[cite]Posted By: MrOneLung[/cite]But Henry - with Eto'o in the team they banged 6 past Madrid at the Bernabeu.
QED - Obviously gone backwards since Ibrahamovic arrived.
E'to was/is a great player.
Point was that Ibra was slated as total rubbish and not able to do it in big games but just has.
Sid Lowe who does the Spanish Football bit on Football Weekly had an interesting take on this. He reckoned that Barca were as happy to get rid of E'to and his caustic attitude as they were to add Ibra. With Zlatan breaking records for Barca they now reckon they've gotten the bargain of the year. A mate of mine who's an Inter nut was absolutely beside himself with upset about the deal, and seeing E'to up close hasn't changed his mind. I think Ibrahimovic is a lot better a player than many people in this country believed on the basis of a couple of dodgy performances.
[cite]Posted By: MrOneLung[/cite]But Henry - with Eto'o in the team they banged 6 past Madrid at the Bernabeu.
QED - Obviously gone backwards since Ibrahamovic arrived.
Point was that Ibra was slated as total rubbish
By MCS. The same man who thinks Giggs is rubbish despite over 800 games for Man Utd, 30 trophies and being in the PFA team of the year 9 times!
Ibra has won me over - not with his goalscoring (which has been pretty phenomenal already), but more with his attitude and workrate. I'd always considered him a sulky, lazy player - talented, yes, but with a propensity to go missing in big games and look petulant when things aren't going his way. However, I've seen every minute he's played for Barca and never once seen him throw a strop when a pass goes astray, or kick his heels when he should be closing someone down. It seems like Guardiola has sat him down and told him that Barca's success is predicated as much on teamwork and a hard work ethic as it is on flair and mercurial moments. Of course, we're less than halfway into the season, so the jury is very much still out - but if he carries on in this vein, then Barca definitely have the better of the deal.
agreed, well sort of ibra is a good playa on his days but have seen too many where he has gone missing
Etoo i wud rather have in my team as he is more likely to score and he is quicker, my opinion only but he is the better playa of the two but it does depend on what role you want your striker to play as Ibra does hold up the ball well and bring ppl into the game.
I just think the amount is laughable on top of the swap, fair enough if was straight swap then wudnt think it is too bad as he suits barca. but £40 million or euros still well OTT
[cite]Posted By: MrOneLung[/cite]But Henry - with Eto'o in the team they banged 6 past Madrid at the Bernabeu.
QED - Obviously gone backwards since Ibrahamovic arrived.
E'to was/is a great player.
Point was that Ibra was slated as total rubbish and not able to do it in big games but just has.
True, I did say I had never seen him do it in a big game, but the main thrust of my thread was that he is not worth 40m more than Eto'o.
Sorry JohnnyBev but how many games hav you actually seen Ibra play in? just those in the Champs league where he would have been up against an English side and so much better than Inter or maybe in the World cup playing Sweden when they would have been playing against tougher nations.
We are far too quick in this country to judge a player based on watching them a couple of times and this whole Ibra episode goes to prove it, the italian league doesn't get the recognition over here like Spain does and because of that we see a lot less of their players but when we do it is usually in the Champs league where the English teams generally are much better than them and we base all our opinions on watching Serie A teams playing against better sides.
That summarises why people in this country had a bizarre hate campaign against Hargreaves, until he signed for Man U and had his status changed from Liability, to Effective (and eventually to Crock)
[cite]Posted By: colthe3rd[/cite]Sorry JohnnyBev but how many games hav you actually seen Ibra play in? just those in the Champs league where he would have been up against an English side and so much better than Inter or maybe in the World cup playing Sweden when they would have been playing against tougher nations.
We are far too quick in this country to judge a player based on watching them a couple of times and this whole Ibra episode goes to prove it, the italian league doesn't get the recognition over here like Spain does and because of that we see a lot less of their players but when we do it is usually in the Champs league where the English teams generally are much better than them and we base all our opinions on watching Serie A teams playing against better sides.
I'd doubt any English fans had taken in Hargreaves excellent form during Bayern's run in to winning the Champ's League. I got villified at work in 2006 when I said I thought he was one of the most effective players in the team in the friendlies run up to the WC.
Same with Paul Lambert who played one of the top 4-5 defensive midfield games in the last 20 years of Champ finals; behind Redondo and Gattuso for me.
Ibra has been stunning for Sweden when playing against matched up teams. When outgunned he does become a surly character, but no more than Henry who's woefully surly in tight big matches on the biggest stages. Having said that although I love watching him play, if I were to sign a striker for a team to have top success, it'd Nistelroy and Drogba.
[cite]Posted By: McLovin[/cite]That summarises why people in this country had a bizarre hate campaign against Hargreaves, until he signed for Man U and had his status changed from Liability, to Effective (and eventually to Crock)
I actually disagree with that. Playing in Germany might have heightened the abuse he got yes, but fundamentally he got slated because he was terrible for England up until about early 2006. So what we'd heard rumours he was doing well for Bayern? All England fans should and did care about was whether he was doing it for England, and he simply wasn't. People have forgotten it now in their wondrous hindsight, but he was very poor pre-2006 and the reaction was a result of that. When he actually started performing for England before and during the World Cup people stop being so critical.
He didn't move to Manchester United until mid 2007, when he'd already won the fans over by actually playing well for England. He was lauded after the World Cup because he was excellent, not because he'd moved to United - that didn't happen for another year.
a) I don't think that he was that bad for England, he'd just become a scapegoat. I'm not sure his form changed so radically. The main thing was that the press went from drawing attention to his every fault, to lauding his effectiveness. b) If he'd been playing for a top 4 team and playing well in front of the premiership cameras critics would be less willing to single him out as the cause of all his country's football weakness.
I saw Hargreaves play for Bayern Munich, but couldn't believe it was the same player who would then play so poorly for England. Perhaps because he was unfamiliar with his colleagues, their style of play etc that he started the 2006 WC with a couple of average performances - but then there were quite a few underperforming players in that squad, but as the tournament improved so did his game and he was considered one of the few successes by the time we were ko'd.
[cite]Posted By: McLovin[/cite]Agree with that to an extent Sussex, but
a) I don't think that he was that bad for England, he'd just become a scapegoat. I'm not sure his form changed so radically. The main thing was that the press went from drawing attention to his every fault, to lauding his effectiveness.
b) If he'd been playing for a top 4 team and playing well in front of the premiership cameras critics would be less willing to single him out as the cause of all his country's football weakness.
In terms of point a) I agree that can happen, but I don't think it's specific to Hargreaves or necessarily caused by the fact he played in Germany (although that might have added some spice). What you said can apply almost exactly to Heskey, who used to be a figure of fun but has turned it around. Heskey undoubtedly was quite poor for England in the past, not as bad as the press made out certainly, but not particularly great and he got a lot of criticism. He's now been playing well and has an important role for the team and a lot of media and public opinion has changed. However, that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't deserve the criticism before.
For point b) I think you'd be surprised. Whilst Frank Lampard was banging in 20 goals a season for Chelksi he still went through a couple of years of being roundly booed for his England performances. It didn't matter that he was playing well for Chelsea, there were still questions of why he was in the squad because in the end he wasn't doing it for England.
I guess my point is that at international level, a player is only as good as the performances he's giving for your team, and if he isn't giving them over a period of time then criticism is fair. The best that history or performances in other shirts should afford a player is a little leeway, but as the case of Lampard shows, this leeway is often very small, even if you play in the premiership. International football is very intermittent and you have to judged on whether you step up the plate in that specific game as there are not as many games as the league to be 'given a chance'. I believe that Hargreaves didn't for several years and earned no right to be rated as a good international player by the England fans until he started to perform for England.
Lampard wasn't booed at first, apart from some West Ham fans. When he went through a barren spell and was shit because SGE couldn't be bothered to play a defensive midifelder he got the shit ripped out of him. OK so many at wembley support London teams anti Lamps, but let's face it a majority of numpty football supporters are led by the red tops.
Hargreaves was played all over by England, but the hatred of him really came on around 2005-2006. No one had a bad word to say about him in the run up to 2002 mainly because most numpties never noticed him as he played all over. England fans booed him during the friendly run up to 2006, when he was a very obvious individual who could be bothered to chase and close down. Whilst the rest of that awful flat four midfield were truly an atrocious mix. So the height of the red top campaign against Hargreaves, and the blind idiot England fans were when he was playing OK whilst the rest of the England midfield were atrocious. Yes he did give ball away but this was a time when Gerrard was fucking up most attacks, yet it was the team's fault there.
As usual most of it was led by Hansen et al who rarely seem to take a ninety performance into account. FFS have you seen how every weekend he plays thirty minutes, yet they bang on about Diamantti? Diamantti is wonderful to watch, but manages to fuck up 8 out of ten attacks he's in, and becomes insanely frustrated by his first of many row z shots. You can see his brilliant qualities would in a struggling team be outweighed by his kamikaze cavalier careering, but they still present wonder at why he doesn't play every minute of god's time.
Still a ridicilous deal even in highsight. The above stats are very interesting, especially the age! Zlatan (as he is more commonly known as these days) was a flop at Barca and was sold to AC for €24m, great business from Moriniho.
The guy has always been incredible. He's going to walk the prem. the prem really isn't a great standard and he's used to playing against much better defences than here.
I have no recollection of this thread which is worrying!!!
Still think as it stood at the time barca overpaid. He scored 16 in 29 games for them. Eto'o scored 33 in 67 for Inter so definitely not a 40m difference there.
The guy has always been incredible. He's going to walk the prem. the prem really isn't a great standard and he's used to playing against much better defences than here.
He's been in France for the last four years. PSG are the only game in town over there. Wouldn't exactly say he's been up against a better quality of defence lately.
True but his record over the past decade is amazing. 24 trophies. 396 goals in 680 career games. 240 in 500 if you don't want to count PSG. And some of his goals are unbelievable finishes. He doesn't appear to require time to adapt which makes him very, very dangerous this year. He's built for it.
I have no recollection of this thread which is worrying!!!
Still think as it stood at the time barca overpaid. He scored 16 in 29 games for them. Eto'o scored 33 in 67 for Inter so definitely not a 40m difference there.
It's 7 years old, I think you not remembering it makes you the normal one.
The guy has always been incredible. He's going to walk the prem. the prem really isn't a great standard and he's used to playing against much better defences than here.
Bullshit... Andy Delort was one of the top goal scorers in France last season yet couldnt even score in the English 2nd tier!!
Naby Sarr has been able to go from our 2nd tier to the French 2nd tier... their Defences have to be terrible on those two facts!!
Haha I remember agreeing at the time that Barca were the ones being conned, however Ibrahimovic has really stepped it up the last few years. I think since he moved to PSG he's been in the best form of his career, at Juve I think the potential was there but he got terribly mis-managed by Capello, I'd say his career was mainly flashes of brilliance up until his AC Milan days where he was really able to sustain it from then on. I've come to respect him a lot.
Comments
If it was 4 mill plus Eto you might say fair enough but 40 million + is nuts IMHO.
"never plays well in big games"
"dog shit"
But the Barca fans are calling for his head this morning after that performance : - )
QED - Obviously gone backwards since Ibrahamovic arrived.
E'to was/is a great player.
Point was that Ibra was slated as total rubbish and not able to do it in big games but just has.
By MCS. The same man who thinks Giggs is rubbish despite over 800 games for Man Utd, 30 trophies and being in the PFA team of the year 9 times!
Still think that 40 million was too much though
Etoo i wud rather have in my team as he is more likely to score and he is quicker, my opinion only but he is the better playa of the two but it does depend on what role you want your striker to play as Ibra does hold up the ball well and bring ppl into the game.
I just think the amount is laughable on top of the swap, fair enough if was straight swap then wudnt think it is too bad as he suits barca. but £40 million or euros still well OTT
True, I did say I had never seen him do it in a big game, but the main thrust of my thread was that he is not worth 40m more than Eto'o.
We are far too quick in this country to judge a player based on watching them a couple of times and this whole Ibra episode goes to prove it, the italian league doesn't get the recognition over here like Spain does and because of that we see a lot less of their players but when we do it is usually in the Champs league where the English teams generally are much better than them and we base all our opinions on watching Serie A teams playing against better sides.
Nothing more to add.
Same with Paul Lambert who played one of the top 4-5 defensive midfield games in the last 20 years of Champ finals; behind Redondo and Gattuso for me.
Ibra has been stunning for Sweden when playing against matched up teams. When outgunned he does become a surly character, but no more than Henry who's woefully surly in tight big matches on the biggest stages. Having said that although I love watching him play, if I were to sign a striker for a team to have top success, it'd Nistelroy and Drogba.
I actually disagree with that. Playing in Germany might have heightened the abuse he got yes, but fundamentally he got slated because he was terrible for England up until about early 2006. So what we'd heard rumours he was doing well for Bayern? All England fans should and did care about was whether he was doing it for England, and he simply wasn't. People have forgotten it now in their wondrous hindsight, but he was very poor pre-2006 and the reaction was a result of that. When he actually started performing for England before and during the World Cup people stop being so critical.
He didn't move to Manchester United until mid 2007, when he'd already won the fans over by actually playing well for England. He was lauded after the World Cup because he was excellent, not because he'd moved to United - that didn't happen for another year.
a) I don't think that he was that bad for England, he'd just become a scapegoat. I'm not sure his form changed so radically. The main thing was that the press went from drawing attention to his every fault, to lauding his effectiveness.
b) If he'd been playing for a top 4 team and playing well in front of the premiership cameras critics would be less willing to single him out as the cause of all his country's football weakness.
In terms of point a) I agree that can happen, but I don't think it's specific to Hargreaves or necessarily caused by the fact he played in Germany (although that might have added some spice). What you said can apply almost exactly to Heskey, who used to be a figure of fun but has turned it around. Heskey undoubtedly was quite poor for England in the past, not as bad as the press made out certainly, but not particularly great and he got a lot of criticism. He's now been playing well and has an important role for the team and a lot of media and public opinion has changed. However, that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't deserve the criticism before.
For point b) I think you'd be surprised. Whilst Frank Lampard was banging in 20 goals a season for Chelksi he still went through a couple of years of being roundly booed for his England performances. It didn't matter that he was playing well for Chelsea, there were still questions of why he was in the squad because in the end he wasn't doing it for England.
I guess my point is that at international level, a player is only as good as the performances he's giving for your team, and if he isn't giving them over a period of time then criticism is fair. The best that history or performances in other shirts should afford a player is a little leeway, but as the case of Lampard shows, this leeway is often very small, even if you play in the premiership. International football is very intermittent and you have to judged on whether you step up the plate in that specific game as there are not as many games as the league to be 'given a chance'. I believe that Hargreaves didn't for several years and earned no right to be rated as a good international player by the England fans until he started to perform for England.
Hargreaves was played all over by England, but the hatred of him really came on around 2005-2006. No one had a bad word to say about him in the run up to 2002 mainly because most numpties never noticed him as he played all over. England fans booed him during the friendly run up to 2006, when he was a very obvious individual who could be bothered to chase and close down. Whilst the rest of that awful flat four midfield were truly an atrocious mix. So the height of the red top campaign against Hargreaves, and the blind idiot England fans were when he was playing OK whilst the rest of the England midfield were atrocious. Yes he did give ball away but this was a time when Gerrard was fucking up most attacks, yet it was the team's fault there.
As usual most of it was led by Hansen et al who rarely seem to take a ninety performance into account. FFS have you seen how every weekend he plays thirty minutes, yet they bang on about Diamantti? Diamantti is wonderful to watch, but manages to fuck up 8 out of ten attacks he's in, and becomes insanely frustrated by his first of many row z shots. You can see his brilliant qualities would in a struggling team be outweighed by his kamikaze cavalier careering, but they still present wonder at why he doesn't play every minute of god's time.
Still think as it stood at the time barca overpaid. He scored 16 in 29 games for them. Eto'o scored 33 in 67 for Inter so definitely not a 40m difference there.
Naby Sarr has been able to go from our 2nd tier to the French 2nd tier... their Defences have to be terrible on those two facts!!