|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Better is something that's difficult to quantify. There are arguments for all 4 of them, but I'm not really convinced that we can really definitively say that one is better than the others. Just watching them with the ball is a completely different experience.
Messi is just pure control. It's like the ball is attached to an invisible string. He just glides through everything. It's technical excellence above all else. He doesn't need moves or tricks; the turns are just that tight and perfect.
Ronaldo is different. He's possibly the most complete athlete in the world. He could really play any sport he wanted. Speed, pace, power, dribbling, shooting: it's just more of everything. It's a blitz. A well-oiled machine.
Suarez is bottled tenacity, fire, workrate, and a few drops of mad genius. He's not that pacy (though very fit, he's probably slower than Messi and Ronaldo), but it's like every tackle, every run, every shot, every turn is his last. Even the way he dribbles, he's kicking it AT the defenders, bouncing it off them and slipping it through their legs, slipping through every crack in the defense, no matter how small. And he just tries things that don't make sense, crazy shots or passes or turns that somehow pan out.
Zlatan is just something else. It's a mixture of sublime technique, athleticism and sheer presence. There's is just an aura about him when he has the ball that makes everything look like it's in slow motion. A bit like Berbatov at his best, but not so lazy. The things he pulls off, from the crazy overhead kicks, the deft flicks, the goals he scores, it's insane. He's probably the most technically brilliant target man who ever lived. It just looks so easy when he plays.
All four of them are great players. I just don't know that you can really completely declare one better than the other. It is hardly an exact science, this is why it goes through a voting system And it's also why I think that the system is stupid. I don't think so and usually I get it right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
My mistake. Allow me to bow to your superiority.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
My mistake. Allow me to bow to your superiority. Actually the majority get it right, nothing superior
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
I just think the idea of individual awards period is stupid. It's a team sport. The trophies should be won by the team. If you disagree, fine. Plenty of people agree with you. But it isn't congruent to the spirit of the game. If one of our players wins it, great. I'll be happy for them. But I still find the idea absurd.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,791
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,791 |
It is kinda weird handing out individual awards for a team game....
Sign Reus
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
I just think the idea of individual awards period is stupid. It's a team sport. The trophies should be won by the team. If you disagree, fine. Plenty of people agree with you. But it isn't congruent to the spirit of the game. If one of our players wins it, great. I'll be happy for them. But I still find the idea absurd. So you are against giving the golden boot too to players based on the number of goals scored?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
I'm not against it per se, I just find it irrelevant. At least that one is pretty fair to judge though. I also find it a bit daft how absurdly slanted towards attackers they all are. The two awards go to the best attackers, not the best players, whether it's an attacking mid, a winger, or a striker. Cahill and Terry were the best CB partnership in the prem, but they didn't win any honors. Mascherano was probably Argentina's best player in the WC, but even if they'd have won, it'd have gone to Messi. Phillip Lahm or Hummels won't win an award like that either. When Messi and Ronaldo are done competing for it, it'll be between Bale and Neymar and Sterling and whatever hotshot attacker it is, no matter how good the other players are.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
I'm not against it per se, I just find it irrelevant. At least that one is pretty fair to judge though. I also find it a bit daft how absurdly slanted towards attackers they all are. The two awards go to the best attackers, not the best players, whether it's an attacking mid, a winger, or a striker. Cahill and Terry were the best CB partnership in the prem, but they didn't win any honors. Mascherano was probably Argentina's best player in the WC, but even if they'd have won, it'd have gone to Messi. Phillip Lahm or Hummels won't win an award like that either. When Messi and Ronaldo are done competing for it, it'll be between Bale and Neymar and Sterling and whatever hotshot attacker it is, no matter how good the other players are. Indeed, individual awards are subjective in a a team game, even the winner of the golden boot depends a lot on who his team mates are. However, life is not perfect and exact and IMO it's good to know who is considered the best by most people. It's like that in most sports, if you take Formula 1, though the driver is driving alone, it depends a lot on the car he has so again it's a team work, even in athletics, though clear cut, it depends a lot on the team (trainer, doctor etc) around the athlete.
|
|
|
|
|
