Dier or Dawson?

[Ribble]

Peak to peak (ooer) Dier is easily the more complete player, but his peak was much shorter than Daws' which makes it a lot closer in terms of career. I think Dier still takes it, but it's weird comparing the two when in my head Dier is still that kid playing makeshift rb with a bottle brush hairdo scoring on his debut.

 

[zonbon32]

Dier a better/more modern 'footballer' but Dawson was very good at the physical side of the game which was still prominent 10-15 years ago. I'll say Dier but not much in it

 

[Stamford]

I think its clearly Dier by some distance. I definitely love Dawson more however.

 

[qqq1]

I liked Dawson more but Dier was a much better player.

 

[Styopa]

We were also a much weaker team so I think Dawson held up a bit more because the bar was lower. Dier was in title challenges and champions league regularly - the team around him was superior so he was judged to a higher standard

Not sure we were a “much weaker” team during Dawson’s time tbh. Dawson played in teams with the likes of Woodgate, King, Berbatov, Keane, Defoe, Lennon, Modric, Bale and van der Vaart. Even Kyle Walker was starting to play regularly during Dawson’s time. Granted not all at the same time, but many of them played together in the same team.

 

[Dave1882]

Picking Daws doesn’t make Dier a poor player, both great servants. But Dawson was the more consistent and reliable player for me. Diers flexibility in where he could play, probably was also his Achilles heal