kas wrote:Predictable response.
Given your evident admiration for predictable responses, I'll take that as a compliment.
The point is not that Madrid are shit (btw, do you know who was the Valencia LB in that match when Essien scored from the right? The (in)famous Del Horno
) but that it was a game of massive pressure. A Clasico is easily equivalent to, if not higher than, a CL quarterfinal in the "big-game" rankings. And that's before you factor in the momentum and media pressure that Madrid had in their favour going into the game.
I disagree, the point that Madrid are shit is of immense relevance to judging how impressive Messi's performance was.
Stimulus Package wrote:Even when he's on the left he comes inside so much that CF is basically his natural position.
This makes no sense whatsoever. Even when he cuts inside, to call CF his "natural position" is just wrong.
Well he isn't a winger, because he doesn't go outside and cross. He isn't an AM, because he plays up front. I suppose you could call him a split striker, which these days most CFs are.
Again, watch him regularly, and compare it to the Madrid game, where he started his runs from the middle, positioned himself in the middle, and when he got the ball or was looking for a pass, he ran centrally rather than diagonally like he does when cutting in from the flank.
--------
I'm loving how you turn 'sideways' into 'diagonally' to make it sound like Messi does more attacking that reality shows.
I'm not trying to make out that Essien is primarily an athlete...I'm trying to highlight his strongest point, the one that makes him the player he is. Just like Ronaldinho's tricks or Kaka's close control. and shooting.
Ronaldinho without his height physical strength would be, well, Messi, i.e. a considerably lesser player. Kaka without his speed and energy likewise.
And what partiality is my argument illustrating? Partiality towards Barça?
Partiality towards rating attacking players of greater technical ability as being more important than midfield players of greater athletic ability. I think it's a naive partiality given the state of contemporary football.
I only mentioned Xavi in this thread as a very specific example of a different type of "midfield general", and Messi was brought into the discussion by you, because you wanted to once again state your (mostly wrong) opinion that he doesn't perform in big games.
Xavi is not a midfield general. As I've said many times, I've yet to see Messi really perform in a big game. Your twisting of my words because you're so protective of your sideways dribbling, one dimensional midget skill and control merchant speaks volumes for your inability to actually deal with the arguments at hand.
If you mean partiality towards all the other players that I think are better than Essien, then yes, I'm being partial
You claim players like Ronaldinho and Kaka can change the game with one swipe of their foot. Technically, anyone who scores a goal has done so with one swipe of their foot (including Essien's goals vs Arsenal, Valencia and your lot) so not only does your argument betray your very limited appreciation of the game, it's also utter fucking nonsense.
Again, I'm not anti-Essien in the slightest. However much I rate Yaya Toure, if I could swap Essien for him in Barça's midfield, I'd go for it instantly.
I just think Essien is someone who everybody would put in their "best world 11", but nobody would put in their "top 5 players in the world". Fair play to you for trying to get Essien more recognition, but I think he already gets all the credit he deserves.
To get back on topic for the thread, Essien clearly > Kuyt.
Essien has influenced more big games that I've seen than Messi has. That's another reason to consider him a better player. We can keep going with this if you like, but since your explanations are bollocks and you've yet to refute a single point I've made (rather, you just repeat ad tedium that you disagree) I'm getting a bit bored to be honest.
Home
[40%] 
