How highly do you rate Gareth Bale?

Gil wrote:Who said he was better than Silva?

I said he was performing better than Silva not that he was the better player.

Silva has been average at best for weeks now while Bale has been consistent throughout. I mean Silva hasn't even been the best player on his team ffs.

People were saying he was better than Iniesta only a few weeks ago.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote: and alot more consistent but he still goes missing far too much for my liking, for example against City he was a complete and utter ghost before his goal.

Isn't that what great players do best though? Admittedly, he was shocking up until his goal but he so easily could have been the matchwinner at the end of the day had Defoe converted his cross.

Hmm, let's see, oh yeah, it was you. To refresh your memory, please look at page three of this thread before you embarrass yourself even further.

Did i say he's better than Nani?

I said i have been impressed with him this season and Nani has disappointed me compared to what i know what he's capable of.....

Nani is clearly the better player of the two.

I am not criticizing Valencia, hes extremely effective probably one of the most effective wingers in the world but effective =/= best i just like to see wingers with more to thier game than what Valencia has thats all.

Its a personal preference not a slight on the player.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Did i say he's better than Nani?

I said i have been impressed with him this season and Nani has disappointed me compared to what i know what he's capable of.....

Nani is clearly the better player of the two.

I am not criticizing Valencia, hes extremely effective probably one of the most effective wingers in the world but effective =/= best i just like to see wingers with more to thier game than what Valencia has thats all.

Its a personal preference not a slight on the player.

Yes, you did, otherwise I would not be defending Nani, take a look at this which you said: "Nani has been a crock of shite this season...

Gervinho is very good i agree one of the best the league has to offer"

Leave it there because you clearly didn't say what you just said all in one post...

That mean's this season, not in general

Maybe learning to read might help you in the long run

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:That mean's this season, not in general

Maybe learning to read might help you in the long run

Oh, deary me, that's what we have talking about for the last couple of pages. THIS SEASON. There was no need in you telling me that, just shows that you simply can't debate. Can I just say that I have bothered in writing decent paragraphs, whereas you have just said, "I said this, but I didnt say this", you're just going around a circle. I suggest you might want to read more than once, before debating with me.

Debating what?

You accused me of saying something i didnt say, i never ONCE said Gervinho is better than Nani, not once !

I said Gervinho has impressed me, while Nani has disappointed me.....

And somehow that = Gervinho > Nani

I see you resort to pictures, when you cant back up your claims........

Fine debater you are

Go forth and find the proof that claims i said Gervinho was better than Nani like you claim i did....

I'll be waiting......

I already quoted the proof, and the funny thing is that I have offered a couple of insightful posts, whereas you're not even attempting to debate in the same manner as I am. You should not be allowed to use the words "fine debater", bloody contradictory, laughable when you look at your posts in replying to mine, too... The reason for the picture is simple: why should I put more effort into debating with you when you have been lazy in replying to me? Don't take it the wrong way, but you can wait all you want, but you don't deserve any more attention.

Sorry guys for dragging this off-topic. I didn't mean to ruin the thread, but I'll take blame for it. Once again, sorry.

So you consider being disappointed with Nani's form and impressed with Gervinho's form.....

Equals Gervinho is better than Nani ?

Ok then iam done, another thing there is no debate going on here its just you accusing me of something i never said

Gervinho " is one of the best the league has to offer "........

Nani has been a crock of shite this season compared to what he is capable of.....

and if you actually read who iam responding too.....

The best winger in the league is comment is aimed at Bale ffs

Nani is obviously better than Gervinho and i have never claimed not once otherwise....

People really have bad reading comprehensions here i see.

Gervinho was a beast in Lille... dunno why we only have to count Arsenal form (which is also great).

Overall: Nani > Gervinho

RIGHT NOW: Bale > Gervinho > Nani

Is what I understand. Bale being great this season, but mehish past ones.

I think Mole was so worked up that he really didn't bother trying to comprehend whether Hala was for or against. He just went at anyone really. FYI, Hala was in defense of Mole with quoting his original comment...

Forget it, Sushi, logic doesn't apply here

When Walcott was outscoring both Nani and Bale last season, he was still average in the eyes of everyone. Now Bale is having an ok quarter of a season, he's being called the best winger in the league

Lex wrote:Forget it, Sushi, logic doesn't apply here

When Walcott was outscoring both Nani and Bale last season, he was still average in the eyes of everyone. Now Bale is having an ok quarter of a season, he's being called the best winger in the league

Are you deluded or playing silly, just like the Newcastle supporter? No Arsenal fan, apart from you, cares that Walcott outscored Nani and Bale, it's irrelevant to what's being discussed. MAjor lulz at you trying to use that to, somewhat, claim that Walcott is either better than the pair or just a better footballer than most give him credit for... Dear Lord... And for your information, Bale is being called the best winger in the league this season because he has been, or what Walcott better than him, like?. He has played from the start and has outperformed Nani, in some peoples' eyes, I don't know what's hard to comprehend.

The point he's trying to make, is that some people seem to have selective memory around here. When Walcott was ripping it last season, no one gave a shit and gave him the usual "headless, all speed no brain" treatment". All while Bale had 1 good Inter game and that's it, yet still rated more.

Yeah ok, Bale is in form right now, and has been so for only a few months, free role and all, but this does not make him the second coming of Bergkamp. Nani, Walcott and yes, even Gervinho should be considered better footballers than Bale simply because of consistency over the years, rather than random spurs of form.

Lex, Walcott may score the odd flurry of goals here and there, but what else does he offer?

Bale, atm, is not only scoring for Spurs, but he is also assisting nearly all of their goals this season.

Goals + assists= why he is being lauded as the best winger atm.

Red you do realise in the last year Walcott has more goals and more assists?

Well he did a few weeks ago it might be not the case now iam not sure.......

Either way that argument doesnt wash.......

Bale is a better player IMO but not because of those reasons.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Red you do realise in the last year Walcott has more goals and more assists?

Well he did a few weeks ago it might be not the case now iam not sure.......

Either way that argument doesnt wash.......

Bale is a better player IMO but not because of those reasons.

What makes him a better player in your opinion?

Better final product i.e.

Better final ball, can score all types of goals ( although still isnt as consistent as i would like )

Can dribble outside and inside his fullback, better technically.....

Although it is probably an unfair time to compare the two as Bale is in the form of his career so far and Walcott is in a major slump.....

One thing i have noticed between the two that seems to be majorly in Bale's favour is confidence......

Bale seem's to believe he can beat the fullback anytime he gets the ball, while Walcott seems to dwell on the ball even when he's on form and unsure whether he can go past the opponent or not....

I would'nt really use confidence as an attribute usually but in this instance i have notice a big difference between the two even when Walcott is in full flow.

Sushi Master wrote:Gervinho was a beast in Lille... dunno why we only have to count Arsenal form (which is also great).

Overall: Nani > Gervinho

RIGHT NOW: Bale > Gervinho > Nani

Is what I understand. Bale being great this season, but mehish past ones.

This.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Better final product i.e.

Better final ball, can score all types of goals ( although still isnt as consistent as i would like )

Can dribble outside and inside his fullback, better technically.....

Although it is probably an unfair time to compare the two as Bale is in the form of his career so far and Walcott is in a major slump.....

One thing i have noticed between the two that seems to be majorly in Bale's favour is confidence......

Bale seem's to believe he can beat the fullback anytime he gets the ball, while Walcott seems to dwell on the ball even when he's on form and unsure whether he can go past the opponent or not....

I would'nt really use confidence as an attribute usually but in this instance i have notice a big difference between the two even when Walcott is in full flow.

Yeah, i can pretty much agree with that.

Sushi Master wrote:The point he's trying to make, is that some people seem to have selective memory around here. When Walcott was ripping it last season, no one gave a shit and gave him the usual "headless, all speed no brain" treatment". All while Bale had 1 good Inter game and that's it, yet still rated more.

Yeah ok, Bale is in form right now, and has been so for only a few months, free role and all, but this does not make him the second coming of Bergkamp. Nani, Walcott and yes, even Gervinho should be considered better footballers than Bale simply because of consistency over the years, rather than random spurs of form.

And? I can see the point he is trying to convey, but my point still stands...

So, yeah, Walcott is crap