Wrong, richest league in the world is the UEFA Champions League...

Cristiano Ronaldo is probably the most in-form winger at the moment... to suggest as if that guy IS the best is an insult to many past legends as well as current players...

And in any case, CR7 plays more like a second striker instead of winger...

phenomenal season no doubt...but Man Utd as a team is playing very well this season, esp in defense and midfield...for me, this has released CR7 to just attack as there are others doing the donkey work...

Looking at games where Man Utd struggled, we don't see CR7 being so pompous anymore do we? Look no further than yesterday's game vs Boro, yes, he scored, early on...but when Utd needs a winner, where is he? For me, Rooney is the driving force for Utd as well as the most important player in their team...

Let's see if CR7 can maintain the same form next season...

kaka isnt the best playmaker anymore flip , i dont even think hes the best player for milan anymore aha

bro chill..no one ever says that ronaldo 'IS' the best..but instead indeed he's one of the best winger for current moment due of his in-form performance and team's stability to ease his worries bout going back defend if there's any counter attack.but TS's title is abit exaggerated where no one is undisputed in football world.

may be i'll looked humble yet arrogant,but certainly in manchester united team there's almost non-exist for 'most important player' term .rio ferdinand with his commanding at defense line,carrick and anderson being the 'key' in squad to unlock dead lock and splash out great passes through opponent's defense,ronaldo with his pace,passes and capability of scoring more (non applied to other seasons) ,rooney and tevez with bull-run to get ball thus tear out opponent's tight arse defense .

rooney is one of the most important player as driving force u shall say.

cheers

IMO, u not using a good sample. Being too subjective.

No player perform well in every match, not to say every minutes.
Every players have their up and down. Take it as example, Kaka is the World Player of the Year. Did he score all the goals for AC Milan when they are trailing? A player won't win a game, a good team will.

Not all players are godlike, and there are many good defenders.

Just because Ronaldo is said to be the best player of the world for the time being, please do not expect him to perform like "hero".
Full fitnesss all the time, will not ever get injured, all shot on target and GOAL!!! He's a human, not a robot. Even a robot has its down time, would require technician to fix it.

In your school/university, have the top student score 100 marks in all their exam? Maybe they are the top student, but it never meant they must score 100 marks in every papers. And at that time, where are you?

You are reinforcing my point; that your opinions are biased duh!

If anything you are emphasising my point; that the Premiership is the most popular league around. Does this necessarily indicate that it is the best league around? Even so, the point of my argument is the opinions on Ronaldo are often biased because posters here have seen him play more than any other player. Do you as an Arsenal/Man Utd/Liverpool fan watch the Serie A or La Liga? Can you give me an honest opinion on any of the top players there? Do you watch them week in, week out as I assume you do the Premiership teams mentioned above? If so, kudos to you. If not, you are just buying into what you read in the news, opinions of others, not yours.

As for your comments on teams not playing their best sides against the South American champions in the World Club Championship, your assumptions are unfounded. I know for a fact the European sides have fielded their first teams. Luck? Convenient excuse. Look at the history of the competition and see for yourself how many times South American teams have come away triumphant. They are at the very least, on par with the top European sides. A bit hard to say it was down to luck when you look back over the years isn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercontinen..._%28football%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_Club_World_Cup

Countries like Brazil and Argentina are by and large, fighting poverty. The leagues there are simply not rich enough to entice players to ply their trade there. That and there is the obvious language barrier. English is the second most spoken language in the world (behind Mandarin I believe), another reason the Premiership has such a large following. I mentioned before that it also helps that their games are played during prime time.

I find this argument weird because you seem to be affirming my points.

If training regiments in England are all you make them out to be, how come so few local players are coming through the ranks? When was the last time and English club developed a player from scratch? When I say "scratch", I don't mean buying an already talented young player and bringing out what is already there.

To be fair Duke you can't use the winners of the Intercontinental Cup/World Club Championship as a sure indicator to how both continents compare to each other. They are mostly one-off games. Rather than looking at the results I think it would be more indicative if one actually watched the games to be able to gauge their respective levels. Of course I don't claim to have watched every final so I can't claim for sure that the European leagues are better. But as I said one good indicator is the fact that almost every player that makes it in South America moves to Europe at some point. It's where the money is and better players = better leagues.

Club championship does shows a club ability. What you mean you are saying chelsea, manchester, arsenal, totenham are so strong that portmouth and barnsley in the final?

Why.. if you playing day in day out with the group ppl you become use to system and thinks that your method which normally work actually is invincible and dribble like CR can't be stopped.

In Brazillian or Argentinian League there more dribblers than in European league. Their formation would easily kill of dribblers and European teams find hard to beat these south american team because they do not have standard formation as european team does.

If South American soccer isn't as good as European soccer, Why does brazil, argentina, uruguay won the world cup as many times as the european soccer nation?

This post has been edited by ponomariov: Apr 8 2008, 12:36 PM

yes brazil , argentina etc won the word cup a lot more than the european countries but their squad mainly consists of players who plays in europe arent they ?

Simply because there are few clubs who have good training schemes. Furthermore, unfortunately for the local scene in england, these teams such as ManUtd prefers to take in young foreigners nowadays.

In the end the better players will go where the money is, fact, no argument here. If you think about it, I'm not using just picking on a specific year that the South American Champions beat their European counterparts. I posted the history of the tournament and although they are one off games, there is some consistency if you consider the tournament has been around for a number of years. I'm not just picking out one specific year.

I am not contesting the notion that the best players in the world may well be playing in Europe but at the same time, I cannot say for certain there aren't any exceptions. I am pointing out that most posters (myself included) are not well informed enough to claim one players is better than the other mainly because we don't see the likes of Joaquin, Messi or whoever play often enough, over the entire match. All we (well, me anyway) see are the highlights.

I think we've strayed from the topic a little here. If you notice, some comments suggest that other wingers aren't as good because they don't appear in the news that often. They claim these players are out of form or whatever but have they actually seen him play or are they just reading what the media reports? Like I said, the Premiership gets the most coverage and it's easier to stand out for the right or wrong reasons. Lucas Leiva was captain of the Brazilian U-21 side and yet people like me had never heard of him, when he was already a household name back home.

What puzzles me is how it appears that foreign youngsters are more talented than younger ones. This means that in England, there is a flaw in player development from the ages of say 12 - 16 years of age. There must be a reason English (or local) youth's don't seem to develop as well when they reach the age of 16. I don't believe that Manchester United have changed their youth development policies much and yet, there is no indication of there being another class of 92. Could it be that Paul Scholes, David Beckham, Gary Neville and co. were one offs?

Local players have to move to smaller clubs to be given opportunities. David Bentley at Blackburn, Leroy Lita at Reading, Tom Huddlestone at Spurs, Joe Hart at Manchester City; these are a few examples of English players who have broken into the first teams of their clubs. It is as if smaller clubs develop players better than bigger ones. Is it a myth that foreign youngsters are better than local ones? There may not have been many English youths coming through the ranks but then again how many foreign ones are there? By that I mean foreign youngsters who were signed at the age of 16 or so and broken into the first team. I know many are inclined to mention Ronaldo's name but he was already a talent before coming over and he was what? 19?

Perhaps its not wrong to say ManUtd's class of 92 were one offs.

In bigger clubs where scouting can be extensive through out the globe, talented foreigners can be picked up. Its not that in general foreign youngsters are better, but the fact that the extra talented ones which are rare gets picked up by a big club thus 'masking' talented locals. Same can be applied to why talented locals can't break into the first team because there are already extra talented foreigners taking up the places. Sometimes its whether these local ones are given a chance to break into the first team. Beckham and co. broke into the first team very young. These exposure gives them an edge in development and the fact that ManUtd actually sold off proven and experienced older players gives them more time to concentrate on developing those young ones. Like you said, when these youngsters move to a smaller club where they are relatively better than even the older players, they get the much needed exposure and experience. I don't know about players from other clubs which moved out and did better, but for ManUtd players l would be Giusseppe Rossi. Those that didn't watch Rossi during his time at ManUtd wouldn't know how good he was. Till he moved out. Immediately he begins to shine.

Of course not Ronaldo, he tormented ManUtd defence in Lisbon before he signed.

Even so, didn't you realised how much different his game was before and now?. This shows the effect of better development of a players from a specific club. Same can be said for Rooney. Before he joined ManUtd he gets more yellow cards then score goals. See the difference now. This is refferring to the earlier quotes of 'development of players in bigger/different clubs'

I don't know much bout players which improved in other clubs, any other clubs' fans can provide us with an example?

hmm..david bentley perhaps?he's a very good winger..still developing though..wonder how he would evolve if he went to a different league..now that would be interesting.well to be fair england's young talents (not too young though) in the defensive department are not bad at all..stephen taylor..micah richards..david wheater (anyone i left out?feel free to list them as well)..what do u think duke?

Stewart Downing. Hes a natural crosser, and he does amazing job @ boro. Hes definite one of the bright star for England squad. He is only 23 this year.

This post has been edited by Belphegor: Apr 9 2008, 03:42 AM

yupyup downing,swp(too bad hes short n doesnt appear much in 1st team),quaresma(love to watch portugal game when 2 of them play on the flank)

for moment .. cr7 is really doing very well .... but rooney is reallly the driving force of mu.... those determination & fires in his eyes ...

but when comes to effectiveness ..no one beats the pin point passing and crossing from becks ... no fancy dribbling & foot works to drill pass defenders .. a vital delivery will do the works in any area on the pitch ... juz my 2 cents ..

Indeed, I do agree that his game has matured. I've mentioned before that he is now more of a team player.

English players I believe are not groomed to develop their individual skills at the right intensity, especially when they are really young. Look at the England Futsal team, they are crap! English players have a poor first touch and their ball control isn't any better. As they get older, it gets harder to develop these abilities.

am truly anticipating the day when vela plays for arsenal , maybe next season when his loan is over~~
a yound lad with tremendous playing ability

Have u watched him play before?

From what I understand, English players are somewhat falling short when it comes to technique. I'm guessing it's largely due to the fact that while training modules are more or less the same, it's the difference in intensity that makes the difference. This was said to me by a coach for the Brazilian Football Academy here in KL. Being a defender, technique (ball control, dribbling) matters less and this could be the reason why England are able to churn out quality centrebacks, whilst not being able to do the same with other outfield players.

Rino Genaro Ivan Gattuso

GTG

This post has been edited by Punish: Apr 9 2008, 04:25 PM