been fantasctic over the last few seasons. Jankulovski can also play there, and if Carletto goes 3-4-1-2 then there are only two CM spots anyway:
ie.
Cafu - Gattuso - Pirlo - Jankulovski
Plus Viera is already a Milan reject ;)
I think our midfield needs some re-shuffling to be honest, how long can we have Pirlo in the middle ? He can't tackle and isn't the quickest player around. Gattuso, for me is out of position, with his tackling and defensive qualities, why on earth is he on the right ? If anything he should be in a more central role, it would bring better balance to the team. Don't get me started on Seedorf, yeah i know he can be amazing at times, but i'd rather have a consistently good player than a player whose performaces range from Outstanding to plain crap.
Why would it be such a problem if some of our midfielders positions are under threat ? What right do they have to an automatic first team place ? They don't. Sometimes there is too much of a loyalty to these players when other players should be given a chance, most notable Dhorasso. It's time some people in here take off the rose tinted glasses and looked at what's best for the team. Yes our team picks itself WHEN they all play well, but if they're not at their best, get someone else in to do the job and stick with them for a good run of games.
Viera is very good, he cuts it in a very fast and hard fought league even though he's around 30. But i am like most people when i say that Milan should start bringing the age of their players down. Plus as he left us to go to Arsenal, i find it hard to see him come back here. If he were to go somewhere it would be to Madrid.
Gerrard is amazing, one of the few players that can grab a team and physically drive every player to play better. I have to admit, that's probably because he's at Liverpool, home town club with home town fans behind him. But he would still have a big influence and effect on any team once he's settled. He would easily adapt and could play any role in our midfield 3. He can play defensive, but he's better at bursting forward, so for me he could take Seedorf's place without a doubt. Would be far too expensive though ( as would Viera ) and has yet to dominate an International game for England the way he does domestically. But to say he's over-rated is a little narrow minded in my opinion.
i wouldnt mind having gerrard but his fee and the risk of unbalancing an already good midfield makes me think otherwise
viera no thanks!
You mis-spelled both names. :D It is Vieira and Gerrard. Seems that everyone here in the forum goes with "Viera". :5drunk: :bri:
ACMILAN1983
08-06-2005, 19:27
Viera allready played for Milan once and given that we have Pirlo in his natural position, I doubt that he would improve the team.
Gerrard may be a different story, but I find it highly unlikely that Milan would make a move for him.
Pretty much sums up what I had to say
Gerrard is amazing, one of the few players that can grab a team and physically drive every player to play better. I have to admit, that's probably because he's at Liverpool, home town club with home town fans behind him. But he would still have a big influence and effect on any team once he's settled. He would easily adapt and could play any role in our midfield 3. He can play defensive, but he's better at bursting forward, so for me he could take Seedorf's place without a doubt. Would be far too expensive though ( as would Viera ) and has yet to dominate an International game for England the way he does domestically. But to say he's over-rated is a little narrow minded in my opinion.
amazing? i even wonder whether he is on the field for the first half of UCL final....his presence is non-existence. sorry even pirlo with an off day can't be as bad as him. he doesn't have half the skills of pirlo, seedorf or even the bull-dozing abilities of gatusso. to me, he is only better than an off-form seedorf. when seedorf, pirlo and gatusso play to their best then gerrard can only sit on the bench because his best is not up there. if we can get him cheap then its ok else its a f**king waste of money.
IMO, only ronaldinho is worth getting to improve our team. any other is just getting more options and depth for the team, it won't make our team much better.
Gio-mania
09-06-2005, 08:08
amazing? i even wonder whether he is on the field for the first half of UCL final....his presence is non-existence. sorry even pirlo with an off day can't be as bad as him. he doesn't have half the skills of pirlo, seedorf or even the bull-dozing abilities of gatusso. to me, he is only better than an off-form seedorf. when seedorf, pirlo and gatusso play to their best then gerrard can only sit on the bench because his best is not up there. if we can get him cheap then its ok else its a f**king waste of money.
So True.................
people should start realizing that our midfield doesnt really need any help..... and i think that it can be seen on the pitch. -with the exeption of the last part of the season.
maybe ppl aren't saying our midfield sux but it seems as if they are
slicknick
09-06-2005, 08:35
Milan would make a move for the neither of them and they wouldn't ever think about signing for Milan. Period.
P.S. Vieira could not really pull it off with Milan back in the day...
Stezagud
09-06-2005, 10:26
amazing? i even wonder whether he is on the field for the first half of UCL final....his presence is non-existence. sorry even pirlo with an off day can't be as bad as him. he doesn't have half the skills of pirlo, seedorf or even the bull-dozing abilities of gatusso. to me, he is only better than an off-form seedorf.
to judge a player on one match is harsh but to judge them on half a match? :eek: and what makes it a particularly weak argument is the fact that in the second half and injury time he dragged Liverpool back from certain defeat against the best side in Europe almost single handedly. When they needed a goal it was Gerrard who they pushed forward and he delivered, twice if you consider it was his burst that earned the penalty. He played 3 or 4 different positions in that match as well as captaining the side and was deserving of his man of the match award.
If doing all that only makes him as good as an off-form Seedorf then i'd love to see what an on form Seedorf can do :)
P.S. Vieira could not really pull it off with Milan back in the day...
The only reason vieira did'nt stay with us then was that the bosman ruling had'nt come out till then, so we had to ship the 17 yr old.
:w212:
I think our midfield needs some re-shuffling to be honest, how long can we have Pirlo in the middle ? He can't tackle and isn't the quickest player around. Gattuso, for me is out of position, with his tackling and defensive qualities, why on earth is he on the right ? If anything he should be in a more central role, it would bring better balance to the team.
you need to watch some milan games. Pirlo surerly can tackle and he wins a lot of balls. I remember how some people said Scholes would hassle and stop him from helping Milan and guess what? I saw Pirlo take the ball from Scholes several times in the first game between us and Scholes didn't take it from Pirlo one single time! He wins a lot of balls. Sure he isn't the fastest around, but his role is to distribute balls and make killer passes, while his defensive work is a bonus. Gattuso in the middle instead of Pirlo would mean slower play and less ball posession, sure he may win some more balls, but waste them too.
agree. if we do need stregthening in midfield I think there are better players out there for much cheaper.
Anyway, if I had to chose between these two, I would go with gerrard for he is younger and more eager.
You can as well mention names when you are at it.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 04:54
You can as well mention names when you are at it.
Pizarro, Diarra, Juninho Pernambucano, Essien, Balack, Rosicky, Mascherano .......... I am sure there are at least 5-6 more but these are off the top of me head.
We could buy at least two of these for the money we would have to waste on Gerrard, and then pray that he would actually make in the Serie A, unlike most of his countrymen before him.
Stezagud
10-06-2005, 10:05
Pizarro, Diarra, Juninho Pernambucano, Essien, Balack, Rosicky, Mascherano .......... I am sure there are at least 5-6 more but these are off the top of me head.
They are cheaper players yes, and would be better options in terms of value but i dont think any of them are as good players as either Gerrard or Vieira. Ballack falls into the same category as world class but he wouldnt be much cheaper to buy and is 4 years older than Gerrard.
and then pray that he would actually make in the Serie A, unlike most of his countrymen before him.
I really think that is a weak point, i mean how many of his countrymen have tried to make it?
Same with the "Vieira failed at 17/18" argument, it has practically no bearing on the player he is today. Pirlo and Seedorf were a lot older than Vieira when they "failed" at Inter but that didnt stop them winning a European Cup with Milan !
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 10:18
You steza are too "biased" on Gerrard, man. I honestly doubt that your opinion of him would still be as high if he wasn't an Englishman.
As for Viera, IMO French players have been nothing but total success in Serie A, however, please don't call it a "weak point" when it comes to your beloved Gerrard for the last English player who was successful in Italy, to some extent, was David Platt, and the one before him - Denis Low, from 40 years ago.
Maltese Charlie
10-06-2005, 10:52
You steza are too "biased" on Gerrard, man. I honestly doubt that your opinion of him would still be as high if he wasn't an Englishman.
As for Viera, IMO French players have been nothing but total success in Serie A, however, please don't call it a "weak point" when it comes to your beloved Gerrard for the last English player who was successful in Italy, to some extent, was David Platt, and the one before him - Denis Low, from 40 years ago.
Hey, don't forget LUTHER BLISSET (miss it) :D just kidding.
Ray Wilkons was not bad at all.
And as regard Gerrard, I also beleive he is good enough to make it in serie A, and we would not get him simply because he's not available. For me he is a player that could make a positive difference in our team.
Hey, don't forget LUTHER BLISSET (miss it) :D just kidding.
I have heard that AcMilan were actually interested in another Watford player namely John Barnes, and some how ended up with Blisset, who scored 5 goals for us and was an absolute Flop.
:5drunk:
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 11:01
Hey, don't forget LUTHER BLISSET (miss it) :D just kidding.
Ray Wilkons was not bad at all.
And as regard Gerrard, I also beleive he is good enough to make it in serie A, and we would not get him simply because he's not available. For me he is a player that could make a positive difference in our team.
OK, my bad - Ray Wilkinson from 25 years ago :guw: :rone:
Maltese Charlie
10-06-2005, 12:23
I have heard that AcMilan was interested another Watford player namely John Barnes, and some how ended up with Blisset, who scored 5 goals for us and was an absolute Flop.
:5drunk:
Yes, I heard that as well, although it is very hard to me to believe such thing was a mistake. Even that in those times Milan were passing their worst period
Stezagud
10-06-2005, 12:33
Its Ray Wilkins !!! :D
You steza are too "biased" on Gerrard, man. I honestly doubt that your opinion of him would still be as high if he wasn't an Englishman.
Maybe, but i watch enough football to know a good player and Gerrard is one. Maybe your biased against English players too? You dont think they can succeed in Italy because a few tried in the 80's, of those, guys like Blissett and Hately had spent the bulk of their careers in the old English division 2 and people are surprised when they dont succeed at Milan? :eek: ;)
Since then who has been to Italy? Gazza? he was crocked in the FA Cup final before he even joined Lazio and never recovered. Platt was as good in Italy as he ever was for mighty Aston Villa. Ince? as far as i know he did well. Beyond them who is there?
By the way, Denis Law is Scottish, though he was an English league player. He didnt like Italy and moved back to England where he became European player of the year with Utd :D Jimmy Greaves did the same, he wouldve have been a phenomenon in Italy but he couldnt handle the pre game sex ban :cool:
I have heard that AcMilan was interested another Watford player namely John Barnes, and some how ended up with Blisset, who scored 5 goals for us and was an absolute Flop.
yeah i've heard that too :dielaugh:
Of the guys on your list who are in your eyes better than Gerrard, i genuinely believe only Ballack can match him. I mean seriously, you have the entire Lyon midfield in there, they have 3 players better than Gerrard and Vieira :eek:
What they actually have is 3 players who know there roles and compliment each other well, ie the sum is greater than the parts. Mascherano has proven little yet, Rosicky was linked with a £3m move to Spurs only a few weeks ago :D Pizarro is good but i wouldnt quite rank him with Gerrard and Vieira.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 12:55
Maybe, but i watch enough football to know a good player and Gerrard is one. Maybe your biased against English players too?
OK, sorry Ray for mispronouncing your name.
In fact, I am far from biased vs English, or Spanish, players but it is always helpful to look back and see these curious trends of how many of their countrymen failed to make it in the Serie A. I always judge players based on their individual qualities for it would be rather narrowminded to say that if Englishman A failed in Serie A, then the same couls be expected for Englishman B. However, there is something that "trends from the past" do show you, while judging Gerrard on his performances for LIverpool do not. I am sure you will agree that every league and country has its own phylosophy and understanding of how the game of football should be played or what constitutes a boring game, for example. And I am sure that this is namely the reason why we have such "trends from the past", if I may call them so.
See, my point is that Gerrard is great in England and may easily be a failure in Italy not because his technical qualities are that bad or will deteriorate if he changes the league, but namely because he as an Englishman has one understanding of the technical and tactical merits of the football game, and history shows that this undersatnding doesn't seem to flourish at the Apenine peninsula, while it will most probably have a lot of success in Spain, for example.
I say this, because by watching Gerrard, and I have done so many many times too, he doesn't strike me as an incredibly inventive player, gifted with jaw-dropping, brazilianlike technical qualities. He is a player who is far more suited to the British style of playing with lots of running, quick and often imprecise passing, and way too much space and time GIFTED to him to operate freely on the ball - things he may be able to find in Spain, but definitely not in Italy.
I am not even discuss in greater debth the "dangers" from the vast cultural change that Gerrard may experience if he does come to a country like Italy. And this has been the main problem for many, many players - not just coming to Italy from England but also the other way around - for if a player doesn't feel psychological comfort but is instead stressed out by this change, he will never be himself on the field either. And we see this happen to people all the time, not just in soccer but in all other aspects of life. Unfortunately and rather curiously, this is often being left out and hardly considered.
I won't bother posting my reply ... i had it all written out and it sure let off ALOT of steam at some people ... but what's the point, i'll just be called biased because i'm English and i'm supporting an English player. Plus it's an argument that i have no chance of winning ... it's only the premiership so people who perform there don't matter, their performances don't count. No one from England could ever settle in Serie A or be technically good enough ... all the players for Milan never have bad games or misplace passes ... i forgot that means my arguments aren't worth anything, sorry. :rollani:
Gio-mania
10-06-2005, 15:41
Same with the "Vieira failed at 17/18" argument, it has practically no bearing on the player he is today. Pirlo and Seedorf were a lot older than Vieira when they "failed" at Inter but that didnt stop them winning a European Cup with Milan !
well, apart from the fact that u might have a point there is would like to point out that:
it was INTER they played at.......... anyone will flop at the recent inter, probably even ronaldinho. dude if we changed our squad with inters after 2 yrs we'd be acing their ass so badly. its simply the atmosphere in INTER the last 16yrs.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 15:45
I won't bother posting my reply ... i had it all written out and it sure let off ALOT of steam at some people ... but what's the point, i'll just be called biased because i'm English and i'm supporting an English player. Plus it's an argument that i have no chance of winning ... it's only the premiership so people who perform there don't matter, their performances don't count. No one from England could ever settle in Serie A or be technically good enough ... all the players for Milan never have bad games or misplace passes ... i forgot that means my arguments aren't worth anything, sorry. :rollani:
OK, I probably forgot to give examples for English players who I think will have a far greater chance of making it in Serie A than Gerrard simply because their game is more suited to Italy. The major reason why I think they would be more successful is because they are more complete players than Gerrard i.e. have superior ball technique and don't just run around, throwing tackles left and right:
Lampard, Joe Cole, Ashley Cole, and Terry.
Ferdinand - too big and clumsy.
I know they are not all midfielders but, honestly, these are the only players from the EPL/English NT, who have a real chance of making in Italy too and I would more than welcome any possibility of seeing them at Milan - probably without Ashley Cole for I am not entirely convinced in his defensive solidity, but apart from that he is a great modern left back in the game.
If you say so Zlatanov ... you and the other posters are always right.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 15:52
If you say so Zlatanov ... you and the other posters are always right.
That you don't like it doesn't mean it is not true.
hey, i'm agreeing with you ... anyone who has different oppinions to you and the others here must be wrong.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 16:20
An opinion is nothing without being supported by some arguments or some logical resoning. So, try doing that - and please don't say "let's forget what history tells us" - instead of going on the defensive in such a miserable way.
Again, just because you don't like something, that doesn't mean it is not true or right. The same goes for me and the others, as well, but at least I am giving examples from the past and I am offering a very possible and plausible explanation why English players, in general, aren't exactly success in Italy. And to show you that I am not an anti-EPL movement member, I also offered several English players, who IMO would be much more likely to make it in Milan than Gerrard, and I gave my reasons for why I think so and just because none of them plays for Liverpool, well, it is not mine but Liverpool's problem. It might not be much but it is definitely more than something like "hey, Gerrard is great in the EPL, I have a strong gut feeling he will rock in Italy too". And at least, I try looking for arguments that support my opinion instead of running out them after one post and backing down on my second with some pretty pathetic defensive tactics.
Furthermore, I am the one here who is the least biased on the subject - I have nothing against England, their players, their EPL, Liverpool, or any other EPL team. The only thing I dislike is superficial statements like "The EPL is the best league in the world" but this comes from fans of the Serie A, so ... I don't have much of a problem with it.
You, and Steza, on the other hand have a handful of subconscious PATRIOTIC reasons why you might not be completely impartial in what you say, especially you, as a Liverpool fan.
Stezagud
10-06-2005, 16:42
An opinion is nothing without being supported by some arguments or some logical resoning.
at least I am giving you examples from the past and I am offering a very possible and plausible explanation why English players, in general, aren't success in Italy
You havent really given any examples, largely because there are so few to choose from. I can think of only 4 decent English players to move to Italy in the 90s, Gazza, Ince, Platt and Lee Sharpe (who's career had been in decline for some time before his short spell at Sampdoria). Bothroyd played and even scored a couple of goals but he hasnt made an impact in Italy or England. Of these players only Gazza didnt perform at the same standards as he had been producing when he left England and that can easily be attributed to the knee injury in his final Spurs game that ruined his career.
I used to believe this theory myself when i was younger, i was in awe of Serie A and guys like Baggio and Maldini who made everything look so classy, but when i looked at the English players who have bothered to play in Serie A the theory collapsed for me.
I also dont quite understand why you think Gerrard would struggle in Italy but were happy when Milan were linked with Ljungberg? Ljungberg relies on his ability to run non stop and exploit space made for him by Henry and Bergkamp(or Reyes) if these are the things that wont be available/effective in Italy then what is it Ljungberg has that Gerrard doesnt? and dont say skill, anyone who's ever seen a ljungberg stepover will know what im on about :D
Oh and i agree with your list of potentially successful English players with one exception, Ferdinand would be fantastic in Italy.
Pizarro, Diarra, Juninho Pernambucano, Essien, Balack, Rosicky, Mascherano .......... I am sure there are at least 5-6 more but these are off the top of me head.
We could buy at least two of these for the money we would have to waste on Gerrard, and then pray that he would actually make in the Serie A, unlike most of his countrymen before him.
Gerrard is in between a DM and an attacking midfielder, a bit like Deco & Ballack. Essien is too expensive. Rosicky and Juninho are pure playmakers. Diarra and Mascherano are pure DMs. Gerrard's range of passing is as good as Pirlo's. Going forward he's tremendous and he has great leadership qualities. Where he falls down is tactically, he doesn't have a clue and runs around like a headless chicken. He's also criticised by Liverpool fans for giving the ball away cheaply - because he always attempts difficult passes.
I don't know what you've been watching over the past few years but Serie A is now an absolute joke. There is no comparison between the level of play today compared to the glory years of the mid 80s - early 90s. Any half decent player isn't going to struggle in a league in which the difference between a UEFA Cup place and relegation is 3 points.
He would be a massive success in Serie A and under a coach like Ancelotti would only improve. If we were going to sign a player like Gerrard I'd rather have Bouba Diop who would be much cheaper, is bigger, stronger, quicker and tackles like a bastard. In any case you won't see either player at this club. Now that those lucky red vermin are in the Champions League I expect Gerrard will stay.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 18:07
@ Steza:
Actually from all those English players you mentioned none was successful in the real meaning of the word "success" - it is more like they didn't fail in the Serie A and had some very good, even great, games in Italy.
The reson why I am keen on Ljungberg is that, while he may run a lot, he is a very manouverable player and improvises quite a bit when going forward. And, hopefully you won't start crying :), but he is more comfortable on the ball too, compared to Gerrard that is. Plus, like all Swedes, he is a physical type of player too yet he has a certain amount of flair and unpredictability when going forward - please try looking at him as a football player and not as an Arsenal player, whose relatives I am sure you and your fellow ManU fans have mentioned a lot over the past 4 years or so.:)
The reason why don't think Gerrardwill make in Italy is because his success in EPL is based on the tactics of the English football culture, if you will, - way too much space and time is given to players to operate on the ball, make a decision on the next move, take a shot, etc. Tactics, and more precisely defensive and game-stiffling tactics are simply not part of EPL football, at least not for the majority of EPL clubs except for Chelsea and now Liverpool after the arrival of Mourinho and Benitez. One of Gerrard's major weapons, and probably his best, is his ability to take long-range shots, however, there are two major factors that contribute to this being successful in the EPL - 1) his undoubtedly GREAT shooting technique and 2) if you watch those moments very very carefully, you will see that he is eather completely uncovered by the oponent or the other player(s) are backing towards their own goal instead of trying to close him down in numbers. This gives him two essential advantages he WILL NOT find in Italy - plenty of time and space to look around, measure that shot, and execute it with accuracy.
Apart from that, he is a very good tackler but this is pretty ubiquitous throughout the whole Serie A and I am not sure it is worth paying 30 mil euros when you can have that for much cheaper. Basically his tackling ability is the only thing from his repertoire I do believe he would take to Italy with him and will be able to use it there just like in the EPL but again - too much money for a goot tackler.
As I am sure it has come to your attention that those players, who I think will have more success, are in general plaers who are very comfortable on the ball, apart from Terry but as a CD, he doesn't need to be a Maradona, after all. The reason is that, IMO, the only way for English players to overcome the lack of time and space they will get in Serie A, as compared to the EPL, is not just by moving more quickly all over the field but also by possessing the technique necessary to get themselves out of complex situations, when they are surrounded by 2-3 oponents, and, in general, be able to free some space and start an attack on thier own - something like Seedorf, Pirlo, Kaka, Nedved, Pizarro, C Zanetti, Emerson, Cambiasso, etc, etc.
This is where I see Gerrard to be lacking - in his ball handling abilities, which will most probably turn out to be essential for him being successful in Serie A. I say probably because there is nothing 100% certain in this world, however, I honestly doubt it is worth, and wise, paying at least 30 mil euros in order to find out what the truth is. And I am sure Galliani is not keen on it either - it simply isn't worth the risk of possibly wasting that much money on one player when there are a number of other alternative options, who are at least as good as Gerrard, and also much cheaper, mainly because they don't have the notorious British media to create that price-raising legendary aura about them.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 18:20
Gerrard is in between a DM and an attacking midfielder, a bit like Deco & Ballack. Essien is too expensive. Rosicky and Juninho are pure playmakers. Diarra and Mascherano are pure DMs. Gerrard's range of passing is as good as Pirlo's. Going forward he's tremendous and he has great leadership qualities. Where he falls down is tactically, he doesn't have a clue and runs around like a headless chicken. He's also criticised by Liverpool fans for giving the ball away cheaply - because he always attempts difficult passes.
I agree on most of what you said although I wouldn't necessarily compare Gerrard to a "headless chicken" but you are right that this is one of his drawbacks as a player - no one is perfect, of course. In my previous post, I have mentioned what else I think he is missing in order to make him a success in Serie A. So, all in all, do you think it is worth paying 30 mil euros for a player who "doesn't have a clue and runs around like a headless chicken" when for the same amount of money we could buy 2-3 of the players above and maybe even have some leftovers? My guess is that the answer is more than obvious, and what's even more important is that Galliani probably thinks the same way.
I don't know what you've been watching over the past few years but Serie A is now an absolute joke. There is no comparison between the level of play today compared to the glory years of the mid 80s - early 90s. Any half decent player isn't going to struggle in a league in which the difference between a UEFA Cup place and relegation is 3 points.
I think you should be asking yourself this same question for you are basing this whole passage on one single mysrable season usually big clubs like Roma, Lazio, Parma had. Once the financial difficulties are resolved, things will come in their places. Furthermore, a small pint difference between UEFA Cup spot and relegation could be a negative thing but could also be a very positive mark for a very competitive league with equally distributed "power" among a large number of teams. And just because there were only two teams who were effectively in the title race, that doesn't mean that the rest are poor just because there weren't any major point gaps between them.
zlatanov... ur saying lampard would succeed in italy while gerrard wouldnt.. honestly they both seem so similar that i think theyre equally good the only difference is that lampard likes to shoot more and join the attack more, while gerrard likes to distribute passes instead though he is also a great shooter. i can see why u think one would succeed while the other wont
oh and by refering to steza and jim as biased because their englishmen is a very weak argument i have to admit... and about ur post where u say that steza might have his somewhat negative view on ljunberg because hes a man u fan ... id like to ask u, since hes a man u fan isnt he supposed to dislike liverpool just as much if not more (since pool and manure are the real local enemies) ... show some facts instead of depending on the nationality of the other views please. :)
I agree on most of what you said although I wouldn't necessarily compare Gerrard to a "headless chicken" but you are right that this is one of his drawbacks as a player - no one is perfect, of course. In my previous post, I have mentioned what else I think he is missing in order to make him a success in Serie A. So, all in all, do you think it is worth paying 30 mil euros for a player who "doesn't have a clue and runs around like a headless chicken" when for the same amount of money we could buy 2-3 of the players above and maybe even have some leftovers? My guess is that the answer is more than obvious, and what's even more important is that Galliani probably thinks the same way.
i dont think stez and jim here are asking for galliani to buy gerrard especially for 30m ... theyre just saying they would love to see him here without refering to any financial values... I THINK
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 19:02
zlatanov... ur saying lampard would succeed in italy while gerrard wouldnt.. honestly they both seem so similar that i think theyre equally good the only difference is that lampard likes to shoot more and join the attack more, while gerrard likes to distribute passes instead though he is also a great shooter. i can see why u think one would succeed while the other wont
yes, that's what I think - Lampard is more likely to make it in Italy than Gerrard and I have tryed to give my reasons above - mainly because he is more comfortable with the ball at his feet. He is more complete as a player, IMO. As for them being alike - trying watching them more closely - no, I am not being sarcastic or anything, just a piece of advise. I am sure you will find the diferences.
oh and by refering to steza and jim as biased because their englishmen is a very weak argument i have to admit... and about ur post where u say that steza might have his somewhat negative view on ljunberg because hes a man u fan ... id like to ask u, since hes a man u fan isnt he supposed to dislike liverpool just as much if not more (since pool and manure are the real local enemies) ... show some facts instead of depending on the nationality of the other views please. :)
unfortunately, whether you like it or not, this is a fact and it is not just some "rumour" that I am spreadying around. And it is true for everyone - me, you, them, everyone everywhere. I am not saying that they are purposefully plugging Gerrard because he is an Englishman but I am claiming that it is in everyone of us to SUBCONSCIOUSLY feel more sympathetic to someone from their own country or cultural background, if you will. This doesn't need to be meant and/or done on purpose to be there, it is there, it exists through our basic human nature and there is no need for us to purposefully and intentionally place in the picture. All in all, it is there without us calling for it or not, no matter whether we like it or despise, it is there and it is a fact by itself.
As for Steza's dislike of Ljungberg:
1) Arsenal have been the natural rival of ManU in EPL for the past decade or so and Liverpool have been a sleeping giant. So, Steza, as a ManU fan is much more likely to dislike Arsenal and its players than Liverpool. In Serie A, for example, unless a Milan fan lives in Milano or the region, chances are that person, especially if 15-25 yo, as a Milan fan hates Juve more than Inter namely becuase Inter have been in the oblivion for the past 15 years, while Juve have been our main rivals.
2) There is no physical law that says that a ManU fan has to hate Liverpool - a team that hasn't been their main rival for quite some time now. Of course, there no law that says that a ManU fan has to dislike Arsenal but chances are - mostly because Arsenal have been ManU's major EPL rival - that younger ManU fans will feel exactly ths way about Arsenal and be more impartial when it comes to Liverpool.
3)We are back to where we started - chances are, whether we realize it or not, whether we want it or not - we will feel more sympathetic towards our countrymen than to a foreigner, a foreigner like Ljungberg for example.
Sorry if I turned this into a psychology lecture and if all this sounds a bit far-fetched but try to carefully think about it and it may start making more sense to you, especially if you can be honest with yourself.
EDITED:
4) Everyone likes certain people while others he/she dislikes, maybe even hates. Isn't that true for you too? Steza's dislike for Ljungberg can be entirely based on a personal basis, why should this imply that he necessarily has to hate Gerrard too, just because the latter plays for a rival club.
I, and I think many other people here, like Havier Zanetti and Thuram, but at the same time I cannot stand Materazzi or Nedved. See, obviously I don't hate Materazzi for being an Inter player but for the monkey-ass he is.
sorry man but that is weak :)
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 19:14
i dont think stez and jim here are asking for galliani to buy gerrard especially for 30m ... theyre just saying they would love to see him here without refering to any financial values... I THINK
I see what you mean, and maybe to extent you do have a point, however all discussions here should assume the price of a player for, after all this is what makes one player "suitable", if you will, and not just his abilities. What I am trying to say is - I wouldn't mind having Gerrard at Milan for free or even 5 mil euros, or maybe even 10 mil. Even if he turns out to be a flop, we have hardly anything to lose, while if he does turn out to be a success, we can only gain, and gain a lot, from that.
I claim that Gerrard will be a flop in Serie A, while others say he would make it in Italy. Well, truth is all this are only assumptions based on more or less hypothetical arguments. The only way to know for sure is to get him and try him. And this is whare the "money" factor comes in with a bang - it is one thing to try and see if Gerrard is suitable for Serie A when he costs, say 5 mil euros, but the whole picture looks very, very different if you consider his actual price or around 30 mil euros. In that case this whole "Gerrard experiment" suddenly looks far from a good idea.
What do you think Galliani's opinion on the matter is?
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 19:21
sorry man but that is weak :)
no, it only sounds weak for you are not trying to look into it and you are expecting proof in the form of a picture or a tape. Again, try to be honest with yourself, and you will see that it is everyday life for everyone of us, at one point or another.
But as I said, most of the time we ourselves are not aware it is there so I guess it is OK if it sounds weak to you. After all, that doesn't mean it truely is.
EDIT: I tried even harder in my previous post - adde reason #4 :D
I agree on most of what you said although I wouldn't necessarily compare Gerrard to a "headless chicken" but you are right that this is one of his drawbacks as a player - no one is perfect, of course. In my previous post, I have mentioned what else I think he is missing in order to make him a success in Serie A. So, all in all, do you think it is worth paying 30 mil euros for a player who "doesn't have a clue and runs around like a headless chicken" when for the same amount of money we could buy 2-3 of the players above and maybe even have some leftovers? My guess is that the answer is more than obvious, and what's even more important is that Galliani probably thinks the same way.
For the amount of money and given he is injury prone he's totally not worth 30 million euros, half that yes but not more.
I think you should be asking yourself this same question for you are basing this whole passage on one single mysrable season usually big clubs like Roma, Lazio, Parma had. Once the financial difficulties are resolved, things will come in their places. Furthermore, a small pint difference between UEFA Cup spot and relegation could be a negative thing but could also be a very positive mark for a very competitive league with equally distributed "power" among a large number of teams. And just because there were only two teams who were effectively in the title race, that doesn't mean that the rest are poor just because there weren't any major point gaps between them.
I have always argued that if that gap between teams from say 5th place down towards relegation is small that's the sign of a mediocre league. Serie A's advantage over La Liga and the EPL was an 18 team league. All you do with 2 more teams is increase the mediocrity at the bottom of the league and add somewhere in the region of 50 mediocre players. A few years ago 7 teams had realistic title ambitions in Italy, now there are only 2. Roma, Lazio and Parma are flat broke, they haven't a prayer of winning the league anytime soon. Fiorentina have money but are also miles away. Inter have a chance, as usual, of challenging Milan and Juventus.
I grew up watching the best players in the World face each other every single week but they didn't do it in the Champions League, they did it in Serie A. No the league have EVER had the concentration of talent Italian clubs had between the mid 80s - early 90s nor did any other league produce the level of football these players and these teams produced. Those are very high standards.
I'm sickened by what Serie A has become, an oversized championship in which most teams play end to end football with crap defending and a million mistakes. If I wanted to watch that, I'd watch the Premiership.
Proving it in Serie A today means nothing, it's the Champions League that counts.
zlatanov
10-06-2005, 19:50
For the amount of money and given he is injury prone he's totally not worth 30 million euros, half that yes but not more.
I have always argued that if that gap between teams from say 5th place down towards relegation is small that's the sign of a mediocre league. Serie A's advantage over La Liga and the EPL was an 18 team league. All you do with 2 more teams is increase the mediocrity at the bottom of the league and add somewhere in the region of 50 mediocre players. A few years ago 7 teams had realistic title ambitions in Italy, now there are only 2. Roma, Lazio and Parma are flat broke, they haven't a prayer of winning the league anytime soon. Fiorentina have money but are also miles away. Inter have a chance, as usual, of challenging Milan and Juventus.
I grew up watching the best players in the World face each other every single week but they didn't do it in the Champions League, they did it in Serie A. No the league have EVER had the concentration of talent Italian clubs had between the mid 80s - early 90s nor did any other league produce the level of football these players and these teams produced. Those are very high standards.
I'm sickened by what Serie A has become, an oversized championship in which most teams play end to end football with crap defending and a million mistakes. If I wanted to watch that, I'd watch the Premiership.
Proving it in Serie A today means nothing, it's the Champions League that counts.
I do agree with most of this for I also miss the Serie A where 5, if not 7 teams were fighting for the title. However, my point was that a small point gap between the teams could mean A but it could also mean B. Now there were only two teams who were fightning fo the scudetto, however, that doesn't mean that the level of the "second-hand" teams has plummeted compared to what it was 5-6 years ago or so. Back then you had 7 strong teams and 11 bench warmers, now we have 3-4 strong teams and the rest is just fill up. My point is that the a small point gap could very well mean more competitive rivalry between these so called "bench warmers" The reason for this is that teams like Roma, Lazio, Parma have fallen down into the second-tier teams while teams like Udinese, Samp, Palermo, Messina, Livorno who 5 years ago were more or less crap, now they have improved a lot. and while they are far from being title contenders, this inevitably raises the quality of the whole group of average teams - the title contenders are often far ahead of these teams have hardly any effect on the weaker teams in serie A.
The strong teams in Italy are even now serious cempetitors in the CL, llok at Inter - they were crap in Serie A while they could have easily reached the CL final if it wasn't for Milan to stop them. Look at Parma - a team with all chances to get relegated into Serie B but they reached the semis in UEFA Cup using their reserve players in almost all games.
The only reason why Serie A looks bad today is baecause it misses Roma, Lazio, and probably Parma among its top title contenders. Instead, thease teams are in the group of average teams right now but I am sure they will soon get off their knees, especially Roma, and will be up there again.
Apart from that, I think the quality of the "bench warmers" has increased with teams like Palermo, Udinese, Samp, Messina, and even Livorno.
Raising the quality of average teams is hardly something to shout about and you can't really use the European argument as we were beaten by a team that finished 5th in the EPL.
Over a decade ago Lazio and Parma become a force but now their cycle is over. The chance is there for other teams to step up but without major investment it won't happen and as serious threat Roma are finished.
Maltese Charlie
11-06-2005, 02:16
Raising the quality of average teams is hardly something to shout about and you can't really use the European argument as we were beaten by a team that finished 5th in the EPL.
Over a decade ago Lazio and Parma become a force but now their cycle is over. The chance is there for other teams to step up but without major investment it won't happen and as serious threat Roma are finished.
I do not agree with your first paragraph because to loose a final with penalty shout out and from 120 minutes Milan absolutely dominated for 110 minutes shows the high level of the Italian league.
In fact Milan till April were playing the best football in the continent. Consider the way how Man Und were dominated.
What exactly happened during the month of May is very hard to explain but for sure Milan had a big disadvantage compered to their european rivals, that had to compete in a very stressfull domestic league while most of their competitors were focusing only on the champions league. During this month phisical and mental tiredness were clearly seen.
I also agree with Zlatanov when he mentioned Parma and their advance in the eufa. Also 2 years ago in the champions league there were 3 italian teams with the last 4. These are very strong argument that shows the high standard of the Italian leauge.
I think that nowadays the teams are more balanced than the 80's (exception for the big 3 teams) is due to the foreign players allowed to play in the league.
In the 80's it was only permitted to have 3 foreigners in each club, so the big clubs were not running after the best players that suits them worldwide like nowadays but had to look into the Italian market. This means that the supply was shorter, and the price for a good player was extremely high.
In this situation the so called small teams found it very difficult to built a competitive team with the others.
Nowadays a small club can buy very good unpopular players for a reasonable price, and that's why in my opinion the so called small clubs are very competitive.
Stezagud
11-06-2005, 03:43
Actually from all those English players you mentioned none was successful in the real meaning of the word "success" - it is more like they didn't fail in the Serie A and had some very good, even great, games in Italy.
But my point is, only Gazza did worse in Italy than he was doing in England when he left, and that can be blamed on his serious (career destroying) injury much more than him struggling because of Serie A itself. Platt and Ince just carried on in the same way they played in England and Sharpe wasnt good but he was no worse that he had been for some time in England too. His next move was to Bradford iirc which tells you which direction his career was heading (he's now on a reality tv show here so it appears he has hit rock bottom :( )
As for Steza's dislike of Ljungberg:
I should have clarified last night and saved you some time so my apologies. I actually thought signing Ljungberg would be a good idea, and if you read the thread on it i was quite clear about it. I stand by the fact that he isnt any more skillful than Gerrard but both of them good players. The point i was making is that to excel Ljungberg relies on the things that would supposedly be deinied him in Italy. It is my opinion that both he and Gerrard are good enough to overcome the differences in the leagues. MK has made a similar point regarding Lampard and Gerrard and i agree with him on that too, if one could succeed then the other could. Zlatanov, if Gerrard isnt going to be able to make use of his shooting abilities then what of Lampard??
why should this imply that he necessarily has to hate Gerrard too, just because the latter plays for a rival club.
on this one you're correct :D
I do hate Liverpool and next season is going to be hell (Robbie Fowler waving 5 fingers instead of 4 now :mad: ) but i have always liked Gerrard. Fergie has been very public in saying he wanted Gerrard to replace Keane and even though Utd dont buy Liverpool players and vice versa, this is one occasion id be happy to see them break that unwritten rule.
I'll have to come back to this later as im off to play football myself now :cool:
zlatanov
11-06-2005, 06:13
Zlatanov, if Gerrard isnt going to be able to make use of his shooting abilities then what of Lampard??
I tried to make it clear but I guess it got lost in the rest of those long posts - I find Lampard to be a more complete player - better technique on the ball but also better off-ball movement i.e. tactically more aware than Gerrard. I believe these two would be absolutely essential in overcoming the difference in the on-field environment between Serie A and EPL for Lampard would find it much easier to create time and space for himself instead of rely on the lack of tactical discipline in the opponent. In the EPL, both players enjoy sort of a "free-ride" of a game but in Italy, I believe, it would be a very different story with opponents trying to close them down even before they get the ball, opponents, who will be much more disciplined tactically and better trained at stiffling the opponent. For these conditions, I find Lampard to be better suited for the reasons I mentioned at the beginning.
Stezagud
11-06-2005, 07:47
I tried to make it clear but I guess it got lost in the rest of those long posts - I find Lampard to be a more complete player - better technique on the ball but also better off-ball movement i.e. tactically more aware than Gerrard.
Im not so sure thats the case, imho Chelsea make space for Lampard better than Liverpool do for Gerrard. Drogba is the target man and then 2 of Robben, Duff and Cole are given free reign to move infield or out at will, this makes a lot of room for Lampard as he is the most attack minded of Chelseas central midfield 3.
In contrast Liverpool play with one main striker too but they dont have the same attacking options to support, only Garcia has the same attacking license as the Chelsea wingers. Consequently Gerrard doesnt get the same time and space as Lampard always does but it doesnt necesarily mean its because he doesnt have the same understanding Lampard does.
The main criticism of Gerrard is that he tries overly ambitious passes , which is certainly true at times. Again though, he has been playing in a side which before the arrival of Xabi Alonso expected him to do everything. When a world class player plays alongside weaker players it no surprise when they try to do things themselves instead of trusting their teammates. If Pirlo or Kaka had been in the same team i dont think they would pass the playmaking duties onto the likes of Igor Biscan either :D
As for the oft criticised EPL defenders, they are well aware of Gerrards threat and do try to stop him, its just hard to stop someone as energetic as Gerrard who is quite capable of scoring from 35 yards. Remember that he has scored in Europe too, He was only pushed into an attacking midfield role in the final for about 20-30 mins and in that time Milan really struggled to stop him.
I do not agree with your first paragraph because to loose a final with penalty shout out and from 120 minutes Milan absolutely dominated for 110 minutes shows the high level of the Italian league.
It shows the high level of Milan, it has nothing to do with the Italian league.
I also agree with Zlatanov when he mentioned Parma and their advance in the eufa. Also 2 years ago in the champions league there were 3 italian teams with the last 4. These are very strong argument that shows the high standard of the Italian leauge.
No it doesn't. It shows the strong level of 3 teams, the same teams over and over again.
I think that nowadays the teams are more balanced than the 80's (exception for the big 3 teams) is due to the foreign players allowed to play in the league.
Teams are balanced in the sense that most of them are equally mediocre.
zlatanov
11-06-2005, 10:24
Teams are balanced in the sense that most of them are equally mediocre.
Truth is that no one can say this for sure - you first argument is that there is a small point gap among UEFA CUp spot and relegation zone. I don't know what your mathematical background is but a simple mathematical intuition should be more than enough to tell you that this could very well mean two, totally different things: 1) what you claim - that most serie A teams are equally ballanced in their mediocrity or 2) that most teams are equally ballanced in the sense that they constitute a stronger nucleus of "smaller" teams in Serie A.
Yet, somehow, you show absolute certainty that it is 1) disregarding any possiblity for 2) being true. And, what's even worse, is that you do so based on nothing close to being a "fact" but more like a gut feeling.
Your second argument is that the number of title contenders has decresed over the past 6 years or so - from 5-6, maybe even 7 to 3-4. I don't think anayone can disagree with this, however, these "title contenders" have always managed to break away from the other teams in the league, and this is true for avery big European League since 3 points began to be awarded for victory and only for a draw - I mention this for this allowes for much more noticeable point gaps between top teams and the rest. Yet, I claim, and I would like to see how you argue about this, that the number or even the level of the top teams, who tend to break away one way or the other, has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the smaller teams, the only difference is that instead of 4-5 teams breaking away in Serie A of 6 years ago, now there are only 2-3 of them.
What I am trying to say is that the number of title contenders obviously relates to the number of top quality teams in Serie A, however, it has no relation to the quality, financial stability and capabilities, etc of smaller teams, and a more competitive league is measured not just by the deteriorated performance of used-to-be strong teams but also of how the the majority of all teams, i.e. smaller teams, has changed as well. And in our case, what we see is teams with improved qulaity for they are financially stable and are able to attract better players.
Truth is that no one can say this for sure - you first argument is that there is a small point gap among UEFA CUp spot and relegation zone. I don't know what your mathematical background is but a simple mathematical intuition should be more than enough to tell you that this could very well mean two, totally different things: 1) what you claim - that most serie A teams are equally ballanced in their mediocrity or 2) that most teams are equally ballanced in the sense that they constitute a stronger nucleus of "smaller" teams in Serie A.
Yet, somehow, you show absolute certainty that it is 1) disregarding any possiblity for 2) being true. And, what's even worse, is that you do so based on nothing close to being a "fact" but more like a gut feeling.
Who is Serie A top scorer? Lucarelli. Who are the champions? Juventus, a team who play the type of football Birmingham City and Everton play. That's how far standards have fallen. Serie A no longer has the highest number of International class players, Serie A is no longer attracting the cream of European and South American talent. While the top clubs in England and Spain are splashing out, Milan, Juve, Inter and Roma are signing ageing players on free transfers.
Your second argument is that the number of title contenders has decresed over the past 6 years or so - from 5-6, maybe even 7 to 3-4. I don't think anayone can disagree with this, however, these "title contenders" have always managed to break away from the other teams in the league, and this is true for avery big European League since 3 points began to be awarded for victory and only for a draw - I mention this for this allowes for much more noticeable point gaps between top teams and the rest. Yet, I claim, and I would like to see how you argue about this, that the number or even the level of the top teams, who tend to break away one way or the other, has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the smaller teams,
It has everything to do with the quality of the seven sisters as they were known, teams loaded with World Class and international class players.
the only difference is that instead of 4-5 teams breaking away in Serie A of 6 years ago, now there are only 2-3 of them.
What I am trying to say is that the number of title contenders obviously relates to the number of top quality teams in Serie A, however, it has no relation to the quality, financial stability and capabilities, etc of smaller teams, and a more competitive league is measured not just by the deteriorated performance of used-to-be strong teams but also of how the the majority of all teams, i.e. smaller teams, has changed as well. And in our case, what we see is teams with improved qulaity for they are financially stable and are able to attract better players.
Mediocre teams are mediocre teams no matter which league they play in. As for finances. 2 years ago the difference in revenue between Serie A and the Premiership was €150, last season that widened to €1.23 billion.
Pathetic defensive tactics ? Classical, that really was. I'll tell you something Zlatanov, the reason i stopped was because you think you are always right. Why should i bother making my case when you will turn around and say that i'm biased and brush off any arguments i do make ? You will also bring out an old chestnut like how you get less time and space in Italy and how players are quicker to close you down. What a load of nonsense. I guess our midfield must have forgot to do this when we all charged out to block Smicer's rocket ? Why i don't bother doing this sort of thing isn't because i don't think of arguments, it's because whatever i say will be replied by some idiot saying "well Gerrard misplaced a pass in one game so he must be rubbish" or something equally pathetic. Whatever i reply with is the arguments i've taken from others here, so i'm just using their logic. You've made up your mind, but to amuse you here goes.
Well Kris i do watch Milan games and unfortunately the ones i have see are where Pirlo and Seedorf fall over when they're tackled and expect a foul ... but play carries on and they get nothing. Maybe i've just been unlucky in the games i've watched, but that's my experience. Plus you can see better more committed tackling in games i play with my mates on a Sunday then you would with some of their challenges. Of course, sometimes they do their job, no doubt about it ... we wouldn't have won what we did over the last few years if our midfield was rubbish. But they're not the super great all conquering midfielders that some posters seem to think they are.
You're quick to point out how well Pirlo played against Man Utd, well done to you for that. Now if i point out how badly he played in a game it's deemed to be not relevant. Hwmook says that Gerrard was absent and non exsistent in the first half of the final and yet if i tell him about the many games where he was exceptional, it would be dismissed because you know .... it's only in the premiership. Plus on your basis Hwmook we might aswell sell Kaka and Shevchenko because they were pretty anonymous in the second half of the final. Just using
your point here, so if you pick holes in it, maybe you should think of a better argument
in the first place.
I'm glad you bought up the biased issue Zlatanov because most posters in here are ripe with it and it seems even if Pele was f*cking English he wouldn't be good enough for any of you and it makes me sick. If you want to talk about bias talk to Maradona (10) and 2 or 3 other South American posters in here who ALWAYS suggest we get players from Brazil or Argentina. I don't see many of you having a go at him. But Steza (who is a Man Utd fan and yet he can still see that Gerrard is a good player !!!!!!!!! ) and i stand up for 1 player and we're bias ..... that's bullsh!t. Subconcious ? Don't make me laugh, that's just complete rubbish, you're really scraping the barrel there. Why would i not stick up for the rest of the English players you mentioned ? Yes, because i'm a Liverpool fan i do argue his case with more vigour but that's only because he is a player i know more about ! Did that ever cross your mind when you were making up these psychological excuses ? I don't see much of Lampard, Cole or the rest of them, because i don't see much of their teams play. I'm only commenting on what i have knowledge on.
Zlatanov, no Gerrard doesn't have Brazillian ability, but then neither do Pirlo, Gattuso or Seedorf ..... how many times have you seen them do stepovers and many dummies to get past people ? So you know, not having the techniques of Ronaldinho or whoever isn't something just associated with Gerrard. Imprecise passes ? Watch the final or Semi final first leg again and see how many imprecise passes our midfield makes, it's shocking for a midfield that is supposed to be part of the best team in the world !
The one thing with Gerrard is he's direct, direct when beating people, direct when shooting (strikes a ball as easily and as hard as Seedorf can) and direct when passing. To say he doesn't have vision or isn't inventive is a bit harsh i think. Some of his passes to Owen when he played for Liverpool were bordering on the Telepathic ! We all raved about the pass Kaka did for our 3rd goal, Gerrard has done many like that but these must have been forgotten about. Oh and Hwmook, you must have missed the many games when Gerrard runs god knows how many yards to tackle on his own 18 yard box, win the ball and start another attack, just like Gattuso. Gerrard has the tenacity of Gattuso, anyone with half a brain can see that so maybe you need to watch the games he plays in a bit more. But i forgot, it's in the Premiership .. it doesn't count .. sorry !
I'll say this, Gerrard is prone to many "Hollywood" passes that go astray, he can lose the ball, he doesn't always beat people, sometimes he can dive in. In truth he's rough around the edges, but surely people can see the potential and recognise he's a very good player ?? Given the quality of players and coaches around him if he came to Milan, he would only get better. He'd become tactically more aware and better at holding the ball. If you add in his energy and ability to drag a team forwards (something none of our midfielders can really do) plus his drive and constant running ( we all see how great Gattuso is at tackling, now imagine a player who does this but can start attacks aswell at a high pace) this would surely be of benefit to Milan. You saw in Europe that whenever Liverpool went at a team, full on attack ... no one could cope with it. Gerrard would add something to our midfield that we currently don't have, that's all i'm saying.
Sorry if my tone is rash but i'm quite frankly fed up with the arguments of some people. If i carried on like some do in here, not liking any player from another country or always discounting them, i'd probably be called a racist or something ! I accept that people don't like players and i'm damn sure i don't know everything about football or other players, but credit where it's due and i think Gerrard should be more deserving of that credit than many give him in here.
zlatanov
11-06-2005, 20:14
Jim_UK, obviously you have your opinion and arguments on the matter and I have mine. And in all honesty no one could say for sure if Gerrard would make it in Serie A or he would be just another flop. However, claiming that Serie A and the EPL don't differ in terms od the tactical awareness and arrangement of the players - a "load of nonsense" as you called it - undermines the credibility of the rest of your arguments for one doesn't have to be a rocket scientist or a certified football coach in order to see that this quite simply isn't true. And I guess this is where the whole argument started from - whether he would be able to overcome these diffrences. Again, using arguments, which state the oposite of something that is so obvious, can only put a question mark upon the validity of the rest and nothing more.
You are right, no one can say if he would or would not make it in Serie A, but you can apply this uncertainty to every player in football. When someone moves to a new club, even if it's between two clubs in the same country, there is never a 100% guarantee that they'll be more or less of a success at their new club compared to their old club.
To be completely truthful i wasn't even thinking about whether he would adapt to Serie A or not, after a point in time that wasn't my issue anymore. My case was whether he would be good enough for Milan's midfield, not "would he succeed" (although i guess that plays a part) or "Should we buy him". It got to a point where people in here didn't rate him because of idiot suggestions like "he plays in the premiership/England, he's rubbish", "he plays for Liverpool, he's rubbish", "he was non existent for half a game once, he's rubbish". Agreed, you didn't say that, but others did.
What i find ludicrous and i hope you will agree with me Zlatanov, is how people can dismiss Gerrard because he plays in an average team, even though if he transferred some of his Liverpool performances to another team, such as Milan, Madrid, Barca, etc, he would be immediately referred to as world class. YET, we go on and rave about Gilardino who scores for fun in an average team and yet he is (according to some) already the best thing since sliced bread. It's that inconsistency that annoys me more than anything, the unwillingness of some to look beyond their own personal narrow mindedness.
Some of my points were probably lost in amongst anger yesterday, so with a clearer head i can retrieve this slightly. I do believe that Serie A relies more on tactics in league games than almost any other league in world football. However, i still don't buy this argument that you get less time on the ball in Serie A. A good defence will pressure you into mistakes and a bad one won't, no matter where you play. There is a difference, however subtle. But that's another argument altogether, one which isn't for today :)
Anyway, lets buy Salif Diao instead :D
So i guess....we could just sell Gattuso to Manchester Utd, and buy Gerrard to fill the right central midfield role....
No offense, i adore Gattuso....but if he played without his heart just like the last years....he is plain mediocre. He seemed to loose his motivation in this year's campaign.....
I would love to have Stevie to fill in Gennaro position......
zlatanov
12-06-2005, 07:04
The problem with having Gerrard at Milan is not just whether he would be able to adapt to Italian football and Italian lifestyle but also if Galliani would be keen on paying 30 mil euros for such an "experiment". And this is very doubtful given our transfer policy, especially when there are other excellent midfielders who would cost 1/2 and even 1/3 of what Gerrard would thus making those other "experiments" far less ricky and thus much more acceptable. I, for example, may believe that Gerrard will not make it in Italy, however, I wouldn't mind having him at Milan - just to try and make sure what the otcome would be - if his price was say 10 mil euros. But at his current price ... he is a risk Galliani is very unlikely to take.
Apart from that, I agree that Gattuso has been less of a lion this past year and wouldn't mind seeing another another player with similar characteristics come to Milan and give Genarro a run for his money. I still hope however, that Istanbul will bring the old Gattuso back, although it's highly unlikely to teach him how to pass a ball :)
I'm 100% sure that gerrard's soccer skills are well enough to play with milan. The only problem is wether he would like it in Italy and is he willing to adapt.
Do players understand enough they really have to adapt to the certain way of live in a new country?
That's according to me the main reason why brazilian and argentinian players adapt almost everywhere they want to leave their home country, they really want to adapt. while english, spanish and yes even italian players usually not make it abroad. I've heard becks still doesn't talk 'decent' spanish? if that is true isn't helping him to adept and to play to his full potential and just allianates him with the thoughts and concerns of the common people in spain.
The italian fleet of players in valencia this season almost constanly said they wanted to return to Italy, it's like they didn't want to play in spain. Fiore for example was IMHO forced to move to spain since lazio owed valencia money of the mendieta deal and lazio just couldn't pay. I don't think fiore was really enthousiastic about the deal to begin with.
In that mental very difficult, adapting period people just expect to much of foreign stars, putting huge pressure on them. most south american players are young players when they arrive so people don't pressure them that much.
we paid 23 mil euros for jose mari and he had to deliver in a team that was undergoing serious changes but was in comparison with today's squad just not good enough.
another example is Riquelme, he was a south american he could speak spanish but still he failed to live up to the great expectations of being the true heir of Maradona. I've heard now he is the leader of villareal, 'he' even got them in the CL...
my point is players must want to adapt and clubs, fans, media must give them time to adapt to the certain livestyle of the country. those things combined aren't the key of succes sometimes the player and the country really don't match
Grant1977
12-06-2005, 10:44
It will have to be Vieria because Gerrard is going no where!! I think Xavi would have been a good target but he has signed a new deal!!
Stezagud
12-06-2005, 14:16
I've heard becks still doesn't talk 'decent' spanish? if that is true isn't helping him to adept and to play to his full potential and just allianates him with the thoughts and concerns of the common people in spain.
give the guy a break, its taken him nearly 30 years to learn English ! ;)
Do players understand enough they really have to adapt to the certain way of live in a new country?
That's according to me the main reason why brazilian and argentinian players adapt almost everywhere they want to leave their home country, they really want to adapt. while english, spanish and yes even italian players usually not make it abroad.
Thats the real point of it, the players who have strong domestic leagues tend not to flourish abroad (though of course there are exceptions) because they dont have to, there is a safety net available to them that the most ambitious players from say Holland, France, South American Countries etc dont have. Gerrard can be a success in England, he has won the CL, is a regular for England and can challenge for the highest honours.
It even used to be considered detrimental to go abroad, before Beckham did not many England hopefuls would consider it because of the lessened exposure they would recieve. I've heard the same of Italian players not wanting to leave Italy for the same reason. Modern technology is removing that obstacle now and slowly players from the major leagues will move around because the best of them want to be in the Champions League and know that only 4-5 clubs per nation offer that as a realistic possibility.
The problem with having Gerrard at Milan is not just whether he would be able to adapt to Italian football
KNOCK KNOCK. Do you know what year this is? It's 2005, not 1995. There is NOTHING difficult about playing in Serie A. 9 years ago in his last full season in Serie A a 29 year old Zola scored 10 goals. This year he scored 9 in 31. That's how far standards have fallen.
The Champions League is the pinnacle of club football, not Serie A.
zlatanov
13-06-2005, 17:00
KNOCK KNOCK - your claims are based on purely gut-feelng like arguments. Following your logic, or rather the lack of it, in 1990, when Zola was 22-23, he should have been goal scorer of the Serie A just because he was younger then? This whole thing of an older Zola scoring goals in Serie A THEREFORE the Serie A must be crap is nothing but an argument as HOLLOW as they get.
Plus let's not forget that Zola is one of the most talanted players of the past 15 years and towards the twilight of his career he did more than enough to be voted the BEST Chelsea player EVER. Given your logical arguments, I feel it is my duty to inform you that Chelsea is an English team and play in the EPL and not the poor rotten Serie A.
One other thing - many, if not most, of Zola's goals come from PKs. Check your stats and then come out and play the role of a football messiah. Capishi?
In conclusion, for your own sake, stop coming out with some stupid arguments like these as if you have just broken the da Vinci code for, in the end, you look more and more like a dumb moron grasping for that last piece of straw. The more you try to look smart and logical, the more you dig yourself in.
Pinnacle of club football? Give me a break and go ask Liverpool fans who they think the best team in Europe is.
FCS, what a fvcking looser.
This is getting too Personal and Boring, none of them both not Vieira not Gerrard are gonna come here, so definately we are'nt going to find out, Just relax, breathe in and out, and enjoy the discussions. :tsr:
KNOCK KNOCK - your claims are based on purely gut-feelng like arguments. Following your logic, or rather the lack of it, in 1990, when Zola was 22-23, he should have been goal scorer of the Serie A just because he was younger then? This whole thing of an older Zola scoring goals in Serie A THEREFORE the Serie A must be crap is nothing but an argument as HOLLOW as they get.
Remember when everyone laughed at the EPL when the likes of Chelsea and Boro signed Serie A rejects who were thought to be past their prime like Zola, Desailly and Vialli? And how they laughed when Zola was among the best players in the league? It's come full circle.
Plus let's not forget that Zola is one of the most talanted players of the past 15 years and towards the twilight of his career he did more than enough to be voted the BEST Chelsea player EVER.
He left Chelsea 2 years ago, now they have more World Class players than any other team, now they are English champions and now they are among the very best teams in Europe. They were none of the above when Zola was at the club.
One other thing - many, if not most, of Zola's goals come from PKs. Check your stats and come out and play the role of a football messiah. Capishi?
Many you say? Really?
2000-2001 : 9 goals, 8 from open play, 1 penalty
2001-2002 : 3 goals, 2 from open play, 1 free kick
2002-2003 : 14 goals, 10 from open play, 4 free kicks
2004-2005 : 9 goals, 4 from open play, 1 free kick, 3 pens
That's 4 penalties from a total of 35 goals. So he must have scored an extraordinary amount of penalties in his previous seasons to overturn this deficit. I assume you have the data to back-up this claim of yours? If so please fill in the blanks.
In conclusion, for your own sake, stop coming out with some stupid arguments like these as if you have just broken the da Vinci code for, in the end, you look more and more like a dumb moron grasping for that last piece of straw. The more you try to look smart and logical, the more you dig yourself in.
In conclusion you're trying to defend your narrow minded prejudices and you're the one who is living in the past.
Pinnacle of club football? Give me a break and go ask Liverpool fans who they think the best team in Europe is.
Of course it's the pinnacle of football. This clubs LEGACY is build on the European Cup, not the scudetto. Like 'proving yourself' in Serie A means anything compared to the Champions League.
FCS, what a fvcking looser.
Dear oh dear, lost our temper have we?
KNOCK KNOCK. There is NOTHING difficult about playing in Serie A. .
Have you played there? are you sure? don't pass such statements again, you are making a fool of yourself. ;)
Have you played there? are you sure? don't pass such statements again, you are making a fool of yourself. ;)
Nothing difficult in relation to playing in any of the other top leagues.
zlatanov
13-06-2005, 19:20
Many you say? Really?
2000-2001 : 9 goals, 8 from open play, 1 penalty
2001-2002 : 3 goals, 2 from open play, 1 free kick
2002-2003 : 14 goals, 10 from open play, 4 free kicks
2004-2005 : 9 goals, 4 from open play, 1 free kick, 3 pens
Of these 4 seasons you are showing only the last one - 2004/2005 - he played in Serie A. The one before that was in Serie B, and the first two, of those above, are in the god-like EPL. And in the one and only Serie A season, from those above, he DOES scored many - close to half - of his goals from stopped play (PKs and free kicks), which is exactly what I claimed in my previous post. I do owe you one big thank you for unearthing all this just to prove me right.
I honestly don't see any reason why you show statistics from other leagues when you are trying to support your illogical statemnet that it is the Serie A that is crap. Actually, I think I know one reason - your are as dumb as a dinner table and have absolutely no clue what you are talking about nor how to support your arguments.
Oh, one other thing regarding the stats for Zola's ONLY Serie A season from the above - season 2004/2005 - don't you think that 4+1+3 makes 8 and not 9? I questioned your math background once but never thought it would be so desperately lacking ...
Now that we are on Zola. if he is such a crap player - since you are using his scoring in Serie A as proof of how weak the Italian league has become - why do you think he was voted the best EPL player of the year at the age of 34? How many other 34 year olds have won this award in England, ha? This fact alone should be enough, even for your illogical mind, to show you that Zola is no ordinary player but a phenomenon in the world of football, and unfortunately, one of the most unappreciated players ever.
One other thing - if the Italian league is so full of ****e, how many 34 yearl olds have been given the MVP of the season in Italy? Following your logic, since old age matters so muchto you, don't you think that the EPL is the crapier league if a 34-year-old player managed to outplay all the rest?
I gave you an advice - change the subject for you are digging yourself deeper with every post you make on this one. You are making a fool of yourself with these absolutely illogical and ridiculous arguments you give. And I guess I am not the only one who told you that.
Take the advice - it is free. Not many other things are.
Of these 4 seasons you are showing only the last one - 2004/2005 - he played in Serie A. The one before that was in Serie B, and the first two, of those above, are in the god-like EPL. And in the one and only Serie A season, from those above, he DOES scored many - close to half - of his goals from stopped play (PKs and free kicks), which is exactly what I claimed in my previous post. I do owe you one big thank you for unearthing all this just to prove me right.
Nice attempt at trying to dig yourself out a hole. You claimed :
One other thing - many, if not most, of Zola's goals come from PKs.
You did NOT claim :
he DOES scored many - close to half - of his goals from stopped play (PKs and free kicks), which is exactly what I claimed in my previous post.
Lying isn't helping your credibility. 4 penalties out of 35 goals is 11.43% which is clearly not most or many. Most of many isn't half either, most or many is over half.
Now unless you have data from the previous seasons we can safely assume that your claim that most of Zola's goals are scored from penalties is complete bollocks.
Oh, one other thing regarding the stats for Zola's ONLY Serie A season from the above - season 2004/2005 - don't you think that 4+1+3 makes 8 and not 9? I questioned your math background once but never thought it would be so desperately lacking ...
One of these goals is either from a free kick or open play but it isn't a penalty, I haven't got round to completing my data for this season.
Now that we are on Zola. if he is such a crap player - since you are using his scoring in Serie A as proof of how weak the Italian league has become - why do you think he was voted the best EPL player of the year at the age of 34?
He was voted EPL player of the year in 1997 when he was 30.
http://rsssf.com/miscellaneous/engpoy.html
How many other 34 year olds have won this award in England, ha? This fact alone should be enough, even for your illogical mind, to show you that Zola is no ordinary player but a phenomenon in the world of football, and unfortunately, one of the most unappreciated players ever.
He's a choking little troll and your argument is irrelevant as he wasn't 34 when he won the award. Besides in 1997 the EPL was crap. Well it's still crap today but it was even worse back then.
One other thing - if the Italian league is so full of ****e, how many 34 yearl olds have been given the MVP of the season in
Italy?
Maybe the same number as in England? Who cares?
I gave you an advice - change the subject for you are digging yourself deeper with every post you make on this one. You are making a fool of yourself with these absolutely illogical and ridiculous arguments you give. And I guess I am not the only one who told you that.
Take the advice - it is free. Not many other things are.
Change the subject to avoid embarrassing you further? Your petty insults won't mask the weakness of your arguments and your bullying tactics won't work on me. You're out of your depth, you just don't know it yet.
your both really childesh if u ask me, and somethings telling me if one of u doesnt ignore the other both of u will get banned
zlatanov
13-06-2005, 21:50
Nice attempt at trying to dig yourself out a hole. You claimed.
Lying isn't helping your credibility. 4 penalties out of 35 goals is 11.43% which is clearly not most or many. Most of many isn't half either, most or many is over half.
Now unless you have data from the previous seasons we can safely assume that your claim that most of Zola's goals are scored from penalties is complete bollocks.
Mehdi, are you just plain dumb or are you playing that role too well?
When you brought Zola in this argument you refered to him scoring 9 goals in his LAST season in serie A and this is what I refered to by saying that he scored "many, if not most, of his goals" from PKs. Your claim was that if an old player like Zola can score 9 goals in Serie A then the whole league is crap, right? Well, we are not discussing Zola's whole career here but just his very last season in Serie A. OK, I will say it in a more simple way - the season that just ended 3 weeks or so ago. Now, you probably realise that 3 ot of 9 IS MANY, and this is not counting the 1 goal he scored from a free kick. With that one you have 4 out of 9 which is even more.
And no, I am not digging myself out of a hole for I never put myself in one - just because you have problems following your own illogical arguments, that has nothing to do with me - why do you think I asked you what the reason for all those OTHER IRRELEVENT stats was?
Your whole statement of Serie A being crap is based one single example of a great player, who at 37-38 managed to score 9 goals, 4 of which were from stopped play. And therefore the Serie A is crap? - Mehdi, if you spent at least a couple of seconds thinking of how relevent your arguments are, you wouldn't have posted 95% of what you actually did.
In order to have a strong argument to support your "Serie A is crap" statement, you need a "trend" and Zola scoring 9 goals at 38 is an exception, not a trend. Btw, one of the reasons for this being an exception is because he is an exceptional player you get to see once every 5-10 years.
Honestly it is amazing how hollow and easy to tackle your arguments are. Actually the most difficult thing about arguing with you is to actually believe that someone could come out with such simple and prime statement and support it with an even more ridiculous argument.
Please drop the "I got you this time" attitude for it suits people with logical thinking, and one doesn't need to be Nobel Laureat in Physics to see that this is something you are far from being. Better luck in that next life of yours.
Zlatanov you can back track all you want, what you wrote is in black and white, lying isn't going to help nor are your lame responses.
Zola isn't an exceptional player neither is Serie A's assist leader Morfeo, who has a flop at every big club, nor is Lucarelli, Serie A's top scorer. Expanding the league to 20 teams has killed Serie A, as I said it would many times. You're just too slow to realise it.
both of you better shut the hell up because ur only going in the wrong direction... if u ask me i would like to see u both banned because ur being plain annoying and uve practically used every bad word there is in the dictionary... i smell a ban...
both of you better shut the hell up because ur only going in the wrong direction... if u ask me i would like to see u both banned because ur being plain annoying and uve practically used every bad word there is in the dictionary... i smell a ban...
You need to read the posts more carefully, I'm not the one who has been using bad language or posted a ton of insults.
fine... just grow up and drop this :)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.