World Class Players..

OPENROAD

Interesting discussion in the Arsenal match thread, deserves a seperate thread imo.


So what makes a world class player?

SlickRic

somebody who would grace any team in the world.

Mr. Presentable

We have a match. Our world (Earth) against your world (Tau Ceti, or whatever). Of the class to be representative of our world.

Mr. Presentable

SlickRic wrote: »

somebody who would grace any team in the world.

Which is anybody. I played for a team in our world once.

Paleface

IMHO this cannot accurately be defined. But I'm really interested to see what people think.

The obvious thing is to say if you picked a World XI team then the player in each position is world class. But you would be leaving out players who are arguably of equal status. Other people depending on opinion will say the players you left out are better than those picked!

So you would have to look at a broader set of players.

How to define these then should be the argument here. You'd think silverware would be a must also but I don't believe that either. Plenty of great players have rarely tasted success and in contrast many average players have won medals on a regular basis.

Lets see how this thread develops!

Iang87

world class players.

Players with the ability to win any game and use that ability when the occassion occurs.

quick example Zidane in 98

jank

A player whom you could confidentially name as one of the best in that position.

Of course it then depends on what formation you play but most people stick to 4-4-2

Example.

As your two strikers you could easily claim that Torres and Drogba would claim those spots. However you could also say that Rooney and Eto could take those spots, or even Van Persie and David Villa. These are all world class players. Of course it is a matter of opinion at the end of the day.

Tusky

I made a thread about this about a year ago. I hate the term and the arguments that follow when its used. 'hes world class', 'no hes not' etc.

If you are going to argue about it, it needs to be clearly defined. At the moment, its not. For some people its the best 3 players in the world in their position. For others its the best 5 or 10. For some it means the player would get into any team or squad in the world. Everyone has their own definition, so arguing about it is silly.

I just stay away from the world and say 'top class'. Doesnt lead to arguments!

DenMan

Wouldn't world class be defined as a player who plays for their national team? I mean, think of all the players playing in their respective leagues all vying to play internationally for their nation. They are the best in their position, and have earned the right to play at the highest level. They have been chosen because they have the most to contribute according to their national teams set-up, as attacking or defensive players. Players who change a game, whether scoring or keeping them out. They have the ability to change the game. Just my two cents.

Paleface

DenMan wrote: »

Wouldn't world class be defined as a player who plays for their national team? I mean, think of all the players playing in their respective leagues all vying to play internationally for their nation. They are the best in their position, and have earned the right to play at the highest level. They have been chosen because they have the most to contribute according to their national teams set-up, as attacking or defensive players. Players who change a game, whether scoring or keeping them out. They have the ability to change the game. Just my two cents.

Kevin Kilbane is not world class!

LuckyLloyd

I have always thought of it as being a player who plays his position to an exceptionally high level, so much so that the list of players who could do a better job than him in his specific role is quite short. As such, the particular style or nature of a player's game does not matter to me so much. The term is not about technical brilliance or aesthetic beauty. But solely about effectiveness and the ability to get the job done he vast majority of the time no matter how high the quality of opposition.

ArmaniJeanss

I always think in terms of the Galaxy Cup, when Earth is sending its squad of 33 via quantum shuttle to the finals in Ursa Minor.

So anyone in Coach McClarens squad of 33, (or that is talked about in terms of 'he should be in the squad' etc) is by definition world class.

Mr Alan

i always think of it as being roughly the top 3 in the world in their position.

bUILDERtHEbOB

Anyone with an over 90 rating on FIFA.

Boskowski

It's a very difficult and loaded question.

The term a 'world class player' obviously means one of the best in the world. So how do you define 'the best in the world'? Is it the best 5000, the best 500, the best 20?

When you say 'someone like Zidane' than that's certainly correct as in he is one of them but does this not restrict such an attribute to too few a people? In order to be a world class player you'd have to be playing with or against other world class players, right? So you need a few more than just the legends like Pele, Best, Beckenbauer, Cruyff, Zico, Maradona, Zidane, Messi ...

I would imagine a world class player is someone who can compete and does compete in the toughest, highest classed matches on the planet. Say Champions League semi-finals and above, European-, Copa America-, World Cup Semi-finals and above. Compete in a match that finds recognition across the globe.

But then that would make John O'Shea a world class player...:eek:

I don't know...

GLaDOS

I think the answer is pretty simple..







Castrol Rankings!

eZe^

I don't see why people find is so difficult really. In my opinion it's a player who if you put him into any starting XI in the world, the team is either at the exact same level, or better than what it was without him.


Eg - Replace Eto'o at Inter with Torres/ David Villa/ Drogba. The team will operate at the same high level. Replace Carrick at Man Utd with Fabregas/ Xavi/ Pirlo and Man Utd won't suffer. Replace Toure at Barcelona with Essien and they will at least be as quality as they were with Toure. Obviously you have to be replacing top quality players to begin with (like above, Carrick was kind of a bad example because he isn't world class to begin with). But other than that I think it's a solid basis for comparison. That way, you can see that both Ribery, Ronaldo, and Messi are all world class, because any of them could play on Bayerns wings at they'd be functioning at the similar level.

Dave!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2eIjZJ2DJ4

heavyballs

any player who is a class above his peers in the top football stage in the world,the Champions League.It can't be the World Cup because too many worls clas players in the past are born in countries that may not qualify for the world cup,..example George Best and Kevin Kilbane.
If a player is up to world class standard he will sign for one of the champions league teams.
Imo it doesn't have to be a flashy player like Ronaldo or Messi,in the past Franz B,Maldini and Rossi would all qualify

jesus_thats_gre

Top 5 in the world in their respective position.

Morzadec

Dave! wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2eIjZJ2DJ4

Lol this was the first thing that came into my head when I saw the thread. Still remember the real argument that this sketch was based on!

tdv

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Top 5 in the world in their respective position.

5 is too much, 3 would be better.

Morzadec

eZe^ wrote: »

I don't see why people find is so difficult really. In my opinion it's a player who if you put him into any starting XI in the world, the team is either at the exact same level, or better than what it was without him.


Eg - Replace Eto'o at Inter with Torres/ David Villa/ Drogba. The team will operate at the same high level. Replace Carrick at Man Utd with Fabregas/ Xavi/ Pirlo and Man Utd won't suffer. Replace Toure at Barcelona with Essien and they will at least be as quality as they were with Toure. Obviously you have to be replacing top quality players to begin with (like above, Carrick was kind of a bad example because he isn't world class to begin with). But other than that I think it's a solid basis for comparison. That way, you can see that both Ribery, Ronaldo, and Messi are all world class, because any of them could play on Bayerns wings at they'd be functioning at the similar level.

There's a problem with this definition though because in my opinion replacing Messi at Barca with Ribery would be a significant blow to the Barca team. Yet in my opinion (and most peoples opinion) Ribery is World Class. So the definition doesn't work in this case.

Top 3 in each position is probably what I'd go for if I had to define it but I don't think it can really be defined, and there are problems with this definition also, because there might be 5 or 6 goalkeepers in the World who should be considered World Class but some of who will be excluded due to a rigid definition.

Ultimately it's subjective and there's no real way of defining it. That said there's probably a group of 20-30 players that it would be difficult to argue against being defined as World Class. But you'll always find someone who has a differing opinion (e.g. Dunphy on Ronaldo).

jesus_thats_gre

tdv wrote: »

5 is too much, 3 would be better.

Ah I don't know..

You can have 5 world class players in a single position. Essien, Lampard, Gerrard, Masch, Fabregas, Xavi, Iniesta, Alonso, Kaka to name just a few are pretty much all world class players.

I don't want to get into an argument on the merits of those players as I was just using them as examples of players that all play around the centre of the park.

Torres, Villa and Drogba would result in Eto'o and a few others being left out too. No one could argue that those 4 are not world class.

LuckyLloyd

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Ah I don't know..

You can have 5 world class players in a single position. Essien, Lampard, Gerrard, Masch, Fabregas, Xavi, Iniesta, Alonso, Kaka to name just a few are pretty much all world class players.

I don't want to get into an argument on the merits of those players as I was just using them as examples of players that all play around the centre of the park.

Torres, Villa and Drogba would result in Eto'o and a few others being left out too. No one could argue that those 4 are not world class.

To be fair, it might be as many as 8 or 12 for a certain position.

killwill

Iang87 wrote: »

world class players.

Players with the ability to win any game and use that ability when the occassion occurs.

quick example Zidane in 98

This it really. The only thing missing is the word consistently.
For example Ronaldo doing it consistently, Berbatov not.

jesus_thats_gre

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

To be fair, it might be as many as 8 or 12 for a certain position.

That's sort of my point. If an arbitrary figure is going to be chosen, I would way prefer it to be 1 larger than the actual number of world class players that exist than for it to be less.

I firmly believe that for most positions, bar goal keepers maybe, 3 is too small a number.

tdv

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

Ah I don't know..

You can have 5 world class players in a single position. Essien, Lampard, Gerrard, Masch, Fabregas, Xavi, Iniesta, Alonso, Kaka to name just a few are pretty much all world class players.

I don't want to get into an argument on the merits of those players as I was just using them as examples of players that all play around the centre of the park.

Torres, Villa and Drogba would result in Eto'o and a few others being left out too. No one could argue that those 4 are not world class.

Well attacking players thats fair enough, but I think you'd pushed to find 3 world class center backs at the moment. Certainley not as many great defenders as there was about 5 years ago.

iregk

A world class player is someone who is labelled World Class in football manager.

leninbenjamin

World class literally means world renowned. It means a player who is good enough to get recognition globally. It's not the top 3 / 5 / 1, that's all in your imagination lads.

Kev_ps3

A player who helps their team to win a major competition

Kess73

leninbenjamin wrote: »

World class literally means world renowned. It means a player who is good enough to get recognition globally. It's not the top 3 / 5 / 1, that's all in your imagination lads.

But then players with the best marketing team behind them could be regarded as world class.


Take Wayne Rooney and David Villa. Which one's face is most likely to be recognised in more countries.

I would wager that it is Rooney that will be recognised in more countries. Does that mean Rooney is a world class player and Villa is not?

I think a world class player is one whose ability consistently makes him stand out, regardless of the class of opposition he plays against, over a prolonged period of time.

Morzadec

leninbenjamin wrote: »

World class literally means world renowned. It means a player who is good enough to get recognition globally. It's not the top 3 / 5 / 1, that's all in your imagination lads.

Is Beckham World Class in your opinion?

leninbenjamin

Kess73 wrote: »

But then players with the best marketing team behind them could be regarded as world class.


Take Wayne Rooney and David Villa. Which one's face is most likely to be recognised in more countries.

I would wager that it is Rooney that will be recognised in more countries. Does that mean Rooney is a world class player and Villa is not?

I think a world class player is one whose ability consistently makes him stand out, regardless of the class of opposition he plays against, over a prolonged period of time.

Morzadec wrote: »

Is Beckham World Class in your opinion?

You're missing the point. It's an outdated expression that goes back to the 50s and 60s, when football cultures were much more insular. Think about it, back then the only players who would have been known world wide were your Charlton, Best, Pele, Charles, Zico. You didn't have the globalisation you have today. There were no Beckhams back then. Players became renowned for their football ability only, and only very few were good enough to turn the heads of fans in another nation.

Morzadec

leninbenjamin wrote: »

You're missing the point. It's an outdated expression that goes back to the 50s and 60s, when football cultures were much more insular. Think about it, back then the only players who would have been known world wide were your Charlton, Best, Pele, Charles, Zico. You didn't have the globalisation you have today. There were no Beckhams back then. Players became renowned for their football ability only, and only very few were good enough to turn the heads of fans in another nation.

Okay fair point, but then it's an outdated expression that is still used today.

Therefore to define it as 'a player who is recognised globally' is, I would argue, an outdated definition.

carlop

Using an arbitrary figure is just not possible in this case, regardless of whether its 3, 5, or 20. At any one time there will be certain positions that are inundated with quality players and others where there are very few.

It's very hard to define and ultimately comes down to a matter of personal opinion, both in which players are worthy of the term and what exactly the term entails.

For me, a world class player is a player who repeatedly can influence the outcome of a game played at the very highest level, and who has done so for a sustained period of time. They will be one of the top 3 or so performers in a high percentage of the matches they play.

leninbenjamin

Morzadec wrote: »

Okay fair point, but then it's an outdated expression that is still used today.

Therefore to define it as 'a player who is recognised globally' is, I would argue, an outdated definition.

Again, you're not getting me. That's exactly what i was trying to point out to people. The original definition of the word is outdated, and since then everyone has come up with their own working definition that does not necessarily reflect other's definitions. You only have to read through this thread to see a widely people's own definitions differ. The expression is now used in a very vague sense, so there's no point in trying to pin-point a specific meaning for it.

Whenever i hear 'world class' I just think 'That fellah rates him' and move on. I'm not going to get stuck in an argument for which there is no end (at least not on something so trivial )

Morzadec

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Again, you're not getting me. That's exactly what i was trying to point out to people. The original definition of the word is outdated, and since then everyone has come up with their own working definition that does not necessarily reflect other's definitions. You only have to read through this thread to see a widely people's own definitions differ. The expression is now used in a very vague sense, so there's no point in trying to pin-point a specific meaning for it.

Whenever i hear 'world class' I just think 'That fellah rates him' and move on. I'm not going to get stuck in an argument for which there is no end (at least not on something so trivial )

Ok we're in agreement then! if you read some of my earlier posts I was picking holes in people's definitions ans was also saying that it can not be defined. I just thought you were attempting to do so.

I think Carlop's definition is pretty good but again it's subjective which again proves that any single sentence is not going to define it for everyone.

It's an abstract concept rather than something that is measurable or definable.

Warper

Kess73 wrote: »

But then players with the best marketing team behind them could be regarded as world class.


Take Wayne Rooney and David Villa. Which one's face is most likely to be recognised in more countries.

I would wager that it is Rooney that will be recognised in more countries. Does that mean Rooney is a world class player and Villa is not?

I think a world class player is one whose ability consistently makes him stand out, regardless of the class of opposition he plays against, over a prolonged period of time.

That's a good description. Its basically a player that wouldnt look out of place playing for any team in the world.