David Villa

sportsczy wrote:

Immaculate_Mole wrote:

sportsczy wrote:

Lampard>>>>>Zidane then

Plus i see your ignoring the LW thing(Stick Benzema on the left wing and see how great he does lmao) and the fact Villa hardly started any of the cup games and Benzema is only ahead of Villa because of his hatrick against Auxerre in the CL....

Also big games? Benzema is no where to be seen and Villa scores,assists or is a major part in the victory nearly everytime...

I cant believe iam even discussing this but considering your a frenchman and Madrid fan it all suddenly comes clear

Oh and dont know where you got that stat from but Villa got 9 assists last year

sportsczy wrote:

Immaculate_Mole wrote:

sportsczy wrote:

Lampard>>>>>Zidane then

Plus i see your ignoring the LW thing(Stick Benzema on the left wing and see how great he does lmao) and the fact Villa hardly started any of the cup games and Benzema is only ahead of Villa because of his hatrick against Auxerre in the CL....

Also big games? Benzema is no where to be seen and Villa scores,assists or is a major part in the victory nearly everytime...

I cant believe iam even discussing this but considering your a frenchman and Madrid fan it all suddenly comes clear

Oh and dont know where you got that stat from but Villa got 9 assists last year

La Liga, CDR and CL only... not supercopa or NT.

Arquitecto wrote:I'll ignore Omarish's comment as I like the guy.

I come into the thread and find Eto being superior to Villa. While I don't think that is true, it is opinion in the end its arguable.

Then.... I get hit with a those rare windstorm opinions that completely knock the wind of me, and actually make me laugh after reading the post. Seriously.... laughing heartily as this is one of the few times I actually am expressing the overused abreviation: LOL.

This pertains with Sportszy's post on Villa and his comparison to fellow striker. I'm dumbfounded to the point where I can't even bother to put up a debate.

But I don't mean to be callous as I do agree on his point's on Serie A and its strength as this point is spot on.

But I don't agree with Dani on the serie a.

Dani,

Milan vs spurs first leg involved a manager with little European experience in which Milan were in their worst form by a country mile in their season as confidence was low through horrible results, injuries and the fact that Allegri choose his worst midfield combination (try to understand the underlined) as the combination of the midfield along with the formation to hold it was the last time he used it as our the midfield was simply our demise. Keep in mind during this period, Allegri was already receiving criticism for his team before hand. Plus, Ibra's goal was completely wrongfully disallowed just because of a slight nudge on Dawson who made a total meal of it.

2nd leg? We completely dominated. As in played them off the park as our regular form and confidence was back as this was the point Allegri found his system and it showed. How did we not get through?

Gomez suddenly turned into Casillas where Dawson put the performance of his life and Gallas made to goalline clearances.

Oh yea, and robinho's finishing (I'm sure you've heard of this).

Yea, we didn't win, but Spurs went through by a hairline and the first leg was simply due to our performance and meek mentality at the time and not spurs quality as they looked poor themselves.

Serie A? I'll state again that in the EL, Serie a continue to show their negligence judging by their squad selection and approach is this can't be judged by that.

CL? Roma were a shadow of who they were in the season before last year with internal problems and horrible results in serie a. Inter? As far as I know, Inter themselves were poor due to manegerial changes, injuries against Schalke as they even beat Bayern Munich.

I'm simply saying your underestimating Serie A dani. Thats really about it.

But I agree on all you other points on the topic.

Immaculate_Mole wrote:

sportsczy wrote:

Lampard>>>>>Zidane then

Plus i see your ignoring the LW thing(Stick Benzema on the left wing and see how great he does lmao) and the fact Villa hardly started any of the cup games and Benzema is only ahead of Villa because of his hatrick against Auxerre in the CL....

Also big games? Benzema is no where to be seen and Villa scores,assists or is a major part in the victory nearly everytime...

I cant believe iam even discussing this but considering your a frenchman and Madrid fan it all suddenly comes clear

Oh and dont know where you got that stat from but Villa got 9 assists last year

The Franchise wrote:

Arquitecto wrote:I'll ignore Omarish's comment as I like the guy.

I come into the thread and find Eto being superior to Villa. While I don't think that is true, it is opinion in the end its arguable.

Then.... I get hit with a those rare windstorm opinions that completely knock the wind of me, and actually make me laugh after reading the post. Seriously.... laughing heartily as this is one of the few times I actually am expressing the overused abreviation: LOL.

This pertains with Sportszy's post on Villa and his comparison to fellow striker. I'm dumbfounded to the point where I can't even bother to put up a debate.

But I don't mean to be callous as I do agree on his point's on Serie A and its strength as this point is spot on.

But I don't agree with Dani on the serie a.

Dani,

Milan vs spurs first leg involved a manager with little European experience in which Milan were in their worst form by a country mile in their season as confidence was low through horrible results, injuries and the fact that Allegri choose his worst midfield combination (try to understand the underlined) as the combination of the midfield along with the formation to hold it was the last time he used it as our the midfield was simply our demise. Keep in mind during this period, Allegri was already receiving criticism for his team before hand. Plus, Ibra's goal was completely wrongfully disallowed just because of a slight nudge on Dawson who made a total meal of it.

2nd leg? We completely dominated. As in played them off the park as our regular form and confidence was back as this was the point Allegri found his system and it showed. How did we not get through?

Gomez suddenly turned into Casillas where Dawson put the performance of his life and Gallas made to goalline clearances.

Oh yea, and robinho's finishing (I'm sure you've heard of this).

Yea, we didn't win, but Spurs went through by a hairline and the first leg was simply due to our performance and meek mentality at the time and not spurs quality as they looked poor themselves.

Serie A? I'll state again that in the EL, Serie a continue to show their negligence judging by their squad selection and approach is this can't be judged by that.

CL? Roma were a shadow of who they were in the season before last year with internal problems and horrible results in serie a. Inter? As far as I know, Inter themselves were poor due to manegerial changes, injuries against Schalke as they even beat Bayern Munich.

I'm simply saying your underestimating Serie A dani. Thats really about it.

But I agree on all you other points on the topic.

Arq, I would like to clarify, I do not believe in any which way Spurs are better then Milan. Even after losing, I felt Milan were the better side and had some misfortune. That is to start with.

However, the fact Milan couldnt overcome Spurs tell me something about them and in turn the fact they won the league, something about the league. I submit they had early issues with coaching, selection and injuries. If the game was say 3 months later, Spurs wouldnt of won.

I think perhaps I was a bit over the top in my words, but I think that was to emphasis how wrong it is to say Cavani is better then Villa. Perhaps I did Serie A a bit of disservice, but my point I wont change. The difference quality teams Villa scored against vs Cavani is literally poles apart.

sportsczy wrote:You guys do realize that Villa's efficiency was beyond horrific last year. It was around 13.5% (goals to shots taken). Everyone else i mentioned above was around the 20% range or better. To me, that's just extremely poor and cannot be considered WC... especially when you consider that most of Barca's chances come from point blank.

Lionel Messi wrote:

sportsczy wrote:You guys do realize that Villa's efficiency was beyond horrific last year. It was around 13.5% (goals to shots taken). Everyone else i mentioned above was around the 20% range or better. To me, that's just extremely poor and cannot be considered WC... especially when you consider that most of Barca's chances come from point blank.

You know last season, Ronaldo's goal to shot ratio was worse than Villas, that doesn't make Ronaldo NOT WC does it?

omarish wrote:

Lionel Messi wrote:

sportsczy wrote:You guys do realize that Villa's efficiency was beyond horrific last year. It was around 13.5% (goals to shots taken). Everyone else i mentioned above was around the 20% range or better. To me, that's just extremely poor and cannot be considered WC... especially when you consider that most of Barca's chances come from point blank.

You know last season, Ronaldo's goal to shot ratio was worse than Villas, that doesn't make Ronaldo NOT WC does it?

That is true but Ronaldo hit 53 of them in the back of net, with almost identical playing time, so Ronaldo is still better goalscorer even if the goal to shot is bad

The Franchise wrote:First of all, why 30 games? Why not all from last season

Second, what is defined as "strike"?

Thirdly, just because it isnt technically "tap in" doesnt exclude my point.

In the situations I said, he isnt on the left scoring goals.

On your little stat sheet, the Villareal hattrick, the 3rd goal is called "strike" but what was the goal?

He got a cross and he was basically on the penalty spot, turned and scored.

Not a tap in, but damn near close enough.

You cannot refute my point, his goals come from the center because when he doesnt have the ball he gets himself constantly into the box.

Just like you though, ignore 90% of my post which is correct and look at the 10% which is debatable (yet still not wrong) and try and run with it.

The Franchise wrote:
First, what is defined as "strike"?

Secondly, just because it isnt technically "tap in" doesnt exclude my point.

In the situations I said, he isnt on the left scoring goals.

On your little stat sheet, the Villareal hattrick, the 3rd goal is called "strike" but what was the goal?

He got a cross and he was basically on the penalty spot, turned and scored.

Not a tap in, but damn near close enough.

You cannot refute my point, his goals come from the center because when he doesnt have the ball he gets himself constantly into the box.

Just like you though, ignore 90% of my post which is correct and look at the 10% which is debatable (yet still not wrong) and try and run with it.

omarish wrote:

The Franchise wrote:
First, what is defined as "strike"?

Secondly, just because it isnt technically "tap in" doesnt exclude my point.

In the situations I said, he isnt on the left scoring goals.

On your little stat sheet, the Villareal hattrick, the 3rd goal is called "strike" but what was the goal?

He got a cross and he was basically on the penalty spot, turned and scored.

Not a tap in, but damn near close enough.

You cannot refute my point, his goals come from the center because when he doesnt have the ball he gets himself constantly into the box.

Just like you though, ignore 90% of my post which is correct and look at the 10% which is debatable (yet still not wrong) and try and run with it.

It was made by Jiopsi I think, a tap in is when gk is out of position

a strike is a normal shot against the gk

The Franchise wrote:Yes, I missed it, which is why I changed it not 2 minutes later.

Well I didnt make the stats, I dont know the parameters of them, neither do it you it seems, so why are they being used like fact?

Anyway, I see quite a few tap ins anyway. Its not like its disproving my point.

Your saying Cristiano scored more goals then Villa...so what? he scored more easy goals then Villa..one because he is better and two because he is contanstly in better goalscoring positions.

This isnt rocket science. Your Abidal comments and now this, do you watch Barca at all?

Cristiano gets all the freedom in the world, he is the best player on a team who barely have set offensive instructions.

Meanwhile, Villa plays in the most organised attacking team out there, has the more strict instructions about movement and positioning then any forward and plays a selfless role for the team which often means created space and not getting the ball in goalscoring positions.

Anyone who compares the role for Cristiano and David Villa in their respective teams, simply baffle me.

Instead of being simplistic and saying "Villa plays on the left and so does Cristiano" you should think exactly what that means.

The Franchise wrote:Yes, I missed it, which is why I changed it not 2 minutes later.

Well I didnt make the stats, I dont know the parameters of them, neither do it you it seems, so why are they being used like fact?

Anyway, I see quite a few tap ins anyway. Its not like its disproving my point.

Your saying Cristiano scored more goals then Villa...so what? he scored more easy goals then Villa..one because he is better and two because he is contanstly in better goalscoring positions.

This isnt rocket science. Your Abidal comments and now this, do you watch Barca at all?

Cristiano gets all the freedom in the world, he is the best player on a team who barely have set offensive instructions.

Meanwhile, Villa plays in the most organised attacking team out there, has the more strict instructions about movement and positioning then any forward and plays a selfless role for the team which often means created space and not getting the ball in goalscoring positions.

Anyone who compares the role for Cristiano and David Villa in their respective teams, simply baffle me.

Instead of being simplistic and saying "Villa plays on the left and so does Cristiano" you should think exactly what that means.