I'm with you on this one. Beckham has to be the most one-dimensional player to have been in contention for the European Player of the Year Award. If it weren't for his celebrity status and the fact he was playing for Man Utd, he would not find himself standing next to the likes of Rivaldo, Figo, Batistuta or Raul. His reputation precedes him.

I have to try to inject some sense of justice here. We are well aware that it is easier to get noticed when you are playing for not only one of the top clubs in the world, but also in arguably the most followed league in the world. Millions around the world get to see you play week in and week out. You generate a legion of fans and marketing giants like Nike pay you millions to get you to endorse their products, helping you generate an even bigger army of fans, if that is even possible. Whilst I do agree that Ronaldo is probably the best winger (no pun intended, Carlsberg) in the Premiership and maybe even in Europe, I would also say that I am in no position to claim that he is the world's best at the moment. Why? Well, i'll tell you.

How many of you religiously follow the EPL, La Liga and Serie all at once? When I use the word, "religiously", I don't mean tuning in only to watch the teams you like play. I mean you watch almost every game to the point you are able to give a fair analysis on most standout players. Heck, I won't even consider myself a religious follower of the EPL. Let's cross continents now into Africa and South America. How many of you have watched a full length match in any of their leagues? How many of you follow their leagues religiously? My bet is that none of you do, and neither do I. I rely on what is written in the papers and if my club is about to sign some unknown, I rely on them to tell me if he is good or not. I have not formed a personal opinion for I've never heard of this lad, let alone seen him play.

My point is that I see posters talking Joaquin, Van Der Vaart, Sneijder and company but how many have seen them play? When I say this, I don't mean you've searched out highlights of him on youtube. Some of you have even got their positions wrong. You watch Ronaldo play 100 times and you see a highlight of some kid in Brazil on the new for 5 minutes, and you are able to give an informed opinion? I therefore make my stand; Ronaldo is the best winger in the EPL at the moment and maybe even in Europe. In the world? Well, I have no idea really.

That may be true but it doesn't change what I've said; that many have not seen enough of other players to form a well informed opinion. You can tell by how some posters seem to have the positions of certain players mixed up. I do think he is the best I've seen at the moment but I won't go far as to say he is the best in the world at the moment. I assume we are making a comparison between he and every other winger in the world given the thread title.

Which is my point if you read my post; it's easier to get noticed when more people are watching you play, by virtue of not only playing for one of the biggest clubs in the world, but also in the most watched league in the world. Can you, in particular even say you've seen enough of someone like Joaquin, Messi, Silva or whoever to give a fair analysis of them? I can't. You are buying into the fact that just because all the best players come from Europe each year, they are without a doubt, the best in the world. How then did Liverpool and Man Utd both lose to South American clubs in the World Club Championship? I have no doubt that the European leagues are the most lucrative, in marketing terms, just not sure if that means all the best players play there. In any case, I'm not objecting to that fact, it could well be true. What i'm pointing out is what I said at the beginning of this post.

They may well be. What I'm pointing out is that many posters here are forming opinions on the likes of Joaquin, Wesley Sneijder and company without having seen them play on a regular basis. The opinion then become flawed, and one sided.

I mentioned earlier the case of Thierry Henry. Many posters will categorise him under the "relative unknown" category prior to signing for Arsenal. The thing is Henry was already a member of the French senior team while he was at Monaco, even before signing for Juventus and subsequently, Arsenal. Yet, many had not heard about him, and here is a player who was plying his trade in Europe, the Serie A, one of the biggest leagues in the continent. What are the chances then that these same posters would have heard of some obscure player from South America or Africa?

Another example is Dmitar Berbatov who scored 68 goals in 152 appearances for Bayer Leverkusen. I've read about him for sometime but never seen him in action until he signed for Spurs. How many can claim otherwise? Suddenly there was this new monster of a striker coming in from the Bundesliga, when he is already a household name in Germany.

Here is another hypothetical question; if Ronaldo were still playing for Lisbon and had not signed up for an EPL club, would posters here be claiming that he is as great as he is? I just believe that to some degree, we are all influenced by the fact that we follow the EPL and no other league.

---

Added on April 7, 2008, 5:54 pmI have to say this; your comment is really naive. You are saying that they don't show the Argentinian or Brazilian leagues because they are crap? I've tried time and time again to take your posts in with a pinch of salt but this I cannot ignore. EPL matches are aired during prime time, and this has the highest viewership. In the early days of the EPL, Europe was dominated by Spanish and Italian sides, not English. The EPL was not the best league in it's infancy, now, perhaps. It grew because it was marketable and it now probably the richest league in the world.

This post has been edited by Duke Red: Apr 7 2008, 05:54 PM

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.

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?

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.

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.

Read the thread title mate. I seriously doubt Gattuso will be as good a winner, should he play there for whatever the reason. Just my opinion.