KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum the best player to ever play in the prem

henry was useless at barce you really are a fool, he was an integral part of the treble winning team, he was part of a front 3 who scored over 100 goals in a season. and if i remember right he was top goal scorer in his first season as well. as for campbell weather he was good enough to play week in week out in team trying to challenge for the title, i doubt, but your saying his experience would've been of no use in the dressing room? same with vieira. wrenger sold all 3 at least a season too early more likely 2 seasons too early

Henry was never integral to Barca he was the first player to be dropped or taken off during a game. As for Veira his legs had gone and his stint in Italy proves that. Sol Campbell would never had been allowed to leave the club if he was so influential in the dressing room.

Do you think we should keep Poulsen?

you wrong murph, completely wrong about henry i watched that barce team every week and that henry, eto'o and messi trio was just amazing much better than their current front 3. and i believe if vieira and campbell, henry would have stayed at arsenal they wouldn't have gone 5 years without a trophy. imo, whatever it is that makes a top manager a top manager wrenger has lost it. and no of course we shouldn't keep poulsen but we should keep gerrard and carra.

You've lost it if you think Wenger has lost it. The only reason Veira, Henry & Campbell became the players they were was because of Wenger.

Henry and Eto'o arent in the same class as David Villa.

ok my bad should really start to read properly then just scan through anyway henry gets my vote

read the post carefully, i never said wrenger wasn't a great manager because he was, but he's become a bit of a joke tbh. henry and eto'o are not as good as villa now but henry in his prime is one the best strikers of the last 20 years. eto'o also was a brilliant striker. villa is a brilliant player but he's not as good as henry was. villa and eto'o about the same. the eto'o, henry and messi trio was better than the villa, pedro and messi trio.

normally you make good points house but i don't know if there was enough in vieira and campbell alone. as always there were good young players coming through at arsenal but somewhere over this era chelsea and utd's spending on players went through the roof and arsenal weren't able to compete anymore. unless they were going to spend like that, they weren't going to say competitive vieira i'd say had a season or two left in him and campbell the same

Not a chance. The Barca front 3 are a more complete team then they where previously.

Why did they let Henry leave on a free transfer after paying 24 million euro's for him after only 3 seasons and swap Eto'o for Ibrahimovic?

Do you know more than Gaurdiola now?

there you go again no real opinion just hiding behind this idea that the manager always knows best.

henry was old and pep loves pedro, managed him in the b team and brought him up into the first team and henry wasn't willing to play a bit part so he has no choice but to leave that dosen't change the fact that henry was very, very good and very important at barce for 2 seasons. and the eto'o swap for imbrhimovic was awful thats why ibrehimovic was given back to italy after one season of witch he barely played in the second half. eto'o left because he wasn't the best player to have around the likes of messi and pedro. not because of his talent as a footballer

I have an opnion. I just dont think its better than the likes of Wenger, Guardiola or Dalglish.

In Henrys first season all he did was bleat on about wanting to go back to his "home" in England. Second season he did ok, not well enough for somebody the club had paid 24 million euro's for. His last season before they let him go on a free transfer he played 15 times.

Your idea and my idea of success seem to be a million miles away.

Obviously my standards are a lot higher than yours.