PFA list

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22216746

The list as we all know is always a joke but this year takes the biscuit

Welbeck has done nothing to deserve being there. Same with Wilshere and Hazard. Where is Michu? Nastasic? Zabaleta? All notable omissions.

Hazard has done nothing to deserve being there?

He's been ok - but his level of consistency hasn't been the same as the other names mentioned.

Hazard has been pretty consistent.. Michu has dropped off a bit lately too.

Fair play to Carrick. He's a good season, very consistent from what I've seen.. Wouldn't have him winning though.

If Hazard makes that list then Cazorla should too

And where's Baines?

Hazard has been better than Cazorla, and more consistent. I don't think you can describe Hazard as inconsistent unless you're including injuries and rotation.

It's voted for by the players so it's always going to be a bit weird. Who's going to notice Zabaleta to the extent that they think he's the best player in the league?

Seniors I'd nominate before Hazard:
Zabaleta, Baines, Fellaini, Cazorla, Michu

Youth I'd nomniate ahead of Wilshere and Welbeck:
de Gea, Rafael, Clyne, Nastasic, Caulker, B.Davies, Rose, Schneiderlin, J.McCarthy, Oscar, Walcott
While several others have been just as good as the two.


As I always say though, the age limit for Young Player of the Year should be lowered.
The oldest blokes are in their mid 20s and have 4-5 Prem seasons behind them.

National Glennographic wrote:Hazard has been better than Cazorla, and more consistent. I don't think you can describe Hazard as inconsistent unless you're including injuries and rotation.

It's voted for by the players so it's always going to be a bit weird. Who's going to notice Zabaleta to the extent that they think he's the best player in the league?

Based on what? He hasn't in the slightest. He may produce moments of brilliance but he goes missing from games way too much. And Santi has better stats too

McCarthy has been quality

My prediction, or a mix of what I hope and think will happen

PotY: Luis Suarez (if they can look past his personality and shenanigans)
YPotY: Gareth Bale

Team - Mignolet; Zabaleta, Williams, Vertonghen, Baines; Carrick, Cazorla, Mata, Bale; Suarez, Persie

Then the writers who regard themselves as some who understand the game better can give their award to either Baines or Carrick,
the fans to United superstar van Persie, while the sponsors can chose the golden boy Bale.

Romford Pele wrote:

National Glennographic wrote:Hazard has been better than Cazorla, and more consistent. I don't think you can describe Hazard as inconsistent unless you're including injuries and rotation.

It's voted for by the players so it's always going to be a bit weird. Who's going to notice Zabaleta to the extent that they think he's the best player in the league?

Based on what? He hasn't in the slightest. He may produce moments of brilliance but he goes missing from games way too much. And Santi has better stats too

Based on my opinion, the opinion of the professional footballers association, and the stats.

I don't think Cazorla's stats are as good if you take Hazard's and extrapolate them. Cazorla hasn't missed a game this season, Hazard has had injuries/rotation since Chelsea were competing in 4 competitions.

Even ignoring this we're talking about 12(9) vs 8(14) in goals (assists)

I do agree Baines has been excellent.

Oscar > Hazard

Zlatan's little helper wrote:Oscar > Hazard

This.

Benitez coming in actually fucked up Oscar's shit - playing him on the wing and all that jazz

National Glennographic wrote:

Romford Pele wrote:

National Glennographic wrote:Hazard has been better than Cazorla, and more consistent. I don't think you can describe Hazard as inconsistent unless you're including injuries and rotation.

It's voted for by the players so it's always going to be a bit weird. Who's going to notice Zabaleta to the extent that they think he's the best player in the league?

Based on what? He hasn't in the slightest. He may produce moments of brilliance but he goes missing from games way too much. And Santi has better stats too

Based on my opinion, the opinion of the professional footballers association, and the stats.

I don't think Cazorla's stats are as good if you take Hazard's and extrapolate them. Cazorla hasn't missed a game this season, Hazard has had injuries/rotation since Chelsea were competing in 4 competitions.

Even ignoring this we're talking about 12(9) vs 8(14) in goals (assists)

I do agree Baines has been excellent.

As I said already, Hazard is too hit and miss. Fine, he's young and that's too be expected, but he's not worthy of the main list yet.

who in the list hasn't been inconsistent? Mata is the same. Hazard will get noticed because he has more pace. Suarez and Van Persie have had their lean spells. Bale hasn't scored since March.

Mata and Hazard are in a large pool of players like Cazorla, Gerrard, Michu, Lambert, Baines, Carrick, Walcott who could be in the running for 4th.

There should be some recognition for the likes of Michu, Lambert, Vertonghen, Nastasic, Riether, de Guzman, Benteke as unheralded new additions to the league who've overachieved.

Would be great if they released the voting results for this like they do with the coaches and the Ballon d'Or.

I find it incredible that Baines hasn't been nominated. My first thought was that perhaps it's due to the fact he's not a fully established international and thus failed to get the England squad players' votes. But then Michael Carrick has been voted in. So that theory is out the window.

I don't think that Baines was as good as last season. But definitely he deserves it more than Hazard and few other players deserve it too (Cazorla for example). Rest of the list is okay, for me Carrick clearly deserves to be there. And I can't believe that anyone have to defend publicly decision about Suarez being nominatez in such a good season for him.

Baines, aside from 5 goals and 5 assists, has statistically speaking created more goal scoring opportunities than any other player in the League (and Europe actually) this season

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2305726/Leighton-Baines-David-Silva-Luis-Suarez-create-chances-Cristiano-Ronaldo-Lionel-Messi.html

Nobody likes to quote the Daily Mail, but I've seen that being said from a number of other sources too.

Would Everton be where they are without him this season?

IMO Mata has been just as good as Van Persie, Suearez and Bale this season. Definitely Chelseas best players so it's pretty laughable that Hazard has been picked before him.He's clearly been better than the likes of Michu and Gerrard.

Hazard is an excellent player and will probably be a world class player in the future but IMO Oscar is better, I think some people rate Hazard more solely because he has closer control running with the ball and he is faster. But Oscar is much more creative, has better and more varied passing (great at through balls,long passing, crossing etc) and is one of those rare players that produces moments of genius on a pretty regular basis. Like his goal against Juve or some of the skills and flicks he does to get past people, great improvisation. He's also been Brazils best and most consistent player ever since he's been a starter for them, overshadowing Neymar.

Mata has been shortlisted too.

I know but Glen said he belongs in the group below with Cazorla, Gerrard, Michu, Lambert, Baines, Carrick, Walcott. IMO he has been clearly better than all them. Especially the overrated Walcott.

Honestly I don't understand why some people rate Walcott so highly, all he has to his game is pace and composure in front of goal in 1 vs 1 situations. Apart from that he is a very limited player. Too one dimensional to be a starter for a CL club as a striker or as a wide man in a 4 - 2 - 3 - 1, no wonder Arsenal are barely scraping 4th now with players like him,Vermaelen and Szczesny starting for them. The only stand out players they have are Carzola and at times Wilshere. Koscielny would start for most teams in Europe too, apart from them the squad is made up of average to decent players. There's is very little CL quality in their team.

The thing with Walcott is that while he is one-dimensional, the opposition still has to deal with his threat. same with players like Robben. If they are the only attacking threat in a team, then they're gonna be easy to deal with but some of what makes them useful is just occupying defenders & opening up space for others to operate in.

agree that I don't think Walcott has been good enough to be listed with most of those players this season though.

Of course he can be a dangerous player but for me he hasn't got enough to his game to ever excel at the highest level, while Robben was/is somewhat one dimensional(emphasis on the word somewhat) he still has much more to his game than someone like Walcott. His biggest trick where he cuts inside and shoots or passes is something that requires much more skill than waiting for a perfectly waited ball behind the defense. At his best you couldn't do much to stop Robben, no tactic was guaranteed to neutralize him because his close control, dribbling and change of pace was so devastating. But if teams and defenders play Walcott the right way he is very ineffective and he has no tools to adapt his game. Because of his limitations Walcott will always rely on service but players like Robben can create their own chances. A bit like Michael Owen really, who even though was clearly better than Walcott I doubt he would be anywhere near as successful and sought after if he was breaking through now, opposed to 15 years ago.

Basically I don't think the threat Walcott provides is substantial enough to warrant him a starting place in a top 4 team, when taking into account he adds little else to Arsenals game.

Don't think anyone would argue with most of that, then again, back when the Top 4 were all serious Champions League contenders, Dirk Kuyt was a starting player on the wing. Man U will likewise go into "highest level" games with obviously limited attackers - one of the stand outs versus Madrid was a forward who scores less than Heskey.

Like debaser says, Walcott can mess with a gameplan. It's fine to say that he can be taken out by defending deep and keeping the left back fairly narrow, but that's going to create space for Cazorla in the hole, it's going to let Giroud play in the penalty area all game, and for a lot of teams whose left sided player likes to cut in it's going to mean narrowing their attack. The fact that Walcott's gimmick requires less skill is irrelevant. Seems reasonable to say that Walcott while having a good season is comparable to gifted players putting in patchy performances.

Mata's the man though, makes everyone around him better.

I still don't think that warrants him being in the team. As for the Kuyt comparison, Kuyt had a much better tactical understanding of the game. He had more intelligent movement, was generally more involved in the build up play and done a much better job off the ball.

Do you really think someone like Walcott would have started in that Liverpool team and Holland for all those years?

Also Welbeck is better technically than Walcott and his primary role for United is ball retention and to keep the ball moving forward, he can be trusted to fulfill his tactical duty's etc, saying that he's not even a regular starter for United anyway so I don't see what the point is in comparing him and Walcott.

If goals and assists are anything to go by, Walcott warrants a place. Not a big fan of his, but there is something extremely unorthodox about him that makes him effective. If it were as easy as saying he's just o pacy then there would be no way he would score and assist so many. He reminds me of Paolo Wanchope back in the day, as in when Walcott gets the ball I'm not sure he has any idea what he's about to do. There is an unpredictability as a result. That he is a very assured finisher is a hugely dangerous asset. Goal he scored this season against Chelsea one of the best, he has a way of shooting early that leaves keepers with no chance. I do think he deserves his place, but more because there aren't many other stand out players this year to be honest.

As for Mata, I would have no problem if he won the entire thing. That is how highly I rate him.

Walcott is a difficult one in that 80% of the time, I'm not convinced he's a footballer, let alone a professional one. Like today.

He didn't even a kick a football until he was 11 or 12 did he? That's what I've read. TBH this kind of pisses me off He's just an athlete that can kick a ball straight.

Suarez and Bale all day long.

Will be Bale and probably Wilshere knowing the players in this country.