sky sports best premier league side

efb

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

Through his career I doubt that precentage were pens

Last season's wonder goal tally was thrown at me, I threw down, dawg

ArielAtom

I'm finding this Avery amusing thread, Keane,Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard all had qualities that would get them in as do Shearer, Henry, Zola, Drogba, but FCUK me Gary Neville!!!! Irwin started as a right full and was converted to a left full so him and Cole as full backs is a no brained.

Billy86

ArielAtom wrote: »

I'm finding this Avery amusing thread, Keane,Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard all had qualities that would get them in as do Shearer, Henry, Zola, Drogba, but FCUK me Gary Neville!!!! Irwin started as a right full and was converted to a left full so him and Cole as full backs is a no brained.

I'm guessing a lot of people just overlook that, I would have Irwin on the right too (though Cole for me is the #1 FB of the lot), that said Neville wasn't bad apart from his last two years or so. Just solidly decent in a team that had a lot more star players... and RB has to be weakest position on the board by some way (LB also has Pearce and Evra just off the top of my still sleepy head by comparison).

Irwin only played a season at right back though. Is that correct? For that reason I wouldn't have him in that position.

Cole would be my LB for sure.

Soft Falling Rain

Yeah RB is pretty bad if the best we can do is solidly decent. The only thing I remember about Neville is him getting treated like a youth team player by his own captain and celebrating in front of Liverpool fans (I can laugh at that looking back though).

Great pundit anyway.

Neville hadn't tons of ability but was very consistent and for that reason he's hard to argue against at RB

Blatter

I was watching an Irwin interview recently and he actually said he was slightly more comfortable at right back, which makes sense because he was actually right footed although he obviously had an excellent left as well.

Chrissybhoy

Donnielighto wrote: »

Hey, any idea when they started to keep track of those assists? Pretty sure that it's well after scholes was a mainstay in the utd team. Also he would have been on less dead balls than stevie wouldnt he?

Being on dead balls adds to you as a player. If your on dead balls obviously means you have quality from them.

Billy86

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

Being on dead balls adds to you as a player. If your on dead balls obviously means you have quality from them.

It also means you likely didn't play in the same team as Beckham or Ronaldo.

Billy86

Anyway, my stab at an XI and subs:

---

Schmeichel

---

Ferdinand--Campbell
Irwin

---

A. Cole

---

Keane---Scholes
--Ronaldo

---

Lampard

---

Giggs

---

Henry

Subs: Cech, Terry, Evra, Vieira, Gerrard, Suarez, Shearer

Picked Campbell over Terry due to having a better peak, Vieira on the bench because Scholes is a proven partner with Keane and Lampard has too many goals on top of his overall play to overlook, and both VDS and Pires missed out on bench spots by a whisker. If it was an actual team setting up for a match Shearer might be a better fit up front, but personally I put Henry in just ahead of him. Evra is in there just because there isn't really a tonne of depth at LB, just a personal bias over Neville or Stuart Pearce.

TheCitizen

rarnes1 wrote: »

Neville hadn't tons of ability but was very consistent and for that reason he's hard to argue against at RB

Neville had had very little ability. He was distinctly average defensively and useless going forward. Very lucky to have had the career he had. He was dependable for Ferguson, didnt get injured much I suppose so was usually available. He is in this team mainly because he works for Sky now. Irwin was miles better.

efb

Was Irwin not left back???

Giggsy11

TheCitizen wrote: »

Neville had had very little ability. He was distinctly average defensively and useless going forward. Very lucky to have had the career he had. He was dependable for Ferguson, didnt get injured much I suppose so was usually available. He is in this team mainly because he works for Sky now. Irwin was miles better.

That's clearly wrong. He was good defensively and very useful going forward. His link up with Beckham was very good and his crossing was not bad either.

Chrissybhoy

Billy86 wrote: »

It also means you likely didn't play in the same team as Beckham or Ronaldo.

If you want to go that route your dead right Gerrard didn't play in the same team with the quality United had so makes it all the more impressive how good he was in average teams

efb

Man City's Sanga would be a good shout

Billy86

efb wrote: »

Was Irwin not left back???

Played there primarily for Man Utd but could play either side, similar to Lahm. There's a lack of quality at RB where Neville is probably the top guy but maybe only the fifth best FB in total (behind Evra and Pearce also for me) hence moving Irwin over.

Billy86

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

If you want to go that route your dead right Gerrard didn't play in the same team with the quality United had so makes it all the more impressive how good he was in average teams

Actually I think that's what stunted him to an extent. Out of Gerrard, Scholes and Lampard, Scholes was the smartest while Gerrard was otherwise the most naturally gifted by some degree - but the other two achieved more than him in temrs of fulfilling their potential (Lampard is an amazing example for young players about getting every last possible bit of your potential ability realised). The problem though was that Houllier seemed to encourage him to be Roy of the Rovers (made easier by having the safe, reliable Hamann as an anchor) and so he never got fully used to developing his game to operate within a team more subtly and more disciplined in the way that Lampard and especially Scholes did, hence his issues with trying too many Hollywood balls, going it alone, etc that he has had at times through his career. In his earlier years he just got so used to doing this because it was oftentimes his managers actual gameplan.

The same I reckon is also somewhat true with Owen never really developing past relying on his pace and getting the first step/turn on his marker, typically for long passes over the top.

bucketybuck

TheCitizen wrote: »

Neville had had very little ability. He was distinctly average defensively and useless going forward. Very lucky to have had the career he had. He was dependable for Ferguson, didnt get injured much I suppose so was usually available. He is in this team mainly because he works for Sky now. Irwin was miles better.

Yawn. Clearly written with an ulterior motive.

Gary Neville was excellent going forward, he had a fantastic cross and I can remember even Alan Shearer being quoted about how important Nevilles crosses were for him as an England striker. (This was in Euro96, before Beckham arrived in the team).

There seems to be this idea of Neville as just a solid defender, thats the myth that many rival fans like to pedal because he also had the shop steward reputation. But the fact is he was far better than just average, he was a vital part of that United team, both defensively and offensively. Its strange that Irwin always get the consistency badge when Neville was every bit as consistent and for just as long. As a proud member of the Dennis Irwin fan club I'd have no problem saying Neville was on the same level as Irwin, both fantastic defenders that were hugely important to their teams.

TheCitizen

Giggsy11 wrote: »

That's clearly wrong. He was good defensively and very useful going forward. His link up with Beckham was very good and his crossing was not bad either.

his crossing? Lol

Billy86

TheCitizen wrote: »

his crossing? Lol

Wouldn't have him on the same level as Irwin going forward, but his deep crossing in particular was actually very good.

Giggsy11

TheCitizen wrote: »

his crossing? Lol

Looks like you haven't watched him play at all apart from his last few games.

PhlegmyMoses

TheCitizen wrote: »

his crossing? Lol

You never saw Neville playing at his peak then. A better crosser than Ryan Giggs. Second only to Beckham in my time watching United. I don't mean to deride your opinion, but you are completely wrong.

Also, I've seen this Scholes stat thrown around about assists. Last week it was 45 in his career, this week it's 31. Can anybody show their qork for this? I just don't believe the numbers. Not that I'd be suprised that he didn't have as many as Gerrard or Lampard, he spent a lot of his career playing deeper, but I just don't buy those numbers.

TheCitizen

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

You never saw Neville playing at his peak then. A better crosser than Ryan Giggs. Second only to Beckham in my time watching United. I don't mean to deride your opinion, but you are completely wrong.

.

I disagree, I reckon youve got Man United specs on. Outside of football Neville is obviously a smart clever type. He made himself part of the furniture at Man United which is an art in itself and is doing the same trick as a Sky pundit now. Fair play to him, for a distinctly average player he had a decorated career. He shouldnt be in this team though, his colleagues at Sky put him in.

Chrissybhoy

TheCitizen wrote: »

I disagree, I reckon youve got Man United specs on. Outside of football Neville is obviously a smart clever type. He made himself part of the furniture at Man United which is an art in itself and is doing the same trick as a Sky pundit now. Fair play to him, for a distinctly average player he had a decorated career. He shouldnt be in this team though, his colleagues at Sky put him in.

I'm not a Man Utd fan and I can safely say his crossing was a strong point in his game. I reckon you have the dislike Man Utd specs on

bucketybuck

TheCitizen wrote: »

I disagree, I reckon youve got Man United specs on. Outside of football Neville is obviously a smart clever type. He made himself part of the furniture at Man United which is an art in itself and is doing the same trick as a Sky pundit now. Fair play to him, for a distinctly average player he had a decorated career. He shouldnt be in this team though, his colleagues at Sky put him in.

Too obvious mate.

TheCitizen

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

I'm not a Man Utd fan and I can safely say his crossing was a strong point in his game. I reckon you have the dislike Man Utd specs on

I dont particularly dislike Man United, Keane should be in this team that Sky pundits picked for example. Neville shouldnt be in this team.

TheCitizen

bucketybuck wrote: »

Too obvious mate.

?

PhlegmyMoses

TheCitizen wrote: »

I disagree, I reckon youve got Man United specs on. Outside of football Neville is obviously a smart clever type. He made himself part of the furniture at Man United which is an art in itself and is doing the same trick as a Sky pundit now. Fair play to him, for a distinctly average player he had a decorated career. He shouldnt be in this team though, his colleagues at Sky put him in.

So let me get this straight. You believe that it is more plausible that he hoodwinked Alex Ferguson and every English manager that he played under into thinking he was a good player, rather than him actually just being a good player? Gotcha. Nuuuuurse!!!

Chrissybhoy

TheCitizen wrote: »

I dont particularly dislike Man United, Keane should be in this team that Sky pundits picked for example. Neville shouldnt be in this team.

I agree Keane should be in it and I think Neville should be in it too. If Zabaleta puts in a few more seasons like he has he'll overtake Neville IMO

ricero

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

Yeah RB is pretty bad if the best we can do is solidly decent. The only thing I remember about Neville is him getting treated like a youth team player by his own captain and celebrating in front of Liverpool fans (I can laugh at that looking back though).

Great pundit anyway.

True there really ain't many memorable right back to play in the premeir league. I always admired Steve finnan during his LFC years, a solid 7 out of 10 every game.

TheCitizen

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

So let me get this straight. You believe that it is more plausible that he hoodwinked Alex Ferguson and every English manager that he played under into thinking he was a good player, rather than him actually just being a good player? Gotcha. Nuuuuurse!!!

I'm saying he shouldnt be in this team that theSky pundits picked. He's not the only one that shouldnt be in it, but he's the most obvious one that shouldnt be in it.

Chrissybhoy

TheCitizen wrote: »

I'm saying he shouldnt be in this team that theSky pundits picked. He's not the only one that shouldnt be in it, but he's the most obvious one that shouldnt be in it.

He's probably the most obvious because there hasn't been many right full backs with the longevity titles or simply not as good as Neville. People will say Irwin but he played left full so judge him as that. Irwin is still very unlucky not to be in the team at left full

magma69

LOL at the biased fans on here crying because a particular player of the team they support isn't there as if there is some sort of huge gulf in class between the likes of Keane/Viera or Gerrard/Lampard/Scholes.

It's much of a muchness when you're talking players on that level and whinging that the selection has no credibility because x/y/z wasn't picked is just being a dramatic baby imo. It's an opinion.

Thought the worst decision myself was Adams over Stam, who was the best centre half I have seen in the Premiership IMO.

Billy86

Personally I think Campbell and Ferdinand at their peaks were better, as awesome as Stam was but CB is an especially strong position to choose from.

Hulk Hands

wandatowell wrote: »

How can anybody argue against Bergkamp is beyond me.

I'd love to see someone try to argue in favour of Bergkamp instead of say Lampard (I could name many more) for the position behind the striker. Seeing as Lampard has a better goalscoring record as a midfielder than Bergkamp has as a no.10. Goals aren't everything though, so we move to assists, of which Lampard also has a better record, again as a midfielder over a no.10. Hes also done it at a high level for longer than Bergkamp. Obviously I'm not suggesting Lampard should be named up front, just more to show how Bergkamp is overrated. The public and media in general tend to overrate technically gifted players, of which Bergkamp certainly was. However football's not about style, it's about effectiveness and that's what we should judge footballers on. Shearer, RVN, Rooney, Suarez, Augero, Henry and possibly Drogba were all more effective players than Bergkamp and should be included before him

Blatter

Hulk Hands wrote: »

I'd love to see someone try to argue in favour of Bergkamp instead of say Lampard (I could name many more) for the position behind the striker. Seeing as Lampard has a better goalscoring record as a midfielder than Bergkamp has as a no.10. Goals aren't everything though, so we move to assists, of which Lampard also has a better record, again as a midfielder over a no.10. Hes also done it at a high level for longer than Bergkamp. Obviously I'm not suggesting Lampard should be named up front, just more to show how Bergkamp is overrated. The public and media in general tend to overrate technically gifted players, of which Bergkamp certainly was. However football's not about style, it's about effectiveness and that's what we should judge footballers on. Shearer, RVN, Rooney, Suarez, Augero, Henry and possibly Drogba were all more effective players than Bergkamp and should be included before him

Van Persie as well. He has 142 goals and 60 assists in 270 appearances.

Bergkamp had 87 goals and 49 assists in 315 appearances.

RvP is streets ahead in terms of productivity.

Bergkamp is one of the best players I've ever seen in England. Overated me bollix!

Iused2likebusts

There is some fascination with stats in the soccer forum. Most of the time we are not comparing like with like so they don't have as much relevance as some would believe.

Skylinehead

If football was all about stats, 57% of people wouldn't bother with it.

Blatter

Football isn't all about stats but in fairness when you're a second striker, it's your job to score/assist goals and Bergkamp falls short of the elite in that regard, as good a player he was.

Skylinehead

Blatter wrote: »

Football isn't all about stats but in fairness when you're a second striker, it's your job to score/assist goals and Bergkamp falls short of the elite in that regard, as good a player he was.

There's an argument as to whether he deserves to be in the best XI, but if you think that he falls short of the elite (ie world class) then you're deluded.

Blatter

Skylinehead wrote: »

There's an argument as to whether he deserves to be in the best XI, but if you think that he falls short of the elite (ie world class) then you're deluded.

I said he falls short of the elite in terms of goals/assists - I don't think that can be disputed. His general influence was so good I would still say he deserves to be mentioned as a great player but his direct productivity in the hard currency of goals/assists wasn't fantastic.

basillarkin

I've said it already can't look past zabalata for right back.

Skylinehead

Blatter wrote: »

I said he falls short of the elite in terms of goals/assists - I don't think that can be disputed. His general influence was so good I would still say he deserves to be mentioned as a great player but his direct productivity in the hard currency of goals/assists wasn't fantastic.

Fair enough, I misread that slightly. However, I don't think the stats argument holds up well at all - I only need to mention Zidanes poor stats for that to fall down, and he was clearly one of the best.

Blatter

Skylinehead wrote: »

Fair enough, I misread that slightly. However, I don't think the stats argument holds up well at all - I only need to mention Zidanes poor stats for that to fall down, and he was clearly one of the best.

Well I think that Zidane's stats are a bit unflattering considering how good he was but he was more of an attacking midfielder who's primary job was to conduct the play in the final third, often from the left side of midfield, similar to Iniesta of recent years - there wasn't really an onus on him to score goals. I would have put Bergkamp down as a second forward who liked to play just off another striker, similar to Cantona.

Skylinehead

Blatter wrote: »

Well I think that Zidane's stats are a bit unflattering considering how good he was but he was more of an attacking midfielder who's primary job was to conduct the play in the final third, often from the left side of midfield, similar to Iniesta of recent years - there wasn't really an onus on him to score goals. I would have put Bergkamp down as a second forward who liked to play just off another striker, similar to Cantona.

Likewise Bergkamp, just shows that stats do not show the full story. There's hundreds of great footballers with similar stories.

Bergkamp was always more of a Zidane than a Cantona. He didn't play off the striker strictly, he had licence to roam as the main playmaker in the team. Never an onus on him to score goals either, seeing as he had Ian Wright, Anelka, Henry, Overmars, Pires, Ljungberg to do that for him.

Hulk Hands

I don't think at any stage could you have said Bergkamp was carrying Arsenal. He was a wonderful addition to have but the forward line was never built around him in the way it was with Auguro, Henry, RVN, RVP etc. Him scoring that outrageous goal against Newcastle looks wonderful but it still means no more than RVN tapping in after a jammy rebound. It's kind of like the Berbatov argument with United, people adored his silky skills but even in his best season with United, the rather less fashionable Hernandez became a better option up front as he was simply more effective at the time. LOL at people getting their backs up at the word overrated also. Unless you would have him in this side over Shearer, RVN, Augero etc etc, then by definition you think he's being overrated by being included here. Nothing like that word to get peoples back up irrationally

Iused2likebusts

Blatter wrote: »

Football isn't all about stats but in fairness when you're a second striker, it's your job to score/assist goals and Bergkamp falls short of the elite in that regard, as good a player he was.

My problem with stats is that I'd doesn't consider the standard of team a player played in. What exact position or role a player had in a certain team. Did certain players take pens or free kicks corners which will benefit their goals and assist records. I loved watching Bergkamp play not sure he should be in the best eleven but I'd base my opinion on watching him over the years rather than goalscoring or assist records.

Iused2likebusts

Iused2likebusts wrote: »

My problem with stats is that I'd doesn't consider the standard of team a player played in. What exact position or role a player had in a certain team. Did certain players take pens or free kicks corners which will benefit their goals and assist records. I loved watching Bergkamp play not sure he should be in the best eleven but I'd base my opinion on watching him over the years rather than goalscoring or assist records.

I guess you don't know the age of people when debating with them. Someone in their mid 20's or younger for example might not have been able to fully appreciate Bergkamps early years when he was fantastic

Hulk Hands

Hulk Hands wrote: »

I don't think at any stage could you have said Bergkamp was carrying Arsenal. He was a wonderful addition to have but the forward line was never built around him in the way it was with Auguro, Henry, RVN, RVP etc. Him scoring that outrageous goal against Newcastle looks wonderful but it still means no more than RVN tapping in after a jammy rebound. It's kind of like the Berbatov argument with United, people adored his silky skills but even in his best season with United, the rather less fashionable Hernandez became a better option up front as he was simply more effective at the time. LOL at people getting their backs up at the word overrated also. Unless you would have him in this side over Shearer, RVN, Augero etc etc, then by definition you think he's being overrated by being included here. Nothing like that word to get peoples back up irrationally

What an awful post

Bergkamp had Ian Wright, Overmars, Anelka to share the scoring with, not to mention Henry.

He was a completely different player to some you've mentioned, especially RVN () who was an out and out goalscorer.