Who in your opinion is the best player in the premiership right now?

Morzadec

People may laugh, but Fifa 14 stats may not actually be the worst criteria to decide this debate.

I would imagine they have a team of experts looking into things in detail, trying to make objective appraisals on each players differing abilities, unencumbered by fan loyalties, probably based on stats and detailed observations. I doubt their decisions were made willy-nilly.

Obviously by no means 'conclusive' or anything, but by this criteria it's Van Persie.


http://www.easports.com/fifa/news-updates-gameplay/article/fifa-14-top-50

SweepTheLeg

Morzadec wrote: »

People may laugh, but Fifa 14 stats may not actually be the worst criteria to decide this debate.

I would imagine they have a team of experts looking into things in detail, trying to make objective appraisals on each players differing abilities, unencumbered by fan loyalties, probably based on stats and detailed observations. I doubt their decisions were made willy-nilly.

Obviously by no means 'conclusive' or anything, but by this criteria it's Van Persie.


http://www.easports.com/fifa/news-updates-gameplay/article/fifa-14-top-50

This is the game that Downing has a higher free kick accuracy than Lampard. Also has Silva higher rated than Mata and Özil.

FIFA ratings have always been a joke, I don't know how players who had great seasons last year don't get upgraded. Not a Liverpool fan but Suarez & Sturridge should be rated way higher. The ratings are made willy nilly.

gnfnrhead

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

So "best" equals the player in form over an 8 game sample. Cool beans. I will return to this thread come season's end...

You appear to have missed the point of the thread.

"Who in your opinon is the best player in the premiership right now?"

It's not a player of the season poll like you seem to believe.

Morzadec

SweepTheLeg wrote: »

This is the game that Downing has a higher free kick accuracy than Lampard. Also has Silva higher rated than Mata and Özil.

FIFA ratings have always been a joke, I don't know how players who had great seasons last year don't get upgraded. Not a Liverpool fan but Suarez & Sturridge should be rated way higher. The ratings are made willy nilly.

Perhaps you're right. I was just trying to think of an objective way to solve this question!

Marty McFly

Since the thread title says right now indicating current form it has to be Ramsey which I think not many people would have thought to have been the case only last season.

Whether he is still best come the end of the season that is another question and remains to be seen but for now it has to be him followed by Ozil then maybe Sturridge for me. Only because I can't have 3 players from my own team as my top 3 have to show some objectivity :pac:.

weldoninhio

Alpha Dog 1 wrote: »

No, no he's not.

Care to name me some others?

Gbear

Real were ****ing lunatics to let Ozil go.

He's the best emm.. sort of attacking midfieldery, sometimes up front, occasionally on the wing, generally creative, mostly brilliant all round fella, on the planet.
He is the best player in the PL.

If you're asking who's had the best form so far this season, it is probably Ramsey.

Sturridge's all round play has been meh but I suppose he does get a shout, what with being the top scorer so far.

Moneymaker

Best player overall is Ozil and it's not even remotely close imo. Real Madrid have made a catastrophic blunder like when they sold Makelele and that worked out well for Chelsea.

Form wise, Ramsey. He's hotter then a million Foreman Grills atm.

GTR63

Moneymaker wrote: »

Best player overall is Ozil and it's not even remotely close imo. Real Madrid have made a catastrophic blunder like when they sold Makelele and that worked out well for Chelsea.

I really like Isco as a signing for them but hate the money they spent on Bale it was real window breaking stuff. Needed a striker WAY more than him could of gotten Lewandowski or another top forward & Reus for the price they paid.

Andersonisgod

Sometimes I go to bed and I say to myself "AndersonisGod, why is Oscar not rated more highly?" And this voice responds "I don't know Anderson but maybe it's better that he goes under the radar." This is a player in sublime form, Chelsea's starting number 10, Brazil's starting number ten. A player with the ability, attitude, versatility and sheer brilliance that can go on to become one of the great players in world football. He surely deserves more votes. I'd say the same goes for Hazard.

My non-Chelsea mention goes to Yaya Toure. An unstoppable beast in midfield, probably the best all rounder in the league.

eagle eye

Ozil without question for me, he is the difference in that Arsenal team. All the other players around him are better because of him.

eagle eye

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Sometimes I go to bed and I say to myself "AndersonisGod, why is Oscar not rated more highly?" And this voice responds "I don't know Anderson but maybe it's better that he goes under the radar." This is a player in sublime form, Chelsea's starting number 10, Brazil's starting number ten. A player with the ability, attitude, versatility and sheer brilliance that can go on to become one of the great players in world football. He surely deserves more votes. I'd say the same goes for Hazard.

My non-Chelsea mention goes to Yaya Toure, who played for the team I believe are my lovechild, the year they won everything. An unstoppable beast in midfield, probably the best all rounder in the league.

Fixed that for ya!:D

richierichballs

kasami.

Skylinehead

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Sometimes I go to bed and I say to myself "AndersonisGod, why is Oscar not rated more highly?" And this voice responds "I don't know Anderson but maybe it's better that he goes under the radar." This is a player in sublime form, Chelsea's starting number 10, Brazil's starting number ten. A player with the ability, attitude, versatility and sheer brilliance that can go on to become one of the great players in world football. He surely deserves more votes. I'd say the same goes for Hazard.

My non-Chelsea mention goes to Yaya Toure. An unstoppable beast in midfield, probably the best all rounder in the league.

No, he doesn't deserve more votes. He's a very good player, if inconsistent, but if you were to vote for him you'd be suggesting he's better than Ozil/Van Persie/Mata/Suarez/Aguero/Rooney/Toure. He's not anywhere near them yet. Nor is Hazard.

gimmick

Aguero for me. I think the guy is pure and utter class. He has speed, skill, calm and can play direct when the needs be as well.

richierichballs

gimmick wrote: »

Aguero for me. I think the guy is pure and utter class. He has speed, skill, calm and can play direct when the needs be as well.

Same for me, I think he's very underrated in England. Jamie Carragher said he was probably the most difficult striker he ever had to play against.

noodler

mike65 wrote: »

I'm not a gooner, Suarez has played 3 games, even Sturridge doesn't deserve this 8 games played award (!) as I knew he'd score loads - Ramseys form has come out of nowhere.

EuropeanSon wrote: »

I can't work out how Sturridge doesn't get on that list if goals and assists are so crucial.

Gbear

gimmick wrote: »

Aguero for me. I think the guy is pure and utter class. He has speed, skill, calm and can play direct when the needs be as well.

I was thinking that his goal return wasn't that great for the quality of the team he was playing in and how brilliant he is but it's actually virtually identical to Suarez'.

Maybe it's just that he's extremely good at everything but that isn't as eye-catching as the crazy dribbling of Suarez or Van Persie being the best finisher on the planet.

Most of his goal involve you going "that's very nice indeed". However, he rarely makes you go "what the absolute **** was that?" as Suarez and Van Persie do from time to time.

I love him as a player and he's the main of the reason I quite like City. Breaks my heart that Liverpool had the chance to sign him for 18m back when Rafa was in charge and we wouldn't stump up the money.

upandcumming

I can't believe I'm the only one to vote for Silva...

Skylinehead

upandcumming wrote: »

I can't believe I'm the only one to vote for Silva...

He's not the best, that's why. He's a very good player who drops out for entire half-seasons at a time. Can't say that for the likes of Ozil or Van Persie.

richierichballs

Skylinehead wrote: »

He's not the best, that's why. He's a very good player who drops out for entire half-seasons at a time. Can't say that for the likes of Ozil or Van Persie.

Drops out for entire half seasons? Did you watch the season City won the EPL? He was the best player in England from start to finish of that season, then went on to win the Euros with Spain. :rolleyes:

EuropeanSon

noodler wrote: »

I can't work out how Sturridge doesn't get on that list if goals and assists are so crucial.

Pretty sure they aren't that crucial, that's just the summary page, not all the criteria.

Morzadec

richierichballs wrote: »

Drops out for entire half seasons? Did you watch the season City won the EPL? He was the best player in England from start to finish of that season, then went on to win the Euros with Spain. :rolleyes:

Not exactly true.

Silva was head and shoulders above everyone the first half or so of that season and looked destined for Player of the Year at Christmas. If you had asked me then the same question this thread poses I wouldn't have hesitated answering Silva.

He then had a bit of an indifferent/hit and miss second half of the season (or maybe last third). He wasn't bad, but he didn't maintain those really excellent performances from the first half(ish) of the season.

Silva's probably not even one of City's 3 key players (I would say Aguero, Yaya and Kompany are all more important), so it's no surprise he's not in the running here.

I don't think he even stands out above his fellow countrymen who play the same position, Mata and Cazorla, both of whom probably had better seasons last year.

And Ozil is that little notch higher than the 3 of them as a creative attacking midfielder.

Don't get me wrong, Silva is a fantastic player, and when he's on form he's a joy to watch. Certainly he's amongst the top 20 players in the league. But I do think the issue raised about his ability to shine in a large majority of matches is valid, and I don't think he warrants a serious consideration for best player in the league.

Skylinehead

richierichballs wrote: »

Drops out for entire half seasons? Did you watch the season City won the EPL? He was the best player in England from start to finish of that season, then went on to win the Euros with Spain. :rolleyes:

I did watch him. Utterly superb until Christmas, and then, yes, dropped out for the rest. Not that he was bad or anything, but nothing like the form he was in the for the first half. Plus, as a number 10, he's not better than Mata (player of the year last year for me), probably on a par with Cazorla, and definitely not as good as Ozil is. Like it or not, there's at least 5-6 players better than him in the league.

Morzadec

gimmick wrote: »

Aguero for me. I think the guy is pure and utter class. He has speed, skill, calm and can play direct when the needs be as well.

richierichballs wrote: »

Same for me, I think he's very underrated in England. Jamie Carragher said he was probably the most difficult striker he ever had to play against.

Aguero is absolutely class and maybe got a bit forgotten about due to his injury-hit season last season.

Certainly up there and I can see the argument for him being placed above Suarez and Van Persie, though it's tough to separate them as strikers.

TheNap

David Silva is a lot better than Carzola and Mata . Easily one of the best in the PL . Watch City play with him then play without him and you will understand . He is a genius

richierichballs

Skylinehead wrote: »

I did watch him. Utterly superb until Christmas, and then, yes, dropped out for the rest. Not that he was bad or anything, but nothing like the form he was in the for the first half. Plus, as a number 10, he's not better than Mata (player of the year last year for me), probably on a par with Cazorla, and definitely not as good as Ozil is. Like it or not, there's at least 5-6 players better than him in the league.

Waste of time even trying to debate with someone who is comparing him to Cazorla and a much more attacking player like Mata. Ridiculous.

I agree Ozil is better but this statistics say something too.



Ozil clearly is a top player but too soon to compare him with anyone just yet wait and see if he is still as effective after opposing teams have had a chance to study him and try to adapt to stop influencing the game so much.
They have been trying to stop silva for years still not managed it....

AdamD

TheNap wrote: »

David Silva is a lot better than Carzola and Mata . Easily one of the best in the PL . Watch City play with him then play without him and you will understand . He is a genius

Hes just not though

richierichballs

Skylinehead

TheNap wrote: »

David Silva is a lot better than Carzola and Mata . Easily one of the best in the PL . Watch City play with him then play without him and you will understand . He is a genius

Did you see Mata last season? He was a force of nature, utterly unstoppable. Better season than any of Silva's in the Premier League to date.

richierichballs wrote: »

They have been trying to stop silva for years still not managed it....

Have they? I don't regard him as being as integral to the team as Yaya Toure or Aguero, I think teams are more concerned with stopping those two.

richierichballs

Skylinehead wrote: »

Have they? I don't regard him as being as integral to the team as Yaya Toure or Aguero, I think teams are more concerned with stopping those two.

Everything in some shape or form goes through Silva, two years when City played Everton Moyes had Rodwell man mark him for the game. After 60 minutes Rodwell looked like he was going to keel over.

His movement means that even when off form, he contributes. He takes up the most challenging positions for defenders and midfielders. On Saturday, they had a very deep midfield and still found space in between the bank of 4 defenders and the midfield. That he also can receive this on the half turn - a benefit of the higher tempo City are playing with - means he is even more effctive.

Skylinehead

richierichballs wrote: »

Waste of time even trying to debate with someone who is comparing him to Cazorla and a much more attacking player like Mata. Ridiculous.

Didn't see this bit earlier, why not compare him to Cazorla, who was better than him last season? And Mata isn't a "much more attacking" player, they're both number 10s. Mata isn't a striker, you know. Just sounds like you're deflecting the fact that Mata is clearly the superior player.

barone

suarez ..ozil..mata

richierichballs

Skylinehead wrote: »

Didn't see this bit earlier, why not compare him to Cazorla, who was better than him last season? And Mata isn't a "much more attacking" player, they're both number 10s. Mata isn't a striker, you know. Just sounds like you're deflecting the fact that Mata is clearly the superior player.

Cazorla was better? lol.

Mata is an exceptional attacking midfielder, Silva is a maestro. It's almost like he see's the biggest picture. He may not always be playing the final pass, or putting it in the net, but his contribution to the way the whole team moves around the pitch is what makes him special.

Silva's only limitation is himself. IMO at his very best, the top of his game is higher than any mentioned, we just don't see it nearly enough.

It's really important to realize that a playmaker is not just about giving through balls that strikers will score on, which can indeed be seen through stats. To me, right now, it sounds like you're saying that all the discussion about Pirlo being a great midfielder is crap and that he can't match Mata's sheer number of assists and goals.

Maybe Silva is not better than Mata in absolute terms, maybe the same can be said about Xavi or Modric, but that's because it's an unfair comparaison between creative midfielders and a counter-attacking midfielder who plays in a team with a ****ty game, so all he can do is assists and goals, so called decisive plays.

To look at it another way, You could replace Iniesta with Silva and they would still be the best team in the world. You can't do the same with Mata, despite the fact that he brings more goals and more assists to the table.

Skylinehead

richierichballs wrote: »

Cazorla was better? lol.

Yes. He was. And you saying "lol" doesn't make it any different. The man was a revelation, his vision, dribbling and passing combined with a lot of goals and assists make it so.

Mata is an exceptional attacking midfielder, Silva is a maestro. It's almost like he see's the biggest picture. He may not always be playing the final pass, or putting it in the net, but his contribution to the way the whole team moves around the pitch is what makes him special.

Silva's only limitation is himself. IMO at his very best, the top of his game is higher than any mentioned, we just don't see it nearly enough.

It's really important to realize that a playmaker is not just about giving through balls that strikers will score on, which can indeed be seen through stats. To me, right now, it sounds like you're saying that all the discussion about Pirlo being a great midfielder is crap and that he can't match Mata's sheer number of assists and goals.

Maybe Silva is not better than Mata in absolute terms, maybe the same can be said about Xavi or Modric, but that's because it's an unfair comparaison between creative midfielders and a counter-attacking midfielder who plays in a team with a ****ty game, so all he can do is assists and goals, so called decisive plays.

To look at it another way, You could replace Iniesta with Silva and they would still be the best team in the world. You can't do the same with Mata, despite the fact that he brings more goals and more assists to the table.

I think you're understating Mata here, he's not a counter attacking midfielder either. His all round game is superb, the goals and assists are just a bonus. He's been the heart of the Chelsea team for at least two years, and any sane Chelsea fan will state that he's been by far their best player for the last two years, and they do play in the same position. A creative number 10, which Mata most certainly is.

richierichballs

Skylinehead wrote: »

Yes. He was. And you saying "lol" doesn't make it any different. The man was a revelation, his vision, dribbling and passing combined with a lot of goals and assists make it so.

I think you're understating Mata here, he's not a counter attacking midfielder either. His all round game is superb, the goals and assists are just a bonus. He's been the heart of the Chelsea team for at least two years, and any sane Chelsea fan will state that he's been by far their best player for the last two years, and they do play in the same position. A creative number 10, which Mata most certainly is.

Oscar and Hazard are much more creative then Mata. They allow him to get forward and score goals,
Chelsea have alot more creative midfielders then City do hence the reason Mata scores goals.

Mata is not a creative number 10, Oscar is.

Skylinehead

richierichballs wrote: »

Oscar and Hazard are much more creative then Mata. They allow him to get forward and score goals,
Chelsea have alot more creative midfielders then City do hence the reason Mata scores goals.

Mata is not a creative number 10, Oscar is.

Hazard is certainly not a creative midfielder, he's far, far more direct. Mata makes the passes, Mata keeps the play going, Mata supplies the assists. Is that not the definition of a creative midfielder?

richierichballs

Skylinehead wrote: »

Hazard is certainly not a creative midfielder, he's far, far more direct. Mata makes the passes, Mata keeps the play going, Mata supplies the assists. Is that not the definition of a creative midfielder?

Right okay so your by your logic Mata and Silva are the exact same player so? Then lets compare stats this season, going by your logic.

Mata: 5 games
1 assist
0 goals

Silva: 5 games
4 assists
2 goals

Skylinehead

richierichballs wrote: »

Right okay so your by your logic Mata and Silva are the exact same player so? Then lets compare stats this season, going by your logic.

Mata: 5 games
1 assist
0 goals

Silva: 5 games
4 assists
2 goals

Ok, I'm not a fan of stats to judge a player, but lets play that game. But for last season, seeing as Mata is out of favour for some reason, and 5 games is a useless barometer.

Silva: 54 games, 7 goals, 19 assists.
Mata: 75 games, 22 goals, 39 assists.

39 assists in one season is a hell of a lot of assists for a player who you say isn't creative.

Andersonisgod

Skylinehead wrote: »

No, he doesn't deserve more votes. He's a very good player, if inconsistent, but if you were to vote for him you'd be suggesting he's better than Ozil/Van Persie/Mata/Suarez/Aguero/Rooney/Toure. He's not anywhere near them yet. Nor is Hazard.

Personally I think he could be considered in that bracket. He's a breathtaking player, a sublime talent who has everything in his game, he's established himself already as Brazil's starting number 10 in a year in which they are about the host the tournament, he is arguably Brazil's most important player behind Neymar, he's Chelsea's starting number 10 ahead of some terrific players and he's already proven himself to be a proper Mourinho player.

I'd also make a case that Eden Hazard is as talented as any player on that list, I still believe that if Chelsea are to win the league this season it'll be the little Belgian genius that is the driving force behind it.

Skylinehead

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Personally I think he could be considered in that bracket. He's a breathtaking player, a sublime talent who has everything in his game, he's established himself already as Brazil's starting number 10 in a year in which they are about the host the tournament, he is arguably Brazil's most important player behind Neymar, he's Chelsea's starting number 10 ahead of some terrific players and he's already proven himself to be a proper Mourinho player.

I'd also make a case that Eden Hazard is as talented as any player on that list, I still believe that if Chelsea are to win the league this season it'll be the little Belgian genius that is the driving force behind it.

I really like Oscar, I think he could be that player in the next few years. But for now, can you really say he's as good as Mata? Just look at the man last year, he was absolutely fantastic, Oscar has never shown he can do that over a season (yet). Ozil the same, albeit in a different league. I'll leave out Van Persie and Suarez, because they're different players. I just think you're being a little bit premature here, Oscar isn't as good as the top players in the league yet.

davycc

Juniorhurler wrote: »

Ramsay at the moment. Really has kicked on and looks to be fulfilling the potential he showed as a teenager.

+1 he has always shone for wales & now is shining even brighter for arsenal too:cool:

he will be player of the season imho if he keeps going at this rate past RVP & the Suarez & Co...

I always had a soft spot for him even as a dirty gunner

Andersonisgod

Skylinehead wrote: »

I really like Oscar, I think he could be that player in the next few years. But for now, can you really say he's as good as Mata? Just look at the man last year, he was absolutely fantastic, Oscar has never shown he can do that over a season (yet). Ozil the same, albeit in a different league. I'll leave out Van Persie and Suarez, because they're different players. I just think you're being a little bit premature here, Oscar isn't as good as the top players in the league yet.

He hasn't shown it yet but I personally think that he is such a sublime talent that he warrants being put among those players. I would have him ahead of Mata, I'm a big fan of Mata, but I think Oscar has more about him. Truth be told I've been a massive Oscar fan since I caught his first game for the senior Brazilian national team.

I don't mean to take this off topic and, if you can think of another example then by all means I'll use it but how much weight do you give to talent and recent form and recent success over longevity? For example, I'd rate Neymar as one of the best players in the world, he's won the Brazilian league, the Copa Libertadores and the Confederations Cup, all big trophies but not the biggest prizes in the game, he's done those things over the course of a couple of years and only this season has started plying his trade in Europe in a top league. Yet, it's very obvious from watching him that this is one of the worlds elite players. My point isn't to big up Neymar or to make people talk about Barcelona, my point is that how long does a player have to do it in a top league until he can be considered one of the best players in the world? Even if in terms of talent and performance it's clear that he is as good as almost anyone.

Skylinehead

Andersonisgod wrote: »

He hasn't shown it yet but I personally think that he is such a sublime talent that he warrants being put among those players. I would have him ahead of Mata, I'm a big fan of Mata, but I think Oscar has more about him. Truth be told I've been a massive Oscar fan since I caught his first game for the senior Brazilian national team.

Well there you go, he's not one of the best. You're judging this off potential talent, which does not equate to being the best player in the league as of now.

I don't mean to take this off topic and, if you can think of another example then by all means I'll use it but how much weight do you give to talent and recent form and recent success over longevity? For example, I'd rate Neymar as one of the best players in the world, he's won the Brazilian league, the Copa Libertadores and the Confederations Cup, all big trophies but not the biggest prizes in the game, he's done those things over the course of a couple of years and only this season has started plying his trade in Europe in a top league. Yet, it's very obvious from watching him that this is one of the worlds elite players. My point isn't to big up Neymar or to make people talk about Barcelona, my point is that how long does a player have to do it in a top league until he can be considered one of the best players in the world? Even if in terms of talent and performance it's clear that he is as good as almost anyone.

You need to do it for more than 2 months anyway. Neymar, again, is a talent, but he's not on the level of a Ribery or Ibrahimovic yet. Being the best player in a league (not that you're saying Neymar is, but the point stands for Oscar) means that you have to consistently prove yourself over the course of at least one season.

Andersonisgod

Skylinehead wrote: »

Well there you go, he's not one of the best. You're judging this off potential talent, which does not equate to being the best player in the league as of now.



You need to do it for more than 2 months anyway. Neymar, again, is a talent, but he's not on the level of a Ribery or Ibrahimovic yet. Being the best player in a league (not that you're saying Neymar is, but the point stands for Oscar) means that you have to consistently prove yourself over the course of at least one season.

By that I mean he hasn't shown it over the course of 2/3 seasons, but then how could he? This is only his second season in England (which I'm assuming is what most of us are judging him on as well as his performances for Brazil).

He's been Brazil's main number 10 since 2012, surely that must count for something. Debatable, but those are two of the best players in their respective leagues, so if, in this hypothetical world I am crafting with my words, Neymar were to join the French or German league, would he be considered one of the best players in that league? Chances are yes, even if you don't think he is the best, it'd be tough to argue that he isn't one of the best. Which goes back to my point, he's done nothing in Europe or at a major international tournament, but his quality, talent and (hypothetical) performances are such that he warrants a mention as being one of the best players in the league. That is my rather wayward method of saying that Oscar, with his ability, quality and performances, should be considered one of the best players in the league right now.

Skylinehead

Andersonisgod wrote: »

By that I mean he hasn't shown it over the course of 2/3 seasons, but then how could he? This is only his second season in England (which I'm assuming is what most of us are judging him on as well as his performances for Brazil).

It is his second season, but bear in mind that his first season was nowhere near Van Persie, or Mata, or Suarez. Surely you can't argue with that? And that's what we should base a "best player in the league" vote on, not on prospective talent, which may or may not happen.

Andersonisgod

Skylinehead wrote: »

It is his second season, but bear in mind that his first season was nowhere near Van Persie, or Mata, or Suarez. Surely you can't argue with that? And that's what we should base a "best player in the league" vote on, not on prospective talent, which may or may not happen.

But you could make the case that in his first season he was playing out of position for a team in serious transition, in a different country, in a different continent and yet he still had a good season. Was it as good as the seasons those players had? Probably not. However I'd absolutely make a case that this season he has been as good as any of those players thus far, infact I'd argue he's been better than those players, he is also coming off the back of an international tournament in which he played a big part in his country winning emphatically.

Skylinehead

Andersonisgod wrote: »

But you could make the case that in his first season he was playing out of position for a team in serious transition, in a different country, in a different continent and yet he still had a good season. Was it as good as the seasons those players had? Probably not. However I'd absolutely make a case that this season he has been as good as any of those players thus far, infact I'd argue he's been better than those players, he is also coming off the back of an international tournament in which he played a big part in his country winning emphatically.

It doesn't matter what his excuses are, this is a simple question - was he the best or not? The answer is clearly no, and the world (bar you :pac:) recognises that. He's been good this season, true, but not as good as Aaron Ramsey. And I'm not saying that Ramsey is the best player in the league, he's not, but if Oscar wasn't the best player in the league last season, and he's not the best player in the league this season so far, how can he be the best?

premierstone

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Oscar , Brazil's starting number ten.

Andersonisgod wrote: »

he's established himself already as Brazil's starting number 10 in a year in which they are about the host the tournament, he is arguably Brazil's most important player behind Neymar.

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I caught his first game for the senior Brazilian national team.

he's won the Brazilian league, the Copa Libertadores and the Confederations Cup

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'm assuming is what most of us are judging him on as well as his performances for Brazil.

He's been Brazil's main number 10 since 2012, surely that must count for something.

Andersonisgod wrote: »

he is also coming off the back of an international tournament in which he played a big part in his country winning emphatically.

Lads does anyone know if Oscar is getting his game with Brazil or how are they getting on?

Andersonisgod

Skylinehead wrote: »

It doesn't matter what his excuses are, this is a simple question - was he the best or not? The answer is clearly no, and the world (bar you :pac:) recognises that. He's been good this season, true, but not as good as Aaron Ramsey. And I'm not saying that Ramsey is the best player in the league, he's not, but if Oscar wasn't the best player in the league last season, and he's not the best player in the league this season so far, how can he be the best?

The thing is though that whether or not he has been better than Ramsey is debatable. Better in terms of stats so far? No. Better in terms of performance? Personally I think so. I realise the comment above me will make this next comment seem ridiculous but you do have to take into account his escapades with Brazil over the summer.