team of the decade. final team

Johner

d22ontour wrote: »

Influences ? In what way ? He has not a defensive bone is his body to be able to react to anything.Give him space and the ball and he rocks...Why i bite.... He does fook all when you don't have the ball

His tacking has improved and his tracking back his definitely improved, I'll just take it as you don't watch much Chelsea making a statement like "he doesn't have a defensive bone in his body"

d22ontour wrote: »

Sigh you really need me to tell you why ?

Yeah, I'd like to find out why actually.

d22ontour wrote: »

Incase you didn't get the last part, eh , no , We had a prodigy who needed the team to adapt to his influences which we did quite well as you well know.You think Lampard is good enough for United to change our system to accommodate him , really ? I want an honest answer to this please.

No but I really think you are underrating Lampard and his abilities.

d22ontour wrote: »

Roman has spent at least 10 times as much as us in the last 6 years , no ? Totally made up figures but are probably quite close. :rolleyes:

Ah well both clubs have still spent millions over the last decade.

d22ontour wrote: »

See this is were every other football fan ridicules you.You honestly think Terry has been better than Carvalho is what makes most other fans find anything you/chelsea fans post to be ridiculous.Carvalho has probably been the best centre back ever in the premier league but yet you spout ****é about Terry like no other centre half comes close.

If you want me to really take apart Lamps i could find the cm thread but am sure bay asked for it to be closed ...

Where did i say anything of the sort about nobody ever coming close to Terry? This is over a decade where in my opinion longevity comes into as well as how good a player as been,Again in my opinion Terry has been brilliant for the whole decade and Carvalho has been brilliant for the 6 years he has been in the EPL. I do think Carvalho is a better defender than Terry but I'm taking into account the whole decade so therefore would give the nod to Terry.

d22ontour

d22ontour wrote: »

I don't think anyone disputes he is a top player in a system that can accommodate him tbh, just that he isn't as good as the others in the list.Chelsea fanbois don't see past that though.... :rolleyes:

Sorry had to edit that, made me think of a few scenarios...

d22ontour wrote: »

Influences ? In what way ? He has not a defensive bone is his body to be able to react to anything.Give him space and the ball and he rocks...






Why i bite.... He does fook all when you don't have the ball





Sigh you really need me to tell you why ?





Incase you didn't get the last part, eh , no , We had a prodigy who needed the team to adapt to his influences which we did quite well as you well know.You think Lampard is good enough for United to change our system to accommodate him , really ? I want an honest answer to this please.





Roman has spent at least 10 times as much as us in the last 6 years , no ? Totally made up figures but are probably quite close. :rolleyes:





See this is were every other football fan ridicules you.You honestly think Terry has been better than Carvalho is what makes most other fans find anything you/chelsea fans post to be ridiculous.Carvalho has probably been the best centre back ever in the premier league but yet you spout ****é about Terry like no other centre half comes close.

If you want me to really take apart Lamps i could find the cm thread but am sure bay asked for it to be closed ...

Not a Chelsea fan as most know on here but had to reply to your inept posting. It's frankly embarresing tbh.

Enough about you, Lampard has 143 goals in 459 appearances since 2001 which is incredible for a midfielder.

And a section of England fans still boo him (probably hammers fans?)

Here's an interesting fact. Lampard has scored more goals than Rooney in the previous 5 seasons (101-97)

Sh*t player alright !!

Sometimes you should do a bit of research before posting nonsense.

d22ontour

Johner wrote: »

His tacking has improved and his tracking back his definitely improved, I'll just take it as you don't watch much Chelsea making a statement like "he doesn't have a defensive bone in his body"

If you actually think he can offer much defensively then let you quote some stats of his defensive prowess please ????

Johner wrote: »

No but I really think you are underrating Lampard and his abilities.

No i think i he can be quite a useful player in a team that can accommodate his abilities.United can't,Barca can't,Real cant, Arsenal can't.The bigger picture is he needs the comfort zone behind him.I don't see big money bids for him ???? Club that overspent for 6 years can accommodate him ??

Johner wrote: »

Where did i say anything of the sort about nobody ever coming close to Terry? This is over a decade where in my opinion longevity comes into as well as how good a player as been,

It's either one or the other tbh. Class >longevity but that doesn't count when Chelsea are concerned according to you....

Johner wrote: »

Again in my opinion Terry has been brilliant for the whole decade

Even when you were shíte ? Seriously get some opta stats if you don't know football before 2005

Johner wrote: »

and Carvalho has been brilliant for the 6 years he has been in the EPL. I do think Carvalho is a better defender than Terry but I'm taking into account the whole decade so therefore would give the nod to Terry.

So you reckon when Chelsea were non factors before romans roubles makes Terry the better long term choice who coincidentally has won shíte before since Carvalho has been there ?

Your logic is as much as to be expected from a Chelsea fan.Football existed before romans roubles ya know

Fratton Fred

Well you'd never guess that team was put together by an Irish soccer forum.

Johner

d22ontour wrote: »

If you actually think he can offer much defensively then let you quote some stats of his defensive prowess please ????

Stats? No thanks I'd rather watch Chelsea week in week out and watch how Lampard makes good tackles in the middle of the park and wins the ball back in his own half. If you don't want to accept that he actually does this then fair enough but you are wrong.

d22ontour wrote: »

No i think i he can be quite a useful player in a team that can accommodate his abilities.United can't,Barca can't,Real cant, Arsenal can't.The bigger picture is he needs the comfort zone behind him.I don't see big money bids for him ???? Club that overspent for 6 years can accommodate him ??

Ridiculous comment, What does it matter that clubs haven't made a big money bid for him? Rooney hasn't had a big money bid for him since he joined United? what does this prove? Nothing.

d22ontour wrote: »

It's either one or the other tbh. Class >longevity but that doesn't count when Chelsea are concerned according to you....

Why does it have to be one or the other?Ok let me explain, IN MY OPINION Terry and Carvalho are both excellent defenders BUT Terry has played more of the decade and longevity comes into it then. This is my opinion, fair enough if you don't agree.

d22ontour wrote: »

Even when you were shíte ? Seriously get some opta stats if you don't know football before 2005

When we were ****e? The first two seasons of the decade we finished 6th and since then we haven't been out of the top 4. I don't see this as being ****e to be honest!

d22ontour wrote: »

So you reckon when Chelsea were non factors before romans roubles makes Terry the better long term choice who coincidentally has won shíte before since Carvalho has been there.Your logic is as much as to be expected from a Chelsea fan.Football existed before romans roubles ya know

So because Terry wasn't winning Premier League trophies and was in a team that weren't challenging at the start of the decade means he wasn't playing well does it and doesn't deserve to be in the team. He was voted Chelsea player of the year in 2001, he was obviously doing something right but oh wait Chelsea didn't win the premier league that year so it doesn't count. :rolleyes:

SlickRic

i've seen it all now.

Chelsea's most important player over the course of the last decade.

endlessly influencing them in attack.

scoring rarely less than 20 a season.

former World Player of the Year runner-up.

we are witnessing one of the best ever careers in the Premiership.

and he's not fit to lace other midfielders' boots?

pfft...

Lampard will be a legitimate legend of the Premiership by the time he retires.

d22ontour

Lets just say that Lampard and Gerrard are the best 2 midfielders to ever grace the game in the last 10 years but your bitter voting has separated them.Gerrard i could fathom in a top team.No top team could ever carry a passenger. :rolleyes:

SlickRic

d22ontour wrote: »

No top team could ever carry a passenger. :rolleyes:

you're just saying controversial statements for the sake of it, with nothing to back it up.

well done.

you know little about football if you genuinely think Lampard is a passenger of any sort.

Johner

d22ontour wrote: »

Lets just say that Lampard and Gerrard are the best 2 midfielders to ever grace the game in the last 10 years but your bitter voting has separated them.Gerrard i could fathom in a top team.No top team could ever carry a passenger. :rolleyes:

If Frank Lampard was a 20 goal a season midfielder for Manchester United I can guarantee you would be arguing for his inclusion in this.

d22ontour

SlickRic wrote: »

you're just saying controversial statements for the sake of it, with nothing to back it up.

well done.

you know little about football if you genuinely think Lampard is a passenger of any sort.

You know little of football if you think a team could afford to carry such a player without adequate defensive players.Could Liverpool drop Mascherano/Lucas to play Lampard ? Please enlighten me if you could secure 4th spot in that line up ? Can't seem to play Aquaman there ~????

He needs a defensive cover behind him, you actually follow football and don't see that ? Little about football eh ? Switch Lampard for Lucas would ya ? :rolleyes:

Theres more to football than what andy gray tells you.Learn some.

SlickRic

d22ontour wrote: »

You know little of football if you think a team could afford to carry such a player without adequate defensive players.Could Liverpool drop Mascherano/Lucas to play Lampard ? Please enlighten me if you could secure 4th spot in that line up ? Can't seem to play Aquaman there ~????

He needs a defensive cover behind him, you actually follow football and don't see that ? Little about football eh ? Switch Lampard for Lucas would ya ? :rolleyes:

Theres more to football than what andy gray tells you.Learn some.

you really do make up some amount of cr*p.

if you have it in your head that all lampard does is be allowed free reign with inadequate defensive abilities, then there is no talking to you, as you've never watched him play football.

yes i'd switch Lampard for Lucas in an instant, and that's no slight on Lucas.

again, you're just making up ludicrous suggestions without any basis to them whatsoever.

d22ontour

SlickRic wrote: »

you really do make up some amount of cr*p.

if you have it in your head that all lampard does is be allowed free reign with inadequate defensive abilities, then there is no talking to you, as you've never watched him play football.

You can specifically relate to his defensive capabilities ? You actually think Chelseas midfield set up is just an accident with a defensive 2 that covers the roaming 1 ? You should get on to Carlo and tell him he is doing it wrong.

SlickRic wrote: »

yes i'd switch Lampard for Lucas in an instant, and that's no slight on Lucas.

You would take currently challenging for a top four spot to god knows what place mid table gives ...

SlickRic wrote: »

again, you're just making up ludicrous suggestions without any basis to them whatsoever.

You might need to see football from even a stream that sky doesn't sponsor.,

I love your love of the game somewhat..

You would switch Lucas for an attacking midfielder in a set up your manager made which would deem him ineffective ? :rolleyes:

And you wonder why Aquaman isn't fit ?


I love the irony in this. :P

K-9

Iago wrote: »

funny how it's mostly Liverpool fans that are fiercest in their condemnation of the whole thing. Lack of Liverpool players in it perhaps?

I've already highlighted that I don't think Keane should have made the team and that their was a real lack of DM type players, and I think Scholes/Gerrard/Lampard is debateable but overall as consistency goes the selections weren't hugely off the mark imo.

Barring Gerrard, I don't think any Pool fan would have a major problem with it, so that that is a swipe at Pool fans.

Pool fans generally know their football, hell, we grew up with it.

It's bias from other fans that sees Pool bias.

Anyway, it isn't a bad team. On RVN, he was the best goal poacher of the decade.

Btw, I'm quoting the part not in bold.

daithijjj

K-9 wrote: »

Barring Gerrard, I don't think any Pool fan would have a major problem with it, so that that is a swipe at Pool fans.

Pool fans generally know their football, hell, we grew up with it.

It's bias from other fans that sees Pool bias.

Anyway, it isn't a bad team. On RVN, he was the best goal poacher of the decade.

Btw, I'm quoting the part not in bold.

Absolutely.

Morzadec

Thinking Keane is better than Lampard over the 00's is fairly retarded, but understandable considering the United/Ireland link.

Thinking Lucas (who's been good this year for the record) would be better in midfield for Liverpool than Lamps....well I don't know what to say....

Lampard is underrated by many I feel, maybe because he's a Chelsea player and most people hate Chelsea, or maybe because he hasn't replicated his club form at International level. I don't know what it is but Lampard has been in and around top 3 performers in the EPL for the last 4 or 5 years or so. He's indispensable to Chelsea. He scores a ridiculous amount of goals from midfield. He can also come deep if needs be but the way Chelsea play doesn't require him to do so that much (just in case this needed explaining).

It's hilarious the way thinking Lampard is a top player is passed off as 'Andy Gray brain-washing'. Come up with a footballing way of arguing against his consistent 20 goal seasons and nominees/winnings of PFA awards and I might listen to you :rolleyes:

Chardee MacDennis

nullzero wrote: »

Opinions are neither right nor wrong they are just opinions,

opinions can most definitely be right or wrong, damn this PC culture where calling someones opinion stupid is deemed to be wrong - this is why there are so many idiots around....

killwill

rarnes1 wrote: »

Keane LOL

and RVN ?

They both only played half a decade SOS ?

No more polls for you !

In that case Ronlado should be taken down too.

Iago

K-9 wrote: »

Barring Gerrard, I don't think any Pool fan would have a major problem with it, so that that is a swipe at Pool fans.

Pool fans generally know their football, hell, we grew up with it.

It's bias from other fans that sees Pool bias.

Anyway, it isn't a bad team. On RVN, he was the best goal poacher of the decade.

Btw, I'm quoting the part not in bold.

Well at the point I posted 5 out of 7 posters saying that the poll/team/principle was a farce/should be locked/was joke were Liverpool fans so that's what I was basing my statement on.

As for Liverpool fans growing up on good football, I agree when speaking about my generation or older, but imho Liverpool haven't played consistent attractive football for any period of time since Daglish was manager. I would compare the Liverpool team of the late '70s & 80's to the Arsenal teams of the last 10 years in terms of the football they played and how much I looked forward to watching them despite following United.That's a long time ago now, so the younger generation of Liverpool fans have had a different education. Anyway, that's a side point and a debate I'm willing to have elsewhere if anyone wishes to do so.

While I don't agree with d22ontours overall assessment of Lampard I do agree that in the decade just gone he was up against two of the most exceptional talents to play in the premier league in Gerrard & Scholes so it was no real surprise that he wasn't included, although it really could have gone either way. I'd bite your hand off if you offered him to United at this point and we could put him alongside Fletcher.

Suggesting he should be there at the expense of Keane would make sense if you had a player who had good defensive skills beside him, but you wouldn't because you'd have to have Scholes/Gerrard. This comes back to my earlier point that had the original poll included Viera & Makelale I'm not convinced Keane would have made the side. He didn't make it in place of Lampard, he made it because there was no better enforcer/DM option available.

Spiritoftheseventies

Now that we have discussed in its and outs of merits of thread maybe time to discuss it player for player.
Given a terrific shot stopper but have seen instances of him being slow to come off his line most recently in game against Bolton where they could have had penalty.
Another criticism of him is that he is a bit Jelly wristed but these faults aside think he deserves to be in as keeper.

K-9

Iago wrote: »

Well at the point I posted 5 out of 7 posters saying that the poll/team/principle was a farce/should be locked/was joke were Liverpool fans so that's what I was basing my statement on.

As for Liverpool fans growing up on good football, I agree when speaking about my generation or older, but imho Liverpool haven't played consistent attractive football for any period of time since Daglish was manager. I would compare the Liverpool team of the late '70s & 80's to the Arsenal teams of the last 10 years in terms of the football they played and how much I looked forward to watching them despite following United.That's a long time ago now, so the younger generation of Liverpool fans have had a different education. Anyway, that's a side point and a debate I'm willing to have elsewhere if anyone wishes to do so.

While I don't agree with d22ontours overall assessment of Lampard I do agree that in the decade just gone he was up against two of the most exceptional talents to play in the premier league in Gerrard & Scholes so it was no real surprise that he wasn't included, although it really could have gone either way. I'd bite your hand off if you offered him to United at this point and we could put him alongside Fletcher.

Suggesting he should be there at the expense of Keane would make sense if you had a player who had good defensive skills beside him, but you wouldn't because you'd have to have Scholes/Gerrard. This comes back to my earlier point that had the original poll included Viera & Makelale I'm not convinced Keane would have made the side. He didn't make it in place of Lampard, he made it because there was no better enforcer/DM option available.

Ach, I'd a joke about Ronaldo being in the team twice!

On Lampard, I picked Gerrard and I think he suffered because of that. I picked Keane, but I'd have put Viera ahead, or Makelale. No more of that!

I think both Lampard and Gerrard suffered because many wouldn't put both together in the same team.

On RVN, a couple of Premiership clubs, including Liverpool, would have loved to have got him on loan in January. Yes, he only had a few seasons in the decade.

Spiritoftheseventies

K-9 wrote: »

Ach, I'd a joke about Ronaldo being in the team twice!



On RVN, a couple of Premiership clubs, including Liverpool, would have loved to have got him on loan in January. Yes, he only had a few seasons in the decade.

is that wiki story sourced from Setanta sports correct which was supposedly led to him eventually leaving United

On 9 May 2006, Setanta Sports reported that Van Nistelrooy's exclusion from the squad was due to a training session fight between him and team-mate Cristiano Ronaldo. Van Nistelrooy allegedly criticised Ronaldo's tendency to hold onto the ball instead of passing to his team-mates, which sparked the fight, after which Van Nistelrooy remarked, "Go crying to your daddy." The article claimed that this was not a reference to Ronaldo's father (who had died earlier in the season), but to United's Portuguese assistant coach, Carlos Queiroz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruud_van_Nistelrooy

aidan24326

d22ontour wrote: »

You know little of football if you think a team could afford to carry such a player without adequate defensive players.Could Liverpool drop Mascherano/Lucas to play Lampard ?

I'd hazard a guess that most Liverpool fans would take Lampard in an instant. It's a myth that Lampard does no defensive work, he's a box-to-box player. Having the likes of Makelele and Essien around gave him license to join the attack quite alot but that doesn't mean he won't track back and cover when he needs to. He gives you 20 goals per season and tireless workrate with it.

Spiritoftheseventies

aidan24326 wrote: »

I'd hazard a guess that most Liverpool fans would take Lampard in an instant. It's a myth that Lampard does no defensive work, he's a box-to-box player. Having the likes of Makelele and Essien around gave him license to join the attack quite alot but that doesn't mean he won't track back and cover when he needs to. He gives you 20 goals per season and tireless workrate with it.

Lampard would give us a few more goals for sure but Mascherano's work rate is as good.

aidan24326

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Lampard would give us a few more goals for sure but Mascherano's work rate is as good.

Yeah I'd agree with that. It's just that some posters seemed to be implying that Lampard is an out-and-out attacker only which isn't quite true. I think if you needed him to sit in a deeper midfield role he could do that job too. But to listen to some people you'd think all he does is lurk around the penalty box with his hands in his pockets waiting for goal chances, which is a lazy analysis.

Mitch Connor

aidan24326 wrote: »

Yeah I'd agree with that. It's just that some posters seemed to be implying that Lampard is an out-and-out attacker only which isn't quite true. I think if you needed him to sit in a deeper midfield role he could do that job too. But to listen to some people you'd think all he does is lurk around the penalty box with his hands in his pockets waiting for goal chances, which is a lazy analysis.

he has been asked to do that on many occasions for England and has, along with Gerrard, failed to do much in that role. They have only really performed when there has been a defensive player alongside them in the centre that allows them to roam forward and forget about their defensive duties.

The Muppet

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Okay this is team of decade. debate.
One of two positions I would have problems with but overall its a good enough team.

Given, Gary Neville, Ferdinand, Terry, Ashley Cole, Ryan Giggs, Roy Keane, Scholes, Ronaldo, RVN,Henry

Manager of Decade: Ferguson

Not bad Team, apart from Shay getting the Irish vote I couldn't really argue with it.