S.Ireland or Ballack

ShoulderChip

Me and my flatmate and I were just arguing about this,

as a chelsea fan I would prefer for Stephen Ireland to be in the team above Ballack, he thinks I am a lunatic, do you?

ITT-Pat

Daddy or chips?

itsjaybud

This season would prefer to have Ireland in the Chelsea team ahead of Ballack, pretty obvious imo!!:)


I'll be interested to see how Ireland does next season and if he can repeat his outstanding form.

Im not too sure what to expect from him next season tbh!!

JPA

Ballack has been very disappointing since joining Chelsea IMO.
Never seems to get much criticism though.
I'd pick Ireland has he is out performing Ballack and has age on his side

invincibleirish

Isn't Ballacks problem Frank Lampard?

OPENROAD

I would take Lampard over the two of them.

Guy:Incognito

invincibleirish wrote: »

Isn't Ballacks problem Frank Lampard?

Isnt the problem with the question that Chealse dont own Ireland?:)

chalad07

OPENROAD wrote: »

I would take Lampard over the two of them.

and i'd have Xavi over Lampard but it's not really the question:)

Anyway, you'd have to go for Ireland based on this seasons performances.

redout

Ireland is nominated for young player of the year.

Ballack isnt even nominated for old man of the year.

Enough said.

Bubs101

I'd take Ballack. it's not necessarilly because he may be a better player that Ireland, it's because Lampard is much better than Ireland and I don't think you could play both in the same team. With Ballack you get a massive threat in the air and a solid player who rarely loses the ball and fights to get it back

CHD

redout wrote: »

Ireland is nominated for young player of the year.

Ballack isnt even nominated for old man of the year.

Enough said.

Yeah that says it all :rolleyes:

redout

CHD wrote: »

Yeah that says it all :rolleyes:

Well point is Ireland could have / should have actually been nominated for the senior award also as he has had a better season than all the 6 that were actually nominated for it.

Guy:Incognito

redout wrote: »

Well point is Ireland could have / should have actually been nominated for the senior award also as he has had a better season than all the 6 that were actually nominated for it.

More to the point is Irelands good performances have made people ignore that he's been muck on quote a few occasions. Just like the rest of the city tem he's been hit and miss. But for some reason he gets songle out for just good performances.

That and no to the last bit.

Going on just stats he's not in the top 20 scorers in the league and has less assists than the like sof Giggs. Hardly earth shattering.

He's played very well but to say he's had a better season than Gerrard or Vidic is just silly. Both of those have been immense this season (recent form aside for vidic)

CHD

redout wrote: »

Well point is Ireland could have / should have actually been nominated for the senior award also as he has had a better season than all the 6 that were actually nominated for it.

Say that then instead of what you originally did. Your right saying this.

Hasn't had a better season than Vidic though.

DSB

Can't believe this is even up for debate, Ballack every time.

Chucky the tree

DSB wrote: »

Can't believe this is even up for debate, Ballack every time.

I cant see how anyone would pick Ballack. Unless you've havent watched a premiership game this season involving either Manchester City or chelsea then I suppose it's possible to pick Ballack.

OPENROAD

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I cant see how anyone would pick Ballack. Unless you've havent watched a premiership game this season involving either Manchester City or chelsea then I suppose it's possible to pick Ballack.

But is the choice just based on this season?

Xavi6

Well there's 10 years in the difference so Ireland has more shelf life so on that basis I'd have him, but at his peak Ballack was absolutely quality.

monkey9

I'm not sure what basis we're choosing by here but i'm going by what player i would want in my team at this moment and no doubts, it'd be Stephen Ireland.

Dave!

On current form and potential, Ireland every time...

eirebhoy

Bubs101 is spot on. Ballack is better for Chelsea than Ireland because Chelsea already have Lampard. Ballack is a central midfielder and pretty much stays in the centre of the pitch. Ireland roams all over the pitch.

Ballack can successfully play in a straight 4-4-2 with 2 attacking wingers as he does with Germany. I don't think that suits Ireland at all, the same goes for Lampard. I'd expect if Ireland or Lampard played in a 4-4-2 with wingers that the opposition would have more of the ball than they really should.

This gives a bit of an idea of the different roles both players have in their teams:



Ireland is "give and go" type player. He'll pass the ball and make a move forward as someone like Kaka and Lampard would. To then return the ball to them will usually take a creative forward pass.
Ballack will play the pass and make himself available again for the next pass if his teammate needs him.

Dave!

Musta taken you a while to draw those diagrams eirebhoy

Barr

Ballack is Chelsea most useless player - why would anyone pick him . His been hopless all season .

eirebhoy

Dave! wrote: »

Musta taken you a while to draw those diagrams eirebhoy

Microsoft paint job, I'm sure you guessed.

Here's the little baby:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards/create

Jesus I'd love to have something like that for Celtic.

bigstar

Stekelly wrote: »

More to the point is Irelands good performances have made people ignore that he's been muck on quote a few occasions. Just like the rest of the city tem he's been hit and miss. But for some reason he gets songle out for just good performances.

That and no to the last bit.

Going on just stats he's not in the top 20 scorers in the league and has less assists than the like sof Giggs. Hardly earth shattering.

He's played very well but to say he's had a better season than Gerrard or Vidic is just silly. Both of those have been immense this season (recent form aside for vidic)

eh what! hit and miss. you obviously havent watched that many city games, the team has been hit and miss but ireland has been a standout player almost every game along with SWP. if city had had a better season he would have made to the senior PFA awards.

Stats, yeah thats what football is all about.

keane2097

Ballack at his peak no question. Ireland this season, both players have perhaps been somewhat inconsistant but Ireland has had more good-very good games and of course he has a longer shelf life too...

Frisbee

eirebhoy wrote: »

Microsoft paint job, I'm sure you guessed.

Here's the little baby:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards/create

Jesus I'd love to have something like that for Celtic.

Bookmarked, fantastic app

K4t

redout wrote: »

Ireland is nominated for young player of the year.
.

It will be a travesty if ireland doesn't get the award.

Stekelly wrote: »

More to the point is Irelands good performances have made people ignore that he's been muck on quote a few occasions. Just like the rest of the city tem he's been hit and miss. But for some reason he gets songle out for just good performances.

That and no to the last bit.

Going on just stats he's not in the top 20 scorers in the league and has less assists than the like sof Giggs. Hardly earth shattering.

He's played very well but to say he's had a better season than Gerrard or Vidic is just silly. Both of those have been immense this season (recent form aside for vidic)

He hasn't been muck now tbh. He's been consistent for the whole season and you must remember that he's not playing in a big four side. He's playing in an average enough mid table side!

I would love Ireland at Man Utd. He's a hard worker and has incredible attacking ability.

DSB wrote: »

Can't believe this is even up for debate, Ballack every time.

Leaving FM aside for a moment :rolleyes:

Ireland is way ahead of ballack atm, although that's partly because of Balack's injury problems.

Boskowski

It's like comparing apples with oranges. Ireland is at the beginning of his career, Ballack is at the beginning of the end of his career. There is 10 years between them. Also they are a different type of player too. Although not much between them in terms of ability, Ballack has much more of a physical presence.

But since we're here now I'd probably have to go with

- Ballack based on overall performances/achievements
- Ireland based on recent performances esp. this season

Michael Ballack is (was?) a fantastic football player. He has great ability, great in the air, he's strong, fast, intelligent and is almost equally skilled with both feet. But Ballack has gone - as they say in Germany - 'pomadig'. It's very a unfavourable footie term in Germany for someone whose game is not very results oriented but is rather aimed at looking well - or at least ok - on the pitch. Someone who is always going at the same pace, not making mistakes but not putting himself out either, basically doing an uninspired 9-5 job on the pitch.

I should know what I'm taking about, I've been called that myself

I think Ballack is all that for the last two years with Chelsea. Funny he's not like that at all in international matches.

Kold

I think Ballack has much better hair.

Elonex

Barr wrote: »

Ballack is Chelsea most useless player - why would anyone pick him . His been hopless all season .

Did you even look at Eirebhoy's diagrams??

It shows how he's being used as more of a defensive midfielder than Ireland.

It really depends what the question is tbh, if it's which player you would like most in YOUR own team, it'd be Ballack everytime for me. Check him out when he's playing for Germany, he's immense.

iregk

A lot seem to be taking this as their entire career in total.

I'm assuming the question is from now. Surely there can be only 1 option here, Stephen Ireland. Ballack is a much better player and people who say he is crap etc.. tend not to notice the finer points of football.

This season he hasn't been at his peak but last season he was for me the best midfielder in the prem. He was the main reason for Chelsea pushing United so far in two tournaments.

Thing is Ballack is 32 going 33. Not much left in him where as Ireland has 10 more years. Surely you would go for the potential over 1 year of good play? Unless of course we are talking about a 1 season deal, in that case give me Ballack.

p.s. eirebhoy where did you get those pics and what they hell are they. apart from passes?

Pro. F

eirebhoy wrote: »

Bubs101 is spot on. Ballack is better for Chelsea than Ireland because Chelsea already have Lampard. Ballack is a central midfielder and pretty much stays in the centre of the pitch. Ireland roams all over the pitch.

Ballack can successfully play in a straight 4-4-2 with 2 attacking wingers as he does with Germany. I don't think that suits Ireland at all, the same goes for Lampard. I'd expect if Ireland or Lampard played in a 4-4-2 with wingers that the opposition would have more of the ball than they really should.

This gives a bit of an idea of the different roles both players have in their teams:



Ireland is "give and go" type player. He'll pass the ball and make a move forward as someone like Kaka and Lampard would. To then return the ball to them will usually take a creative forward pass.
Ballack will play the pass and make himself available again for the next pass if his teammate needs him.

All that image shows is how the players played on the day, not their natural abilities. During the match their styles would have been effected by the formations they were playing in and what their managers asked them to do.

I would say that Ireland is not a player like Lampard. Yes, like Lampard, he does do well running forward into the box but he can also dictate the play from deep too. He passes and controls the ball well and consistently, from what I've seen. He has the skill to dictate the play from deep imo. Maybe there is a question about Ireland's defensive game. (I find it really hard to judge because whenever I've seen City playing this season the whole teams' defence has been shite.) But Ballack is cruising these days and Ireland is full of energy and running so he wins there for me too.

Anyway, Ireland could absolutely do a better job than Ballack in Chelsea's 433 this season. No doubt for me.

PS I love that Guardian yoke too, it's deadly

Bubs101

Pro. F wrote: »

Anyway, Ireland could absolutely do a better job than Ballack in Chelsea's 433 this season. No doubt for me.

He just couldn't. lampard is a much better player than Ireland and there's no way Ireland would be allowed play his City game at Chelsea not should he be. We'd lose a massive threat from corners which we are lethal from so it wouldn't be worth it. Also, similarly to Terry in defence, I think Ballack adds alot of fire in the midfield which we'd miss

Pro. F

My point was that Ireland can play deep in a CM role so he wouldn't be doing the same job as Lampard. He would be doing the job that Ballack is doing now.

The way I see it Chelsea play a 433 with: one defensive CM staying deep to break up opposition play and keep possession; Lampard getting forward a fair bit and Ballack doing a bit of both, trying to keep things moving and mostly staying behind the play. My point is that Ireland could do what Ballack is doing. Now, maybe he can't defend as well as Ballack. Maybe. But I say he can control the possession better. (this is based on this seasons form from what I've seen)

Bubs101

Pro. F wrote: »

My point was that Ireland can play deep in a CM role so he wouldn't be doing the same job as Lampard. He would be doing the job that Ballack is doing now.

The way I see it Chelsea play a 433 with: one defensive CM staying deep to break up opposition play and keep possession; Lampard getting forward a fair bit and Ballack doing a bit of both, trying to keep things moving and mostly staying behind the play. My point is that Ireland could do what Ballack is doing. Now, maybe he can't defend as well as Ballack. Maybe. But I say he can control the possession better. (this is based on this seasons form from what I've seen)

He's never played there before so you can't just assume that he will not to mention that Ballack is really solid there. It's the kind of position that doesn't draw plaudits. get the ball from Essien, give it to Lampard or the wingers, win it back. He does this all the time and is a real unsung player of the team

Pro. F

The position draws plaudits from me. Its not because I don't appreciate the position, or don't know what it entails, that I disagree with you.

Ireland has had to do a similar job at times for City this season. And he has the skills to do it. Maybe he can't win the ball back as well as Ballack. But he can keep possession and dictate play better imo. Combine that with the fact that Ballack looks like he is cruising these days and that Ireland has been putting in some grafting and that's why I have the opinion that I do.

eirebhoy

Pro. F wrote: »

All that image shows is how the players played on the day, not their natural abilities. During the match their styles would have been effected by the formations they were playing in and what their managers asked them to do.

If you look at a few other matches you'll see their roles are pretty consistent. Ballack is playing a much different role to Ireland, no matter what the game. Even look at Essien. Essien is actually playing further forward than Ballack which would surprise a lot of people.

I would say that Ireland is not a player like Lampard. Yes, like Lampard, he does do well running forward into the box but he can also dictate the play from deep too. He passes and controls the ball well and consistently, from what I've seen. He has the skill to dictate the play from deep imo.

Lampard can come deep and pass the ball around too. Neither player has the brain of a deep lying midfielder. Ireland is a brilliant player and will be world class but I don't think he could dictate a game well from a deep position. I'm sure he will in the future. Look at Paul Scholes.

If Ireland and Lampard played in the same team one of them would have to change their role from the role they currently play. As Lampard has to do often for England and he's often rubbish.

Watch both players the next time. They'll pass the ball and run forward a lot. It's very counter attacking football and can obviously leave the defence very exploited.

Pro. F wrote: »

My point was that Ireland can play deep in a CM role so he wouldn't be doing the same job as Lampard. He would be doing the job that Ballack is doing now.

I just don't think he could. imo Andy Reid or Nakamura are naturals in that position (even though they've hardly started a game there). To play Ireland in that deep lying role wouldn't suit him imo.

I'm off the drink this weekend so will take up any chance to waste a few minutes. This is Man City's total succesful passes from their last 10 games compared to Ireland's total succesful passes:

344 - 26 - 7.6%
293 - 25 - 8.5%
182 - 26 - 14.3%
337 - 24 - 7.1%
203 - 17 - 8.4%
409 - 29 - 7%
390 - 46 - 11.8%
414 - 32 - 7.7%
357 - 33 - 9.2%
240 - 21 - 8.8%

And to compare to an all round midfielder in Gareth Barry:

160 - 30 - 18.8%
137 - 28 - 20.4%
226 - 29 - 12.8%
230 - 31 - 13.5%
216 - 32 - 14.8%
333 - 51 - 15.3%
166 - 22 - 13.3%
182 - 31 - 17%
189 - 21 - 11.1%
113 - 13 - 11.5%

Ireland doesn't dominate play as much as some people say. Brilliant player but playing a different role to Ballack, who I've completely forgotten about at this stage.

Pro. F

First off, good post^
Sorry about all the quoting in my post but this disscussion is getting convoluted.

eirebhoy wrote: »

If you look at a few other matches you'll see their roles are pretty consistent.

Again this doesn't show what the players' natural abilities are, just what they have been doing - because of what their managers asked of them or what the team neaded etc. I'm saying that if you watch Ireland play you can see that he has the skills to play as a CM. I'm not sure about his defensive ability but his skill with the ball is well suited to that position. It might be said that it would be a waste to not have him as an AM, because he's so dangerous there, but that's a different point.

eirebhoy wrote: »

Even look at Essien. Essien is actually playing further forward than Ballack which would surprise a lot of people.

Good point. I was thinking more of Mikel. (Although Essien is a busier player in general and when he gets back in form I would expect him to do more to win back possession then Ballack while still getting forward more as well.)

eirebhoy wrote: »

Lampard can come deep and pass the ball around too....Neither player has the brain of a deep lying midfielder.

Lampard can't come deep and pass the ball around well. He doesn't have the skills to play that position well. IMO Ireland does. I've seen him play plenty of intellegent passes from deep, both to keep possession and to dictate the play.

eirebhoy wrote: »

Watch both players the next time. They'll pass the ball and run forward a lot. It's very counter attacking football and can obviously leave the defence very exploited.

Yes do watch both players - they will pass and run forward alot. However watch the other things that Ireland does too. Watch Ireland's first touch. It's consistently good. Watch his passes. He can pick out a through pass that splits the defence. These are skills which are needed for a CM and are skills that Lampard lacks. This is the crux of our disagreement. I say that Ireland has these skills and you say he doesn't.

eirebhoy wrote: »

I'm off the drink this weekend so will take up any chance to waste a few minutes. This is Man City's total successful passes from their last 10 games compared to Ireland's total successful passes:

344 - 26 - 7.6%
293 - 25 - 8.5%
182 - 26 - 14.3%
337 - 24 - 7.1%
203 - 17 - 8.4%
409 - 29 - 7%
390 - 46 - 11.8%
414 - 32 - 7.7%
357 - 33 - 9.2%
240 - 21 - 8.8%

And to compare to an all round midfielder in Gareth Barry:

160 - 30 - 18.8%
137 - 28 - 20.4%
226 - 29 - 12.8%
230 - 31 - 13.5%
216 - 32 - 14.8%
333 - 51 - 15.3%
166 - 22 - 13.3%
182 - 31 - 17%
189 - 21 - 11.1%
113 - 13 - 11.5%

Ballack, Reid, Nakamura and now Barry!:p too many!

Two things.
First, statistics aren't that easy to use for proof. They need to be investigated mathematically to see if they are significant (ie to rule out some other factor causing the effect). I think it's called regression analysis. Without that they prove nothing.

Secondly, statistics don't come near actually watching a player. I'm not going to get involved with them now.

noodler

This season it is no contest and for the future it is obviously no contest.

If you wanted to sign a player based on past glories that he may never reproduce-then Ballack.