Does it make sense?

I have noticed a pattern of thought too many times when two players are compared.

Player X is/was better striker, but player Y is/was better/legend for the team, even if both played very similar positions/roles. Is this a kind of thinking faulty? I mean if the position and role of the X and Y player is striker, and one agrees that X is better as a striker, how can Y be better? I also understand that Y might have other qualities that add to his play, for instance tracking back and such, but isn't the role of striker to score and to assist in scoring? If that is yes, and he is doing his job the best, doesn't that make him better overall, because he is doing what he is supposed to be doing?

Any thoughts?

This thread doesnt make sense.

i hate math

Imagine any name instead of X or Y. I dont want to mention names because it turns the thread into "My RB is better than yours" type of thread.

highburied wrote:This thread doesnt make sense.

Well simply, a lot of times people here say Player1 is better ST, but Player2 is better player. If both play same roles and positions, how is that possible?

eelir wrote:

highburied wrote:This thread doesnt make sense.

Well simply, a lot of times people here say Player1 is better ST, but Player2 is better player. If both play same roles and positions, how is that possible?

Rud Van Nistelroy and Henry were both strikers.

RVN scored lots of goals.

Henry scored goals and made goals for his teammates.

So, whod u pick?

That who can be a bit more versatile obviously.

True, but who is a better striker and who's better footballer? Can you divide this two notions?

It's illogical, for example if you had said something like; Xavi is the better passer of the ball but Pirlo is the better midfielder. It'll make sense.

If player X is better than player Y in his position, meaning he is superior overall, Player Y can still be superior in other attributes for example finishing and therefore is better for the system, but player X is still 'more complete'.

So who is better now X or Y, you ppl confused me?

Hm. If in doubt, I'd go for looks

It would be much easier if you give examples. I know it will lead to discussion of those two players and end up in the rightback section but while some get it, others seem confused.

To answer your question. People are caught up in who looks better or has various different skills and/or what fits their expectation of what a player is supposed to be in that position.

Thread needs more detail, allow me to help
X=Messi
Y=Cr7
Substitute these into the OP and let the post count explode, you can thank me some time after the lock

Well in Barca section there was some discussion about Raul vs Villa, and someone said Villa might be better striker in Spain, but Raul is all time great footballer. I do not get this? How is it possible to someone do an assigned role better, and be worst?

Oh that...thats just called nostalgia.

For the NT, its not even close.

Yeah but this type of reasoning is happening all the time here, and I fail to see the point. It was the same some time ago with Messi vs CR among others.

I mean you cant compare players of different positions. But, same possitions and roles could be compared. How come it is possible to be better player, if you do worse in your role or position?

So is this kinda like comparing Falcao and Benzema? Falcao's the better striker, while Benzema's the better footballer?

Yohan Modric wrote:So is this kinda like comparing Falcao and Benzema? Falcao's the better striker, while Benzema's the better footballer?

great example. I could not remember this, but i had a discussion about this. How does this work? how do you judge this?

It dont make sense, Falcao is better

People caught up in the fact Benz can dribble, make final passes and looks nice. It dont matter.

Falcao is better.

eelir wrote:

Yohan Modric wrote:So is this kinda like comparing Falcao and Benzema? Falcao's the better striker, while Benzema's the better footballer?

great example. I could not remember this, but i had a discussion about this. How does this work? how do you judge this?

Falcao's the better finisher, however he isn't good at dribbling, passing etc, however Benzema is.

Ok. But doesn't that make Benz a better striker then? Or maybe it makes him more versatile as he could be played in more positions, but does that mean he is better player? If Falcao does a strikers job better then Benz, and they are both strikers, to me it seams that Falcao is better player. Benz could be more useful for the team, but not better.

BTW. I am not saying any of the two are better then other. I need to watch more of both to judge.

Strikers primary job is to put the ball in the back of the net. Falcao does that better than Benz.

Difference is when the service is in-adequate or non-existent Benzema can affect the game in ways Falcao could ever dream of.

Maybe if you give a general naming for every position then it might make sense, for example:
Forward and you have CF, ST. Falcao might be a better ST but Benz a better Forward. Makes sense???


Same for Midfielders.

baresi wrote:Maybe if you give a general naming for every position then it might make sense, for example:
Forward and you have CF, ST. Falcao might be a better ST but Benz a better Forward. Makes sense???


Same for Midfielders.

Yeh agree with that. A striker is a goalscorer, whereas there's different roles for forwards.

When doesnt Benzema get service?

Sort of how like Higuain is the better 9 but Benzema the more complete footballer? We've definitely seen that argument before here.