The Official SOCCER Thread 2015/2016

[PappyTron]

6 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

I rate Zidane more than anything but Messi is better.  

Here Dies', Henrys got a world cup winners medal

[DieselDaisy]

55 minutes ago, PappyTron said:

Those three statements, in toto, equal a tautological nonsense. To say that Messi can never be regarded as great as Zidane because he has never won a World Cup, is absolute pap.

Except I didn't say that! Stop lying and creating straw men arguments.

Zidane is a greater player than Messi not necessarily because he won a trophy, but what he did (to achieve that trophy). Can you not see the distinction between performance, i.e. excelling at your sport, and victory, i.e. succeeding, winning the thing. You could argue that A creates B (but not always). I certainly believe A creates an environment that makes B more possible.

[PappyTron]

31 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Except I didn't say that! Stop lying and creating straw men arguments.

Zidane is a greater player than Messi not necessarily because he won a trophy, but what he did (to achieve that trophy). Can you not see the distinction between performance, i.e. excelling at your sport, and victory, i.e. succeeding, winning the thing. You could argue that A creates B (but not always). I certainly believe A creates an environment that makes B more possible.

But Zidane is NOT a better player than Messi simply because he had a better World Cup and helped his team win the trophy. You cannot distill the entire essence of a player's innate talent, skill and career achievements into a single tournament that lasts a few weeks. Having a fantastic World Cup helps cement a great player's legacy, but does not make a poor player great, nor does it detract from a great player's career if they have a poor World Cup. Messi has perhaps never had a mind-blowing World Cup, but he was voted to be the best player in the tournament. His career is there for all to see: if he had never even played in a WC he would still be universally regarded as the greatest player of all time and the fact that he is seen as such WITHOUT having a magical World Cup says it all.

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, PappyTron said:

But Zidane is NOT a better player than Messi simply because he had a better World Cup and helped his team win the trophy. You cannot distill the entire essence of a player's innate talent, skill and career achievements into a single tournament that lasts a few weeks. Having a fantastic World Cup helps cement a great player's legacy, but does not make a poor player great, nor does it detract from a great player's career if they have a poor World Cup. Messi has perhaps never had a mind-blowing World Cup, but he was voted to be the best player in the tournament. His career is there for all to see: if he had never even played in a WC he would still be universally regarded as the greatest player of all time and the fact that he is seen as such WITHOUT having a magical World Cup says it all.

I'm not. I actually think Zidane was even more brilliant in the following Euros. I'm taking his cumulative career - club/country - and pitting it against Messi's and summarising that I believe he was a better player. But Zidane's two international trophies are the pinnacle.

This conversation is going nowhere because you are obviously up a bum with statements like this: ''universally regarded as the greatest player of all time''. That is a hyperbolic statement. Look at the players you are overriding with such a declaration, the Puskas and Di Stefanos, the Eusebios, Peles and Garrinchas, Bests, Beckenbaurs, Platinis, Romarios, (fat) Ronaldos et al. To say that Messi is better than all of that lot is unbelievably hyperbolic and clearly demonstrates that you are up a certain Argentinean kid's bum. If arguing with Axl fans has taught me anything it is that it is futile to argue with a person rammed up a bottom.

[PappyTron]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm not. I actually think Zidane was even more brilliant in the following Euros. I'm taking his cumulative career - club/country - and pitting it against Messi's and summarising that I believe he was a better player. But Zidane's two international trophies are the pinnacle.

This conversation is going nowhere because you are obviously up a bum with statements like this: ''universally regarded as the greatest player of all time''. That is a hyperbolic statement. Look at the players you are overriding with such a declaration, the Puskas and Di Stefanos, the Eusebios, Peles and Garrinchas, Bests, Beckenbaurs, Platinis, Romarios, (fat) Ronaldos et al. To say that Messi is better than all of that lot is unbelievably hyperbolic and clearly demonstrates that you are up a certain Argentinean kid's bum. If arguing with Axl fans has taught me anything it is that it is futile to argue with a person rammed up a bottom.

I'm not even a fan of Messi, so there goes that theory; I just appreciate artistry when I see it. Whether you, up in the wilderness of Durham, like it or not, Messi IS widely considered to be the greatest player in the history of the game. You might have a differing opinion, but that doesn't make you correct. Bradman is widely considered to be the greatest cricketer, though some might argue a case for a Tendulkar, a Lara or a Warne or whoever, but all of them, case to be made or not, are a long way back in the universal acclaim compared to the Don and the same holds true with Messi.

Also, please stop bringing up Best because every time you do so it makes me laugh. You say that Messi is not in the league of Cruyff, Zidane et al because he hasn't torn up a World Cup, then have the gall to make a case for Best to be talked about in the same breath as Garrincha, Eusabio and Beckenbaur, despite never even playing in a World Cup.

[DieselDaisy]

22 minutes ago, PappyTron said:

I'm not even a fan of Messi, so there goes that theory; I just appreciate artistry when I see it. Whether you, up in the wilderness of Durham, like it or not, Messi IS widely considered to be the greatest player in the history of the game. You might have a differing opinion, but that doesn't make you correct. Bradman is widely considered to be the greatest cricketer, though some might argue a case for a Tendulkar, a Lara or a Warne or whoever, but all of them, case to be made or not, are a long way back in the universal acclaim compared to the Don and the same holds true with Messi.

Also, please stop bringing up Best because every time you do so it makes me laugh. You say that Messi is not in the league of Cruyff, Zidane et al because he hasn't torn up a World Cup, then have the gall to make a case for Best to be talked about in the same breath as Garrincha, Eusabio and Beckenbaur, despite never even playing in a World Cup.

Not where I come from. I would argue that he is considered the ''greatest player in the game today'' (we both know who he is competing against here) but the idea that he has displaced Pele (three World Cup winners medals) and Maradona is certainly a controversial one - even you have to admit this? Don't take my word for it: phone talkshite and see what sort of reaction you will get!!

And your statement about Bradman is flawed simply because it eradicates bowlers. Bradman is widely considered to be the greatest batsman the sport has ever seen (although even this is disputed) because of his unprecedented batting average but you cannot possibly say 'cricketer' because of the way the differing disciplines of the sport are separated. That is why many people cite an all-rounder, and many of those same people mention Sobers! You wouldn't ask The Don (with two test wickets to his name averaging 36.0) to open up your bowling!!

Do you actually have a clue about any of these sports?

PS

I live in Northumberland.

[PappyTron]

3 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Not where I come from. I would argue that he is considered the ''greatest player in the game today'' (we both know who he is competing against here) but the idea that he has displaced Pele (three World Cup winners medals) and Maradona is certainly a controversial one - even you have to admit this? Don't take my word for it: phone talkshite and see what sort of reaction you will get!!

And your statement about Bradman is flawed simply because it eradicates bowlers. Bradman is widely considered to be the greatest batsman the sport has ever seen (although even this is disputed) because of his unprecedented batting average but you cannot possibly say 'cricketer' because of the way the differing disciplines of the sport are separated. That is why many people cite an all-rounder, and many of those same people mention Sobers! You wouldn't ask The Don (with two test wickets to his name averaging 36.0) to open up your bowling!!

Do you actually have a clue about any of these sports?

PS

I live in Northumberland.

Bradman is considered to be the greatest cricketer full stop; that would be of all of the players that have played the game he is considered the greatest exponent of it. Bowler, batsman, all-rounder, whatever, Bradman is the greatest cricketer. The only bowler who could be mentioned in the same breath as Bradman would be Barnes.

Quote

Not where I come from.

Who gives a fuck what the six-fingered, inbred sister fuckers of deepest darkest Northumberland think of who is the greatest footballer? Honestly, who cares what you bog-dwelling pricks have to say on the subject? Half of the people that you are thinking of probably don't even consider it football unless the ball is made of leather, has laces on and you tuck into dripping on bread at half time.

Quote

Do you actually have a clue about any of these sports?

Let me put it this way; I could wax lyrical about both the history and rules of cricket, whilst simultaneously doing you up the gary for a giggle. You are quite simply a buffoon and your continued drivel and unabashed ignorance speaks volumes about both your ghastly mind and the number of fingers you possess, you cretinous northern nitwit.

Edited April 20, 2016 by PappyTron

[SoulMonster]

5 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Zidane is a greater player than Messi not necessarily because he won a trophy, but what he did (to achieve that trophy).

Again you are overstating the importance of World Cups in gauging a footballers talent. I am sorry but let me bring a lifetime enemy of you into the discussion: statistics. I know you feel awkward around statistics but we cannot help it. If you are going to assess the quality of something based on a small sub-set that is not necesarrily representative of the whole, like using the performance in 20-30 WC matches to represent 500 (?) matches in a player's career, then random chance becomes a too large component. That is statistics. You simply cannot trust your conclusion because the uncertainty is too large. If Messi can rule his league, which is basically at the same level as WC (especially for the first rounds), year after year, then THAT is a better indicator of his value as a footballer than however he performed in a much smaller subset of games during WCs. By focusing on the larger set of events you minimize the probability of chance which is significant when you focus on a smaller set (how his team mates played, what teams they were up against, how his shape was at the time, etc).

From what you write it also becomes apparent this has its origin in you being personally dissapointed in his performance this last WC. Which is typical of you. You never have got the hang of seperating subjective feelings from objective reality and is always a victim to transposing your own personal feelings into whatever you discuss. That is very un-scientific of you. But then you are not a scientist.

[DieselDaisy]

4 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Again you are overstating the importance of World Cups in gauging a footballers talent. I am sorry but let me bring a lifetime enemy of you into the discussion: statistics. I know you feel awkward around statistics but we cannot help it. If you are going to assess the quality of something based on a small sub-set that is not necesarrily representative of the whole, like using the performance in 20-30 WC matches to represent 500 (?) matches in a player's career, then random chance becomes a too large component. That is statistics. You simply cannot trust your conclusion because the uncertainty is too large. If Messi can rule his league, which is basically at the same level as WC (especially for the first rounds), year after year, then THAT is a better indicator of his value as a footballer than however he performed in a much smaller subset of games during WCs. By focusing on the larger set of events you minimize the probability of chance which is significant when you focus on a smaller set (how his team mates played, what teams they were up against, how his shape was at the time, etc).

From what you write it also becomes apparent this has its origin in you being personally dissapointed in his performance this last WC. Which is typical of you. You never have got the hang of seperating subjective feelings from objective reality and is always a victim to transposing your own personal feelings into whatever you discuss. That is very un-scientific of you. But then you are not a scientist.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? I'm a cricket aficionado! There is nothing more pleasurable for me than to sit down with a copy of Wisden and a cup of tea and compare runs, batting averages and strike rates.

I appreciate your point regarding club football producing a greater sum across a longer chronology, an aggregate, (correct?), however sport does not work quite like that, especially the World Cup and romantic vicissitude of tournament based knock-out football. That is why knock out football, be it the FA Cup or the World Cup, is the ultimate test in that particular sport (Liverpool understand this): it admits no second chances; it does not give Messi ''ten more games to aggrandise his goal tally; Messi has to succeed on that one particular moment.

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

How did you arrive at that conclusion? I'm a cricket aficionado! There is nothing more pleasurable for me than to sit down with a copy of Wisden and a cup of tea and compare runs, batting averages and strike rates.

I appreciate your point regarding club football producing a greater sum across a longer chronology, an aggregate, (correct?), however sport does not work quite like that, especially the World Cup and romantic vicissitude of tournament based knock-out football. That is why knock out football, be it the FA Cup or the World Cup, is the ultimate test in that particular sport (Liverpool understand this): it admits no second chances; it does not give Messi ''ten more games to aggrandise his goal tally; Messi has to succeed on that one particular moment.

If this doesn't go on your Tinder profile then a lot of women out there won't know what they are missing out on.

I disagree wholeheartedly with cups being the ultimate test. It is only a test of how good a particular team, or player, is in that particular cup, which is not a good indicator of that particular team or player's overall level. Again, you cannot, or shouldn't, generalize from such a small sample. The only thing we can conclude is that Messi hasn't been as brilliant in WCs as he has been for his home team.

[DieselDaisy]

This is the best way I can put it: I see knock-out football as producing an environment which asks the most questions from the players.

By the way, I'm not disregarding club form, and league form, in an assessment of a given player. Messi's club form is probably about as terrific for any player who has chocked at international level.

Edited April 20, 2016 by DieselDaisy

[Len Cnut]

See choking suggests that he doesnt perform or hes shit on the international level, which just isnt true, he just hasn't won anything.  It is a valid point but not enough of one to say he doesnt count in amongst the best of the best, it'll be interesting to see where his goal tally is at by the time he retires and also, the denial of his skillset in comparison to someone like Bestie is just silly.

Its worth bearing in mind that Per Mertesacker has a world cup winners medal, not sure you'll find many people who'll call him better than Messi.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Len B'stard

[DieselDaisy]

4 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

See choking suggests that he doesnt perform or hes shit on the international level, which just isnt true, he just hasn't won anything.  It is a valid point but not enough of one to say he doesnt count in amongst the best of the best, it'll be interesting to see where his goal tally is at by the time he retires and also, the denial of his skillset in comparison to someone like Bestie is just silly.

Its worth bearing in mind that Per Mertesacker has a world cup winners medal, not sure you'll find many people who'll call him better than Messi.

Jesus christ, how many times must I reiterate this point? I'm not going on about medals! I'm going on about performance! I would not have used Cruyff or Eusebio as an example, would I, if I was reducing the argument to mere world cup winners? 

[Len Cnut]

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

Jesus christ, how many times must I reiterate this point? I'm not going on about medals! I'm going on about performance! I would not have used Cruyff or Eusebio as an example, would I, if I was reducing the argument to mere world cup winners? 

Got em to the final?  I actually agree with your overall point, that your greatness thing cant really be complete without a World Cup...not that you cant be great without it but its one of the boxes that, when ticked, makes you that much more greater.

compare that to the clips of Bestie you sent me as example of his greatness and tell me this kid aint the greatest thing you seen since Maradonna.

[DieselDaisy]

It is the ultimate box I would say. When people mention the greats like Pele and Maradona it tends to be those players' international form that they have in mind. When you immediately mention Pele it tends to bring forth images of '58 or '70, not Santos. That is how it goes - perhaps unfairly but there you have it.

I think I already did post a clip of George Best. I simply prefer Best aesthetically. I'm not denying the fact that statistics and cups would suggest Messi to be the greater, however, when I compare clips between the two I consider Best to be the finer player. I'm not exactly holding some oddball belief here and setting it forth for shock value haha! When you poll people on greatest player, Best is frequently a name that prevails! You lot are acting like I'm citing some obscure league player. 

[The_Original_RK]

I can't even describe how much I loathe Louis Van Dull. When will this fooking Dutch nightmare end?!?! This is what death by a thousand cuts must feel like.... a thousand boring, backwards passing cuts.

[Len Cnut]

39 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It is the ultimate box I would say. When people mention the greats like Pele and Maradona it tends to be those players' international form that they have in mind. When you immediately mention Pele it tends to bring forth images of '58 or '70, not Santos. That is how it goes - perhaps unfairly but there you have it.

I think I already did post a clip of George Best. I simply prefer Best aesthetically. I'm not denying the fact that statistics and cups would suggest Messi to be the greater, however, when I compare clips between the two I consider Best to be the finer player. I'm not exactly holding some oddball belief here and setting it forth for shock value haha! When you poll people on greatest player, Best is frequently a name that prevails! You lot are acting like I'm citing some obscure league player. 

But point is his level of acclaim is incongruous with his achievements, put a vote on boxers up and you'll get more than a few with Floyd in their top 5, especially nowadays, dont make it right, my whole point that started this off was that hes a good player, great even but his level of acclaim is nowhere near justified.  Its to do with his being the first magazine cover player with a trendy haircut and a pretty face that birds fancied, hes a 60s icon.

[PappyTron]

Liverpool are magic, Everton are tragic.

[Len Cnut]

Apparently Arsenal tickets are goin back to general sale for tommorows game, projections are that it'll be a big like...empty match.

That actually pisses me off, fuck me, we're not fighting relegation here, teams like Liverpool, Newcastle, West Ham, Palace, they aint table toppers but their fans show up religiously.

Sounds almost blasphemous to say but i almost wish we did have bad times, just to weed out all the fuckin' prawn sandwiches, a lot has been said about the team this season but i tell you what, the fans are just as fuckin' bad.  Last time i went down The Emirates and felt something was the Bayern game, home games for us lot are SUCH a bunch of fuckin' prawn sandwich.  What happened to my fuckin' Arsenal, what happened to our fuckin' terraces, what happened to tip toes and shovin', what happened to all that?  

I'm sounding like Dies' here . Dont get me wrong, i'll have modernisation...but make the fuckin' tickets some kinda sensible price so the lads can turn up and we can fuckin' have it.  

Make it a score, make it 30 quid even and i'll turn up every fuckin' week.

[PappyTron]

Heavy D happened, Len.

[Len Cnut]

The fucking saggy titted jinx!

[PappyTron]

35 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

The fucking saggy titted jinx!

He's killed the whole club; battered them into submission like a baby seal.

[Len Cnut]

Just now, PappyTron said:

He's killed the whole club; battered them into submission like a baby seal.

Somewhere the ghost of Herbert Chapman and Ted Drake weep . 

[PappyTron]

9 minutes ago, Len B'stard said:

Somewhere the ghost of Herbert Chapman and Ted Drake weep . 

So, Len, I know that you are a Wenger fan and want him to stay, but what would it take for you to change your mind?

[Len Cnut]

19 minutes ago, PappyTron said:

So, Len, I know that you are a Wenger fan and want him to stay, but what would it take for you to change your mind?

Y'know what, thats actually a really difficult question.  He's a manager and, to my mind he's consistently kept a team that ain't been the full shilling in the conversation where they really shouldn't be by rights.  So whats the solution, trundle along until the bastard does a David Moyes and drops in standard or just jack him in now and gamble on a new manager who might sink us but also might be the dogs?  Hmmm.  I'm not sure i can answer that offhand.  I suppose thats it, that'd be it, if there was a drop in standard, if we suddenly became this fuckin' mid-table team then it'd probably be time for a change.  Or you could just have a pair and opt for change now and take whatever comes on the chin (shut up :lol:).  I've not really answered your question really, have i?  I suppose a season finishing 6th or something and i'd be swayed, which sort of lends credence to the naysayers and their position eh?

Look, these Arsenalfantv's and social media fanbase chat bare shit.  They go on about this ain't acceptable, that ain't acceptable, we're a top team etc etc, yes, we are a top team, historically speaking we're a top team but we were never a dominant top team, not in the way United *shudders* were or Liverpool were, our like...episodes of success were very much (unless you wanna go fuckin' pre-war) acts of fighting against the tide, we was never the fuckin' top spot shoe-in, y'know what i mean?  These lot fuckin' gob off and chat shit like were fuckin' like, top of the league consistently during George Grahams era or Bertie Mee's, now i don't remember Bertie Mee but i fuckin' rememeber George Graham, they were no fuckin' dominant team, those wins were fuckin' grafted, it's why we celebrated em like we did, like Anfield 89, it was some flukey shit really, weren't it, being honest here?   Yeah they had the brass to pull it off but it still is what it is, 9 other games those Liverpool boys would've bummed us in.  And thats what it is, these boys got used to what was, again, a few years of success due to Arsene and suddenly thought its their birthright, Liverpool fans have a right to react like that, following their drop, United fans do following Moyes...but do Arsenal fans really?  I'm not defending Wenger here necessarily, just talking about the mentality of certain fans.

Look, end of the day i want Arsenal to win trophies and be a top drawer team, i think we are a top drawer team but these lot just fuckin' overhype and overblow things and make videos that get a million hits over some minor shit that makes it all a bigger palava than it fuckin' needs to be.  And i tell you something else for free, i would knock Claude the fuck out   I'm serious, if i was on some video for AFTV (which i would rather die than do :lol:) and he fuckin' stood that close to me, shouting and swearing in my face he would get fuckin' banged out right in front of the fuckin' statue of Tony Adams til they'd need smelling salts for the cunt to remember his birthday again, i would NEVER have that off no one, that is fuckeries that is, look whats happened to the carribean community in this country man, they used to be fuckin' staunch lads, it's resulted in nobheads like Ty' getting barked on and just standing there, something about that unsettles me greatly, Claude would catch a fuckin' Julian Jackson shot off of me with NOOOOOOOO hesitation

You dont agree with the man, alright but why you givin' it for?  Like you're some fuckin' badman or something, I almost want to fuckin' do an interview for that, I'd drop him like a sack of shit.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Len B'stard