sotnas
Player Valuation: £10m
Well, I was amazed last night. Although it wasn't an outstanding game, I think that some of those players are really something special.
Others I think they're crap (Ballack specially).
People compare the Mancs team of 2008 with the one of '99. I'd say that the '99 was a better team.
They had Stam (from a higher league above Vidic and Ferdinand), Keane and Scholes in his prime. Giggs, who in my opinion must be the most underrated player of all time, was up there within the top 3 players in the world. Instead the crappy Beckham was getting all the headlines, what a laugh.
And thinking that a player like Sheringham was a reserve. Uau, what a team.
This team has more flairy players and probably of better potential (Anderson, Nani, Ronaldo and Rooney). But pull Ronaldo out of the side and what do they have? A good side, absolutely true, but not a world beating side. Ronaldo's this year's performances took them to another level, he made the difference.
Last night, Utd had a great first half. Chelsea was lucky to draw before half time. But in the second half, I think Chelsea proved to be a stronger side. They're better as a side. Only Ballack is out his league.
Essien is a huge player. Makelele still is one fine player. Lampard is still great. Joe Cole as grown into a great team player, with all the great skills he has. Drogba, Malouda...All great players.
I think that player by player, chelsea must have a better side. And they sure played better in the second half.
Utd lost the ability to hold the ball. The front players had to run looking for it, but the midfielders left them down.
I think that none of the Utd Midfielders would play in the Chelsea team (Scholes, still very good but past his prime, Hargreaves, is it me or is he [Poor language removed]?, Carrick, surely well below Essien or Lampard).
But since Chelsea will break apart, I guess next season will be a walk in the park for Utd.
Others I think they're crap (Ballack specially).
People compare the Mancs team of 2008 with the one of '99. I'd say that the '99 was a better team.
They had Stam (from a higher league above Vidic and Ferdinand), Keane and Scholes in his prime. Giggs, who in my opinion must be the most underrated player of all time, was up there within the top 3 players in the world. Instead the crappy Beckham was getting all the headlines, what a laugh.
And thinking that a player like Sheringham was a reserve. Uau, what a team.
This team has more flairy players and probably of better potential (Anderson, Nani, Ronaldo and Rooney). But pull Ronaldo out of the side and what do they have? A good side, absolutely true, but not a world beating side. Ronaldo's this year's performances took them to another level, he made the difference.
Last night, Utd had a great first half. Chelsea was lucky to draw before half time. But in the second half, I think Chelsea proved to be a stronger side. They're better as a side. Only Ballack is out his league.
Essien is a huge player. Makelele still is one fine player. Lampard is still great. Joe Cole as grown into a great team player, with all the great skills he has. Drogba, Malouda...All great players.
I think that player by player, chelsea must have a better side. And they sure played better in the second half.
Utd lost the ability to hold the ball. The front players had to run looking for it, but the midfielders left them down.
I think that none of the Utd Midfielders would play in the Chelsea team (Scholes, still very good but past his prime, Hargreaves, is it me or is he [Poor language removed]?, Carrick, surely well below Essien or Lampard).
But since Chelsea will break apart, I guess next season will be a walk in the park for Utd.