sky sports best premier league side

mufcboy1999

scholes was the best british cm of his generation, possibly the most highly respected british player on the continent, his talent was far superior to gerrards in that cm role.

btw i'd have lampard in before gerrard too.

keane vs veira is always a tough one to call, but I feel gerrard only got a mention to keep the liverpool faithful happy.

Andersonisgod

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

True but the longer a player played in the league the more likely they are to be included. Most players selected in the team are players who spent the majority of their career in the PL (apart from Ronaldo who is one of the best players of all time). There may have been better right backs in the league than Neville, but he performed at that level for 15 years and deserves his place in the team for example.


Can't argue too much with the team myself, was probably a bit young to fully appreciate Schmeichel, Adams and Bergkamp but they seem like they deserve their place in the team. If I was to change them 3 I would put in Cech, Ferdinand and Shearer probably, Roy Keane and Scholes are also unlucky to miss out but very hard to make a decision between them two and the two who were selected.

Yes longevity is important but quality is more important. I think Neville gets in because of a combination of his longevity, he was part of a successful team, he was a very good player and there's not a whole lot of serious competition in that right back spot.

The contrast between the amount of Arsenal players in the team compared to Chelsea or Man City is telling. Arsenal have won 3 Premier League title's yet they have 4 (5 if you count Cole) and Chelsea only have 1 (2 if you count Cole) yet Chelsea have also won the league 3 times and I would argue that Chelsea's league wins were in tougher era than Arsenal's (invincible season aside) and I'd also argue that at least two of Chelsea's title victories were more impressive than any of Arsenal's. The combination of bias and nostalgia was ripe in the selection of this team. Bergkamp over Drogba? Not a chance.

Frankie Lee

There was not a whole lot between a peak Vieira and a peak Essien/Makelele too. If Carvalho was English he'd be the first name on the team.

irishmover

Andersonisgod wrote: »

On what basis? Terry has 3 Premier League trophies and has been highly regarded throughout Europe for over a decade. Ledley King has a ringing endorsement from Henry and unfulfilled potential.

Explain how trophies have any basis on whether a player is good or not? King has been regarded a better defender by most people in the game than Terry. Just because he played for Spurs and didn't win major trophies doesn't mean a thing. Opinions are good though. My opinion King was worlds apart from any other English defender in that era. His knees were what ruined him from being among the best ever players, even at that he was still better than Terry though.

dmc17

If you put both Keane and Viera in together, you don't need the other 9 :pac:

Andersonisgod

irishmover wrote: »

Explain how trophies have any basis on whether a player is good or not? King has been regarded a better defender by most people in the game than Terry. Just because he played for Spurs and didn't win major trophies doesn't mean a thing. Opinions are good though. My opinion King was worlds apart from any other English defender in that era. His knees were what ruined him from being among the best ever players, even at that he was still better than Terry though.

Well when a player is really really good they generally move to a team that wins trophies, playing a key part in a trophy winning side tends to act as an indicator of quality (Terry has captained Chelsea to 3 Premier League crowns.) Most people in the game regard King higher than they do Terry? This is news to me, infact lets examine that rather dubious claim closer.

John Terry individual honours:
PFA Player of the Year: 2004-2005
PFA Team of the Year: 2003-2004, 2004-2005,2005-2006
FIFA World Cup Team of the Tournament: 2006
FIFPro World XI: 2005,2006,2007,2008,2009
Uefa Club Awards Best Defender: 2005,2008,2009
Uefa Team of the Year: 2005,2007,2008,2009

Ledley King individual honours:
Premier League Player of the Month September 2004

So that whole "King has been regarded as a better player by most people in the game" argument has been rather exposed as a fallacy.
So in terms of team awards he is nowhere close to Terry. In terms of individual honours (all of which are voted upon by those in the game) he is nowhere close to Terry. Infact the only two places where King is better than Terry are in your mind and in an alternate reality in which King had no knee troubles and Terry was the player struck down by knee troubles, alas it is not reality.

tastyt

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Yes longevity is important but quality is more important. I think Neville gets in because of a combination of his longevity, he was part of a successful team, he was a very good player and there's not a whole lot of serious competition in that right back spot.

The contrast between the amount of Arsenal players in the team compared to Chelsea or Man City is telling. Arsenal have won 3 Premier League title's yet they have 4 (5 if you count Cole) and Chelsea only have 1 (2 if you count Cole) yet Chelsea have also won the league 3 times and I would argue that Chelsea's league wins were in tougher era than Arsenal's (invincible season aside) and I'd also argue that at least two of Chelsea's title victories were more impressive than any of Arsenal's. The combination of bias and nostalgia was ripe in the selection of this team. Bergkamp over Drogba? Not a chance.

Ya I find it very strange how little drogba has been mentioned. He absolutely tore up the premier league and won everything possible. Also did it a lot more in Europe than bergkamp because bergkamp of course wouldn't fly to away games. Seems very swayed towards arsenal with merson and Nicholas involved.

They actually couldn't be split between bergkamp and shearer on the show. Le tissier and Thompson thought shearer was a no brainer as he is almost 60 goals clear at the top of the scoring charts while playing in poorer sides. Merson came out with a ridiculous argument that it's harder for a striker to score in good teams because the other teams defend more against you if you are the best team, wtf!!!!

They gave merson the deciding vote because he played with both so of course he went with bergkamp because club teammates are obviously much closer.

Bergkamp was class but imagine the numbers shearer would have hit and medals he would have if he had chosen United over his hometown club. Simply can't be left out.

Scorpion Sting

Keane just has to be in a Best ever Premier League XI. One of the first names on it for me alongside Ronaldo, Scholes, Henry, Shearer, Neville and Schmeichel. I'd have Lampard over Gerrard as well, always thought Lamps was the more complete CM.


My team would be something like this:

4-2-2-2

---

Schmeichel
Neville Adams Terry Cole

---

Keane Scholes
Ronaldo

---

Lampard
---- Henry Shearer

Chrissybhoy

mufcboy1999 wrote: »

scholes was the best british cm of his generation, possibly the most highly respected british player on the continent, his talent was far superior to gerrards in that cm role.

btw i'd have lampard in before gerrard too.

keane vs veira is always a tough one to call, but I feel gerrard only got a mention to keep the liverpool faithful happy.

Gerrard at one stage in his Career was prob the best CM in the world he deserves his place

Chrissybhoy

jebforever wrote: »

Keane just has to be in a Best ever Premier League XI. One of the first names on it for me alongside Ronaldo, Scholes, Henry, Shearer, Neville and Schmeichel. I'd have Lampard over Gerrard as well, always thought Lamps was the more complete CM.


My team would be something like this:

4-2-2-2

---

Schmeichel
Neville Adams Terry Cole

---

Keane Scholes
Ronaldo

---

Lampard
---- Henry Shearer

Can I hear your arguement on how lampard is more complete than Gerrard

eagle eye

If we are doing our own and it's 4-4-2 then for me,

---

Schmeichel

Ivanovic Vidic Terry Irwin

Ronaldo Viera Keane Giggs

---

Shearer Henry

Unearthly

Schmeichael

Neville
Stam
Johnsen
Irwin

Beckham
Keane
Scholes
Giggs

Cole
Yorke

Soft Falling Rain

I do love it when Gerrard is included in such a team at the expense of one or two other players, it makes people on here lose their minds. Always entertaining. :pac:

Jimbob1977

While Marc Overmars didn't grace the Premier League for very long, he was better than Giggs in my personal opinion.

Shearer has to make the starting XI. A goal machine. ... good at close range, long range and in the air

shadowcomplex

Schmeichel
Irwin-Terry-Vidic-Cole
Ronaldo-Keane-Scholes-Giggs

---

Gerrard

---

---

Shearer

---

mufcboy1999

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

Can I hear your arguement on how lampard is more complete than Gerrard

Technically superior, goal scoring and has successfully adapted his game in recent years, unlike Gerrard, saurez's form hide it last year because he was just as bad.

He's only there because he's the only Liverpool player you could of relistically have put in the side.

Kirby

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

Gerrard at one stage in his Career was prob the best CM in the world he deserves his place

Only Liverpool fans ever thought that. Even in his pomp, he was never the best CM in the world.

Even when he was at the peak of his powers, he wasn't even the best CM in his own team, as he had Alonso beside him.

Gadge

4-3-3

---

Schmeichel

---

Neville-Adams-Vidic-Cole

---

Keane---Vieira

---

---

Gerrard

---

Ronaldo

---

Henry

---

Shearer

---

That team would wreck the place.


4-4-2

---

Schmeichel

---

Neville----Adams----Terry----Cole
Beckham-Keane-Scholes-Ronaldo

---

Shearer

---

Henry

---

Beckham's delivery alone would create 20 goals per season for Shearer. I have Terry in this team for all the goals he'd score from Beckham's corners

Chrissybhoy

mufcboy1999 wrote: »

Technically superior, goal scoring and has successfully adapted his game in recent years, unlike Gerrard, saurez's form hide it last year because he was just as bad.

He's only there because he's the only Liverpool player you could of relistically have put in the side.

Technically superior that's enough I stopped reading the post I'm not going to argue

Chrissybhoy

Kirby wrote: »

Only Liverpool fans ever thought that. Even in his pomp, he was never the best CM in the world.

Even when he was at the peak of his powers, he wasn't even the best CM in his own team, as he had Alonso beside him.

I don't support any club. Gerrard as a CM long passing short passing brilliant in a tackle dynamic the energy he brought to the team his aggression scorer of all type goals scored pens free kicks great set piece delivery 3rd man runs his intelligence for the game hence why he could play several positions. Tell me a CM that could do all them

extra gravy

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

Gerrard at one stage in his Career was prob the best CM in the world he deserves his place

He didn't lead his team to any PL titles though, for that reason alone he shouldn't be on the list ahead of Keane.

Talib Fiasco

---

Schmikey
Irwin---Adams---Terry---Cole

---

Gerrard-Vieira
---Zola

---

Ronaldo
----Henry

---

Shearer

If they stay longer, I think some bias could sneak Zab and Kompany in and perhaps Aguero if he keeps up his level for years to come.

Chrissybhoy

extra gravy wrote: »

He didn't lead his team to any PL titles though, for that reason alone he shouldn't be on the list ahead of Keane.

It's ultimate team not who won more titles team. I'd have him and Keane if it was a 4-4-2 system

CSF

extra gravy wrote: »

He didn't lead his team to any PL titles though, for that reason alone he shouldn't be on the list ahead of Keane.

That is not logical.

Andersonisgod

The arguments against him are that while he does have an excellent long pass in his arsenal, he could never really dominate and dictate a game like a top CM, in particular his willingness to show for the ball from the back has always been sorely lacking and far too often he's willing to go for the Hollywood ball rather than the right pass. Defensively he is lacking too. Another argument is that he's been a big fish in a small pond practically his entire club career. Personally I always thought he was a better CAM than CM but even then I wouldn't have him in an all time BPL 11.

basillarkin

bullvine wrote: »

5 arsenal players is some laugh in fairness and no shearer or keane, these things are such a sham.

You have heard of the invincables?

Andersonisgod

basillarkin wrote: »

You have heard of the invincables?

There's very few things in football I hate more than the Arsenal invincible season myth. Yes they did go unbeaten and yes they fully deserved to win the league that season but it gets far too much credit. Loads of draws, eliminated in the league cup and fa cup semi finals that season and the champions league quarter finals (by Chelsea).

The following season Chelsea amassed records for fewest goals conceded, most clean sheets, most wins in a season, most consecutive away wins and most points in a season. Indeed Chelsea only lost once that season and performed better in the cups.

Yet here we are a decade later and that Chelsea side is sadly overlooked in the annals of history time after time. That same Chelsea group would go on to retain the title the following season too but these things have been airbrushed from history in favor of the Arsenal narrative.

wadacrack

GK: Schmeichel- Outstanding keeper, his presence made United much strnger defensively. Took eguson about 6 years to replace him or find a keeper with anywhere near the same quality.

RB: Irwin- Technically much superior to Gary Neville who was solid but Irwn offered more going forward while being as good defensively.

CB: Ferdinand- In his prime a World Class defender with pace and defensive quality

CB:Adams- Arsenal had a great defence in this period and Adams was the real leader in the side that included other players of real quality.

LB:Cole- In his prime he was the left back in world football arguably.

RM:Gerrard-Great all around player in his prime.A level above Lampard and Scholes.

CM:Viera- The best midfielder in Premiership history in my opinion, a driing force for Arsenal for 6 or 7 years.

CM:Keane - Keane in his rime was much more influencial than the likes of Scholes, Beckham and Giggs. He dove United to the treble in 1999 the year after he came back rom a cruciate. I remeber watching United from 98-01 and if Keane wasnt playing United were usually much poorer.

LM: Ronaldo- United have not been the same since Ronaldo left and he is one of teh greatest to play the game.

CF: Henry- Greatest PL in its history . the number of goals he scored is brillant but it how he scored them. Very few tap ins. The goals h scored were of brillant quality.

CF:Berkamp-Technically the best player to play in te Premier League. Shearer scored many goals but was never that highly regarded around Europe in comparison to Berkamp

Hulk Hands

Having Viera over Keane is laughable. Having any of them before Scholes is downright insane. Bergkamp? Christ

Chrissybhoy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

The arguments against him are that while he does have an excellent long pass in his arsenal, he could never really dominate and dictate a game like a top CM, in particular his willingness to show for the ball from the back has always been sorely lacking and far too often he's willing to go for the Hollywood ball rather than the right pass. Defensively he is lacking too. Another argument is that he's been a big fish in a small pond practically his entire club career. Personally I always thought he was a better CAM than CM but even then I wouldn't have him in an all time BPL 11.

I disagree I think he finds the right pass he's assists would support this. That's why Owen Suarez Torres had great relationships with him when he had movement up top he'd be at his best passing wise. As for dictating the game I agree he didn't get the ball off the back four enough but I think that's because he was told go the other way let Alonso Mascherano etc do that. But he did often get the ball deep and play diag balls wide to start attacks that's not Hollywood passes that's seeing the picture quick and getting your winger one on one with the full back quick as possible. There's more than one way to dictate a game and he did with tempo he set.

Andersonisgod

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

I disagree I think he finds the right pass he's assists would support this. That's why Owen Suarez Torres had great relationships with him when he had movement up top he'd be at his best passing wise. As for dictating the game I agree he didn't get the ball off the back four enough but I think that's because he was told go the other way let Alonso Mascherano etc do that. But he did often get the ball deep and play diag balls wide to start attacks that's not Hollywood passes that's seeing the picture quick and getting your winger one on one with the full back quick as possible. There's more than one way to dictate a game and he did with tempo he set.

Tbh I think his ability to set a tempo is an area he falls really short when compared to the great midfielders of a generation. Xavi, Scholes, Pirlo all able to set a tempo in even the biggest games, so often games rotated around these players, same can't be said for Gerrard, who is more explosive than those players and capable of popping up with a moment of magic but goes missing for way too long in games to be considered one of the greats.

Will I Amnt

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

---

Schmikey
Irwin---Adams---Terry---Cole

---

Gerrard-Vieira
---Zola

---

Ronaldo
----Henry

---

Shearer

If they stay longer, I think some bias could sneak Zab and Kompany in and perhaps Aguero if he keeps up his level for years to come.

Don't worry, enough bias sneaked in with the players you left out :pac:

efb

Andersonisgod wrote: »

There's very few things in football I hate more than the Arsenal invincible season myth. Yes they did go unbeaten and yes they fully deserved to win the league that season but it gets far too much credit. Loads of draws, eliminated in the league cup and fa cup semi finals that season and the champions league quarter finals (by Chelsea).

The following season Chelsea amassed records for fewest goals conceded, most clean sheets, most wins in a season, most consecutive away wins and most points in a season. Indeed Chelsea only lost once that season and performed better in the cups.

Yet here we are a decade later and that Chelsea side is sadly overlooked in the annals of history time after time. That same Chelsea group would go on to retain the title the following season too but these things have been airbrushed from history in favor of the Arsenal narrative.

Why can't a team assembled by a Russian Billionaire Oligarch catch a break...

efb

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Having Viera over Keane is laughable. Having any of them before Scholes is downright insane. Bergkamp? Christ

I think too much is made about scholes- like some working class hero.

Yet he can't tackle and flopped on the international stage

Hulk Hands

Andersonisgod wrote: »

There's very few things in football I hate more than the Arsenal invincible season myth. Yes they did go unbeaten and yes they fully deserved to win the league that season but it gets far too much credit. Loads of draws, eliminated in the league cup and fa cup semi finals that season and the champions league quarter finals (by Chelsea).

The following season Chelsea amassed records for fewest goals conceded, most clean sheets, most wins in a season, most consecutive away wins and most points in a season. Indeed Chelsea only lost once that season and performed better in the cups.

Yet here we are a decade later and that Chelsea side is sadly overlooked in the annals of history time after time. That same Chelsea group would go on to retain the title the following season too but these things have been airbrushed from history in favor of the Arsenal narrative.

It's forgotten about because it took ridiculous spending from funds the club didnt earn to have those two years of success. The Arsenal side that came before it went through a season unbeaten. The United side that came after it won 3 leagues in a row, a European cup and was superior in most areas. Even the year Chelsea set the record points total, it was overshadowed by Liverpools European success. Come to think of it, it's been 1 league in 9 years for Chelsea. They'd really want to be winning it this year to retain a claim of being a top tier club

Chrissybhoy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Tbh I think his ability to set a tempo is an area he falls really short when compared to the great midfielders of a generation. Xavi, Scholes, Pirlo all able to set a tempo in even the biggest games, so often games rotated around these players, same can't be said for Gerrard, who is more explosive than those players and capable of popping up with a moment of magic but goes missing for way too long in games to be considered one of the greats.

To be fair The players u mentioned make more passes a game but maybe the style they played over the years allowed for them to do this.

Andersonisgod

efb wrote: »

Why can't a team assembled by a Russian Billionaire Oligarch catch a break...

I agree wholeheartedly. Infact I think you've hit the nail on the head here. One club is famous for living within their means and are managed by a professor type figure who revolutionized the English game for the better. The other club are the "bad guys" fueled by Russian oil money, purchasing a host of big names (damn mercenaries) under the gaze of the arrogant, brash and downright evil Mourinho who cares not for the soul of the game, only winning at any cost.

That's the narrative, is it any wonder the better team never gets the recognition it deserves.

Andersonisgod

Hulk Hands wrote: »

It's forgotten about because it took ridiculous spending from funds the club didnt earn to have those two years of success. The Arsenal side that came before it went through a season unbeaten. The United side that came after it won 3 leagues in a row, a European cup and was superior in most areas. Even the year Chelsea set the record points total, it was overshadowed by Liverpools European success. Come to think of it, it's been 1 league in 9 years for Chelsea. They'd really want to be winning it this year to retain a claim of being a top tier club

So what? I didn't realize that there was small print in this list that said "only players who cost below 20 million pounds are eligible" so they cost a lot of money so they can't be picked? Why should their price tag influence the quality they produced? That Chelsea side, with all their expensive recruits, were the better team and should be recognized as such.

Yes we should have won the league more but in the meantime we have picked up a lot of cups, including the Champions League trophy so it's not too bad.

Andersonisgod

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

To be fair The players u mentioned make more passes a game but maybe the style they played over the years allowed for them to do this.

Yes the teams they'll have played in would assist in this but it still remains to be seen if Gerrard can do it. He's been asked to do it in a deeper role the last couple of seasons in Rodgers version of tiki taka and I think the results have been rather mixed if I were putting it diplomatically.

Hulk Hands

Andersonisgod wrote: »

So what? I didn't realize that there was small print in this list that said "only players who cost below 20 million pounds are eligible" so they cost a lot of money so they can't be picked? Why should their price tag influence the quality they produced? That Chelsea side, with all their expensive recruits, were the better team and should be recognized as such.

Were they the better team? Arsenal won the league in 01-02 and and 03-04. It's certainly debateable as to which side was superior. I was simply stating that the Chelsea team is forgotten about because a team with a unique success came directly before (Arsenal), a superior side came directly after (United) and another team won a big trophy at the same time (Liverpool). It's hard to distinguish that Chelsea side

Andersonisgod

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Were they the better team? Arsenal won the league in 01-02 and and 03-04. It's certainly debateable as to which side was superior. I was simply stating that the Chelsea team is forgotten about because a team with a unique success came directly before (Arsenal), a superior side came directly after (United) and another team won a big trophy at the same time (Liverpool). It's hard to distinguish that Chelsea side

Yes they were. Breaking the duopoly of Man Utd and Arsenal in 2004/2005 smashing all sorts of records in the process, they went on to retain their crown the following season. Without a doubt it's one of the best teams in the history of the premier league. The club changed the face of English football.

LuckyLloyd

Pick Roy Keane. Then pick the rest of your team. Anything else is incorrect.

extra gravy

CSF wrote: »

That is not logical.

For me, the best team should contain players who were both gifted and successful. Keane satisfies both requirements whereas Gerrard didn't win any league titles. Just my own opinion though.

Talib Fiasco

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Don't worry, enough bias sneaked in with the players you left out :pac:

Three United players? Generous enough I thought :pac:

Skylinehead

That Chelsea side is forgotten because they lost.


The losers.

besty

---

Schmeichel

---

Neville---Rio---Terry---Cole

---

Keane----Vieira

---

Ronaldo

---

Giggs

---

Shearer

---

Henry----

Some difficult calls (Scholes/Gerrard/Lampard principally) but I think this team would be unplayable.

yabadabado

Gerrard playing centre mid in the best EPL team ever.:eek:
He hasn't even been Liverpool's best centre midfielder of the premiership era.

Talib Fiasco

yabadabado wrote: »

Gerrard playing centre mid in the best EPL team ever.:eek:
He hasn't even been Liverpool's best centre midfielder of the premiership era.

Who's been better than him at Liverpool?

efb

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

Who's been better than him at Liverpool?

Alonso

Talib Fiasco

efb wrote: »

Alonso

Better beard and that's it. Alonso's was a great player for Liverpool but that's a massive insult to Stevie G. The only midfielder who could even come close to rivalling Gerrard is Barnes.