What's new

What the pundits & media are saying about us

Davo99

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2006
4,063
5,827
Actually they're both no10's who are classed as forwards regardless the comparison still stands as we're going by your argument of a player who is deemed lazy (Ozil) vs a player who is a real team player (although Eriksen doesn't have much less ability) regardless

Your comparison was a bit silly and now you're moving the goalposts again just to try and win a point tut tut

Okay then I'll humour you...Seeing as you want to use forwards who would you rather have Berbatov or Kane?
I’ve added to my post earlier that you just quoted.

We could do this all day. Ibrahimovic or Chris Wood? Balotelli or Shane Long? Adebayor or Kevin Davies?

It’s not always the case and you can find an anomaly if you’re keen enough, but the original point I was making is if the luxury player is good enough and doing his bit in front of goal, you can afford him not to do as much defensive work. I think Hazard does this.

You’ve moved the goalposts as wel in including Eriksen, as he’s not of much less ability. Same as Kane with Berbatov. You’ve literally done what you said I did, moved the goalposts to win a point. The original comparison was meant to be silly. Go and humour yourself you miserable git. :D
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
I’ve added to my post earlier that you just quoted.

We could do this all day. Ibrahimovic or Chris Wood? Balotelli or Shane Long? Adebayor or Kevin Davies?

It’s not always the case and you can find an anomaly if you’re keen enough, but the original point I was making is if the luxury player is good enough and doing his bit in front of goal, you can afford him not to do as much defensive work. I think Hazard does this.

Sure we can do this all day but my point is that it's neither here nor there, you can and will find better players who put the work in compared to luxury players, it's a pointless debate and it doesn't prove anything.

And it's entirely subjective your point about teams being able to carry players who don't put the work in - recent evidence does seem to suggest that managers are now favoring work ethic over individual talent if you look at Pep who made Aguero put in more defensive work, Klopp who favoured Firminho over Sturridge, we don't need to talk about Poch. Hell even Mourinho sold Mata to Man Utd and favoured Oscar who was better defensively.

This is obviously digressing from the main point though about Hazard, whether you're willing to admit or not - you probably won't to try and save face - he's been given the lazy and disinterested tag by many including his own fans which tells you all you need to know about him.
 

tobi

Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose
Jun 10, 2003
17,547
11,749
Comparing Son and Hazard is a flawed argument because they're completely different players.

If you want to compare Son to another player, compare him to Mane and Martial etc. Wide forwards with goalscoring instincts.

Also Zaha isn't a good comparison either because he's an inverted winger.

Hazard is an unstoppable player when he wants to be, he's good enough to coast through games and impact games when he feels like it, his problem is that his team isn't consistent and need him to have a ruthless, non stop mentality (Ronaldo and Messi). He talks about reaching that level but his performances show that he doesn't want that mantle.
 

Davo99

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2006
4,063
5,827
Sure we can do this all day but my point is that it's neither here nor there, you can and will find better players who put the work in compared to luxury players, it's a pointless debate and it doesn't prove anything.

And it's entirely subjective your point about teams being able to carry players who don't put the work in - recent evidence does seem to suggest that managers are now favoring work ethic over individual talent if you look at Pep who made Aguero put in more defensive work, Klopp who favoured Firminho over Sturridge, we don't need to talk about Poch. Hell even Mourinho sold Mata to Man Utd and favoured Oscar who was better defensively.

This is obviously digressing from the main point though about Hazard, whether you're willing to admit or not - you probably won't to try and save face - he's been given the lazy and disinterested tag by many including his own fans which tells you all you need to know about him.
Try and save face? Bro, how seriously do you take all this?

I think Hazard is better than Son, regardless of work ethic. Fucking shoot me. :D
 

JCRD

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2018
19,153
30,013
That's actually a valid point, he's infuriating for that.

It's playing the percentages though. It only takes one or two timed runs and he is away. Leicester was a prime example although he was in his own half.

If 10 runs you may get offside six or seven which is fine if the other three or four work out.
 

Davo99

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2006
4,063
5,827
It's playing the percentages though. It only takes one or two timed runs and he is away. Leicester was a prime example although he was in his own half.

If 10 runs you may get offside six or seven which is fine if the other three or four work out.
He can improve this side of his game though. He often goes too early or is unable to hold his run a stride or two. I’d rather he was breaking the defence more than just 3 times out of 10.
 

teok

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2011
10,873
33,729
8UtPko5.gif
 
Top