Premierships greatest foreign players...

Well actually Utd's players are represented in 7 of those years, not to mention, why dont you dig up who came second and third ? pretty confident you will find the close competition especially in the 90's will be dominated by Man Utd players.

110% wrote:

TeamSpirit™ wrote:If we want to go with year in, year out consistency & production - then Fine Henry wins it hands down.

But, as 110% is dissmissing, I do believe in the trailblazing theory - I have the utmost respect that brought our league out of the doldrums, helped us be competitive in European competition again and so forth.

The signing of Bergkamp represented a change of tradition at Arsenal.

Likewise Cantona at Man Utd, Zola & Chelsea & we were watching players who were on another planet for natural talent.

Do you consider players who left the technically harder Serie A to play in the EPL in the 90s as trailblazing? Don't forget that players like bergkamp, henry, cantona etc were failing at their respective clubs, and they moved somewhere to start new. Potentially somewhere with less pressure and where it was easier to succeed, and the money. Yes they made the EPL better because they obviously are talented players. Bogarde I guess will thank them for blazing that trail.

What about the players who cannot hack it in the EPL now and go to scotland for example? Are they trailblazing?

But why is it people always talk about needing to give foreigners time to settle - Then British game was a totally different animal 10-12 years ago to what it is now. Not higher in quality, but just radically different to what's played on the continent. Spurs through all their eggs in one basket with Klinsmann & Ginola, and they delivered.

For the majority of foreigners, English football was a no-go area 15 years ago, it's not just about the money - it's also the style and culture. The EPL is seen as a much more accomadting league where there is room for the use of Great technique, thanks to the likes of Cantona, Zola, Ginola & Bergkamp.

110% wrote:

Football Genius wrote:

TeamSpirit wrote:Or maybe Ginola was really the most Valuable player.

We would've been in serious trouble without him that season - that I'm sure off.

Man Utd did win the CL Final despite not having Keane & Scholes, so that tells you something about their depth.

Its alot easier for quality to stand out amongst poorer players, than it is for quality to stand our amongst quality.

Im guessing the Keane Scholes quote is supposed to counter my arguement that the best teams invariably have the best players, firstly that was a knockout competition, a one off and any Manc will tell you that Utd didn't play particulary well that night but got what seemed to be fate on their side. Not to mention they had good strength in depth yes, depth is important to cover your first 11 but depth is useless unless there is real quality in there

Best team doesn't always have the bets players at all. Greece at the Euros is a good example of this. Also the last world cup did you see the best team with the world's best players e.g. Brasil with dinho, kaka etc? Or Argentina with riquelme, messi etc? Nope, Germany, Italy, France etc had the best teams, and there few players standing out, but as a team they performed.

OK please for the love of god STOP comparing a league to a knock-out competition, they are VERY different. Find me an example of a league being won with a team of comparible quality of Greece ?

How did Thierry Henry win it 2003?

That was the year Ruud got around 40 goals and we won the Premiership.

Parks Lives wrote:Yes, we were just like Greece.

My post was on the topic of "does the best team having the best players", and I answered with Greece.

Nothing at all to do with man u. Get a grip.

Parks Lives wrote:How did Thierry Henry win it 2003?

That was the year Ruud got around 40 goals and we won the Premiership.

Henry = Arsenal = London

Your recognising the connection yet Parky ?

Football Genius wrote:

TeamSpirit wrote:Or maybe Ginola was really the most Valuable player.

We would've been in serious trouble without him that season - that I'm sure off.

Man Utd did win the CL Final despite not having Keane & Scholes, so that tells you something about their depth.

Its alot easier for quality to stand out amongst poorer players, than it is for quality to stand our amongst quality.

Im guessing the Keane Scholes quote is supposed to counter my arguement that the best teams invariably have the best players, firstly that was a knockout competition, a one off and any Manc will tell you that Utd didn't play particulary well that night but got what seemed to be fate on their side. Not to mention they had good strength in depth yes, depth is important to cover your first 11 but depth is useless unless there is real quality in there

But the pressure is also greater if your asked to carry a bunch of mediocre players during the season. In a great team such as Man Utd 1999 or Arsenal 2004, the pressure can be shared around.

In 1999, Ginola was our only hope - we had no-one else. It's not like Liverpool of today were you can say , "If Gerrard isn't doing it, we can look to Alonso, Kuyt etc."

Man Utd had 4 quality forwards, a Wc Goalkeeper, Jaap Stam at his peak and the midfield quartet. The depth came from Solskjaer, from Nicky Butt, Ronny Johnsen etc. Those 3 players alone would've walked into the Spurs team that season.

110% wrote:

Parks Lives wrote:Yes, we were just like Greece.

My post was on the topic of "does the best team having the best players", and I answered with Greece.

Nothing at all to do with man u. Get a grip.

Er, yes it is.

You said in relation to Man United, not always does the best team have the best players, look at Greece.

Its you that needs to get the grip and stop discounting everything to do with a certain North west club.

You even tried to say that Dalglish was the best player to ever play in the English league before, when even most Liverpool fans would accept thats George Best.

Joker.

Parks Lives wrote:How did Thierry Henry win it 2003?

That was the year Ruud got around 40 goals and we won the Premiership.

20 goals, and assists.

And the fact that a third of Ruud's league goals came from penalties.

Scholesa should've won it that year IMO. Man Utd only really kicked into oiverdrive when he was given the free role behind Ruud - that being Valuable.

TeamSpirit wrote:
Scholesa should've won it that year IMO. Man Utd only really kicked into oiverdrive when he was given the free role behind Ruud - that being Valuable.

& I bet he didn't come close.

Football Genius wrote:

110% wrote:

Football Genius wrote:

TeamSpirit wrote:Or maybe Ginola was really the most Valuable player.

We would've been in serious trouble without him that season - that I'm sure off.

Man Utd did win the CL Final despite not having Keane & Scholes, so that tells you something about their depth.

Its alot easier for quality to stand out amongst poorer players, than it is for quality to stand our amongst quality.

Im guessing the Keane Scholes quote is supposed to counter my arguement that the best teams invariably have the best players, firstly that was a knockout competition, a one off and any Manc will tell you that Utd didn't play particulary well that night but got what seemed to be fate on their side. Not to mention they had good strength in depth yes, depth is important to cover your first 11 but depth is useless unless there is real quality in there

Best team doesn't always have the bets players at all. Greece at the Euros is a good example of this. Also the last world cup did you see the best team with the world's best players e.g. Brasil with dinho, kaka etc? Or Argentina with riquelme, messi etc? Nope, Germany, Italy, France etc had the best teams, and there few players standing out, but as a team they performed.

OK please for the love of god STOP comparing a league to a knock-out competition, they are VERY different. Find me an example of a league being won with a team of comparible quality of Greece ?

We were not comparing league with cup competitions. It was in answer to your point about the best teams having the best players. Let's make it easier so a genius can understand, there are 11 players in a team, and those 11 players can be amongst the best in the league within their positions, but that is no good unless they can play well together. So when you have the best team you have the best collection of 11 players that can play together, you do not necessarily within that 11 have the best player in the competition. Therefore Ginola can be the best player in the league, and man united the best team.

As a liverpool fan you should recognise that last year you had the best defence, but you did not have the best defenders!!

something like 10 of his 25 league goals were penalties and even then he only scored a goal more than henry

Agooner wrote:something like 10 of his 25 league goals were penalties and even then he only scored a goal more than henry

ok take away henry's free kicks and pens aswell then......

Parks Lives wrote:

TeamSpirit wrote:
Scholes should've won it that year IMO. Man Utd only really kicked into overdrive when he was given the free role behind Ruud - that's being Valuable.

& I bet he didn't come close.

God my typings horrible.

Parks Lives wrote:

110% wrote:

Parks Lives wrote:Yes, we were just like Greece.

My post was on the topic of "does the best team having the best players", and I answered with Greece.

Nothing at all to do with man u. Get a grip.

Er, yes it is.

You said in relation to Man United, not always does the best team have the best players, look at Greece.

Its you that needs to get the grip and stop discounting everything to do with a certain North west club.

You even tried to say that Dalglish was the best player to ever play in the English league before, when even most Liverpool fans would accept thats George Best.

Joker.

below is my post, where do I mention manu:

Best team doesn't always have the bets players at all. Greece at the Euros is a good example of this. Also the last world cup did you see the best team with the world's best players e.g. Brasil with dinho, kaka etc? Or Argentina with riquelme, messi etc? Nope, Germany, Italy, France etc had the best teams, and there few players standing out, but as a team they performed.

You said in relation to Man United...

l r d wrote:

Agooner wrote:something like 10 of his 25 league goals were penalties and even then he only scored a goal more than henry

ok take away henry's free kicks and pens aswell then......

he will still endup with something like 20 goals

IM TALKING ABOUT A LEAGUE CONDITION

It is YOU that keeps referring to games and teams in a Knock-out competition, you cannot compare the two !

Ok on performance name me 5 better centre-backs last season than Carragher or Hyppia ? 5 better right backs than Finnan and 5 better left backs, oh sod it name me 3 ! I know what your saying but in a 38 game season i dont give a toss if you had the most perfectly balanced team, well organised, intelligent team ( e.g Wigan last year ) they will NOT win the league because they lack QUALITY.

Once again name me a team that won the league that did not possess players of the highest quality ?

There are two part 'best team' invariably has the 'best players'

Agooner wrote:something like 10 of his 25 league goals were penalties and even then he only scored a goal more than henry

But I remember the 2-2 at Highbury... both of Henry's goals were very lucky/debateable.

1st one was a Ca$hley Cole aimless ball in that just deflected of him.

2nd he was offside.

Ruud's goal in that game was class. (roasted Keown, and Chipped Seaman)

There was actually a time Ruud would take players on.

First 3 seasons he was class, every bit as good as Henry. Just never the same player after the 2004 season.

110% wrote:

Parks Lives wrote:

110% wrote:

Parks Lives wrote:Yes, we were just like Greece.

My post was on the topic of "does the best team having the best players", and I answered with Greece.

Nothing at all to do with man u. Get a grip.

Er, yes it is.

You said in relation to Man United, not always does the best team have the best players, look at Greece.

Its you that needs to get the grip and stop discounting everything to do with a certain North west club.

You even tried to say that Dalglish was the best player to ever play in the English league before, when even most Liverpool fans would accept thats George Best.

Joker.

below is my post, where do I mention manu:

Best team doesn't always have the bets players at all. Greece at the Euros is a good example of this. Also the last world cup did you see the best team with the world's best players e.g. Brasil with dinho, kaka etc? Or Argentina with riquelme, messi etc? Nope, Germany, Italy, France etc had the best teams, and there few players standing out, but as a team they performed.

this should nort even come to an argument. For example, who were the best team in england last year? Chelsea! Did they have the best players in the league? nope

Agooner wrote:

l r d wrote:

Agooner wrote:something like 10 of his 25 league goals were penalties and even then he only scored a goal more than henry

ok take away henry's free kicks and pens aswell then......

he will still endup with something like 20 goals

the point is take his pens and free kicks away every year, and someone else will be top scorer on at least two occasions, so it;s a silly argument to mention ruud pens, when Henry also gets pens plus free kicks

Agooner wrote:

this should nort even come to an argument. For example, who were the best team in england last year? Chelsea! Did they have the best players in the league? nope

So Makelele isn't of the highest quality in his field ? Cech isn't of the highest quality in his field ? Terry/Gallas aren't of the highest quality in there fields, Essien,Robben,Cole etc

Did you even THINK before you wrote that....

Agooner wrote:

this should nort even come to an argument. For example, who were the best team in england last year? Chelsea! Did they have the best players in the league? nope

Well...

Best GK- Cech
Best CB - Gallas
Best CM - Essien
Best DM - Makalele
Best TargetMan - Drogba
Best Winger/Support Forward - J.Cole

Those are all worthy shouts for 2005-06.

Parks Lives wrote:You said in relation to Man United...

where? look at the post it's all there

it's in your head somewhere? see a psychiatrist

nah essien was just a water carrier last year.
but the rest yep

l r d wrote:

Agooner wrote:

l r d wrote:

Agooner wrote:something like 10 of his 25 league goals were penalties and even then he only scored a goal more than henry

ok take away henry's free kicks and pens aswell then......

he will still endup with something like 20 goals

the point is take his pens and free kicks away every year, and someone else will be top scorer on at least two occasions, so it;s a silly argument to mention ruud pens, when Henry also gets pens plus free kicks

ok go ahead, take away all his goals from free kicks and penalties and do the same for every other player and come up with another name for me.

110% wrote:

Parks Lives wrote:You said in relation to Man United...

where? look at the post it's all there

it's in your head somewhere? see a psychiatrist

You said in relation to Man United...

As in you were responding to Football Genius post on Man United.

Agooner wrote:

l r d wrote:

Agooner wrote:

l r d wrote:

Agooner wrote:something like 10 of his 25 league goals were penalties and even then he only scored a goal more than henry

ok take away henry's free kicks and pens aswell then......

he will still endup with something like 20 goals

the point is take his pens and free kicks away every year, and someone else will be top scorer on at least two occasions, so it;s a silly argument to mention ruud pens, when Henry also gets pens plus free kicks

ok go ahead, take away all his goals from free kicks and penalties and do the same for every other player and come up with another name for me.

So you are now arguing against the point you originally made

TeamSpirit™ wrote:

Agooner wrote:

this should nort even come to an argument. For example, who were the best team in england last year? Chelsea! Did they have the best players in the league? nope

Well...

Best GK- Cech
Best CB - Gallas
Best CM - Essien
Best DM - Makalele
Best TargetMan - Drogba
Best Winger/Support Forward - J.Cole

Those are all worthy shouts for 2005-06.

Yes all very good, but who actually got the PFA award, wasn't it gerrard, and the writers award went to henry I think, so clearly the very best players in the league did not play for chelsea, but they had a very high level of quality in their team (higher than liverpool or arsenal) that's why they won the league.

Nobody said chelsea were rubbish. The point was they can win the league and have "great players in every position", but not necessarily the "best player" in the league.