Ross Barkley

[oldblue]

Haven't a clue mate, might be one for @Eggs to field

...strange is that because I have long compared Barkley to Charlton, indeed a long time ago I posted a montage of Charlton to illustrate what I meant. Barkley is much more Charlton than Gerrard.

Not sure about the right boot theory re Charlton but I have heard him recall how he got that fantastic shooting ability with both feet. Charlton said he painted a line about 4 ft off the floor on the wall of the Old Trafford car park, he'd then spend hours striking footballs keeping them below that line. Look back at the 66 World Cup goals and it's amazing how many were hit hard and flat at that height. Great player was Bobby Charlton.

Was bored enough to try find anything about Charlton training himself to use both feet but I've either got the wrong player or I dreamt it as he says he never had to practice using both feet at all.
Enjoyed watching a few clips though. It's definitely similar style to Ross with his upright running style and, deceptive pace. Great spring too and shots with absolutely no backlift. Think Ross bit more deliberate in his shooting but that might be something practice brings.
Don't see the Gerrard shouts at all. He's not really an athlete in that sense but much more close control. Still think there's a lot of Gazza about the way he runs right into packs of defenders and uses his technique and physique to draw them into mistakes. Much better now he's trying to stay on his feet.

 

[Walken]

Was bored enough to try find anything about Charlton training himself to use both feet but I've either got the wrong player or I dreamt it as he says he never had to practice using both feet at all.
Enjoyed watching a few clips though. It's definitely similar style to Ross with his upright running style and, deceptive pace. Great spring too and shots with absolutely no backlift. Think Ross bit more deliberate in his shooting but that might be something practice brings.
Don't see the Gerrard shouts at all. He's not really an athlete in that sense but much more close control. Still think there's a lot of Gazza about the way he runs right into packs of defenders and uses his technique and physique to draw them into mistakes. Much better now he's trying to stay on his feet.

I'd agree with much of that, he's certainly not the full throttle athlete Gerrard was, though I don't think Gerrard had to technique to be a top player without that aspect, but I do think Barkleys pace when he uses it really surprises people, not to mention his strength, he also has that rare talent of being able to maintain his pace when on the ball

 

[bluerobert]

yes it does, one of the arguments for maradona over pele is often his time at napoli, which is without doubt more revered than pele's time at new york.

I wouldn't argue one particular aspect makes a player world class, if we are using the term for the truly elite, its a combination of things, and as a player Gerrard does not tick enough boxes, I agree with Roy Keanes assessment, who by the way had no problem calling henry or viera world class

That Napoli team won the league by 3 points when a win was worth only 2 points. They finished the season top goal
Scorers, lost the fewest games and had the best goal difference. They conceded 21 goals in the season and had 16 clean sheets. Their defence was bettered only by Inter that season. Maradonna scored 10 that season and finished top goal scorer for the team. He scored 2 pens in one game so his goals only affected 9
of their 30 League games. To say he won it for them by himself is absolute rubbish.

 

[oldblue]

I'd agree with much of that, he's certainly not the full throttle athlete Gerrard was, though I don't think Gerrard had to technique to be a top player without that aspect, but I do think Barkleys pace when he uses it really surprises people, not to mention his strength, he also has that rare talent of being able to maintain his pace when on the ball

Yeah I've never been a fan of pace for it's own sake. Much more important you can change pace in a way defenders don't see coming and obviously keep the ball.

 

[Walken]

That Napoli team won the league by 3 points when a win was worth only 1 point. They finished the season top goal
Scorers, lost the fewest games and had the best goal difference. They conceded 21 goals in the season and had 16 clean sheets. Their defence was bettered only by Inter that season. Maradonna scored 10 that season and finished top goal scorer for the team. He scored 2 pens in one game so his goals only affected 9
of their 30 League games. To say he won it for them by himself is absolute rubbish.

I agree entirely and always argued so, but the question was does playing in the states and brazil make pele's achievements less revered, I would say they do, not saying its right

 

[bluerobert]

I agree entirely and always argued so, but the question was does playing in the states and brazil make pele's achievements less revered, I would say they do, not saying its right

To be honest Iv always thought Peles stats were a little suspect, he played in poor leagues and for an international team that dominated world football in a period pretty much at a time when outside the top teams most smaller nations were still awful. I'm just saying a person can't win a league by themselves. Hence why Gerrard probably never won one. Doesn't mean he wasn't world class though

 

[Saint Domingo]

To be honest Iv always thought Peles stats were a little suspect, he played in poor leagues and for an international team that dominated world football in a period pretty much at a time when outside the top teams most smaller nations were still awful. I'm just saying a person can't win a league by themselves. Hence why Gerrard probably never won one. Doesn't mean he wasn't world class though

What was he world class at though? Didn't have the passing range or control of a Scholes Pirlo or Xavi, although he could hit the odd Hollywood pass. Wasn't prolific in terms of goals like Lampard, although he obviously had a knack for scoring important ones. Wasn't positionally or tactically astute hence why managers couldn't trust him in a flat four and created roles for him. Wasn't a world class tackler, but again could make a few statement hits.

He was a very physical fast player who had the character to impose his will on games for certain periods. Allied with this he had a very good shot from distance on his right foot and could hit good set pieces. He impacted certain big games for short period of times but there's no point rewriting history, even in the 'Gerrard final' Liverpool were largely outplayed by an average West Ham, not to mention being outplayed in most of the finals they were involved in, those they won (or drew but won on pens) and those they lost (that the media try and airbrush from history).

He could conjure up big moments and have a god like spell for 10 or 15 mins of a game v any opposition, but ultimately I don't think he was world class at anything (if the definition is being up with the best in the world for being good at something and doing it consistently). World class moments, but not a world class player.

Last comparison to make. Lampard also had a similar number, if not more of these moments. Huge goals in title run ins, goals in champions league finals, winners in FA cup finals, big goals at the World Cup and Euros. A trophy winner who won titles because his goalscoring from midfield was world class across 5 or 6 seasons. Yet he's always perceived as a lesser player than Gerrard. Why? Pure media bias built up over years of kopite fawning to become an entrenched view point.

Lampard's goalscoring and midfield influence was proven at the highest level time and time again yet England managers put this to one side in the hope of one magic Gerrard moment at a World Cup (which of course never materialised). Maybe we should have trusted multiple trophy winners like Scholes and Lampard to run midfield for England rather than playing second fiddle to a player who never showed consistency in anything.

 

[bluerobert]

What was he world class at though? Didn't have the passing range or control of a Scholes Pirlo or Xavi, although he could hit the odd Hollywood pass. Wasn't prolific in terms of goals like Lampard, although he obviously had a knack for scoring important ones. Wasn't positionally or tactically astute hence why managers couldn't trust him in a flat four and created roles for him. Wasn't a world class tackler, but again could make a few statement hits.

He was a very physical fast player who had the character to impose his will on games for certain periods. Allied with this he had a very good shot from distance on his right foot and could hit good set pieces. He impacted certain big games for short period of times but there's no point rewriting history, even in the 'Gerrard final' Liverpool were largely outplayed by an average West Ham, not to mention being outplayed in most of the finals they were involved in, those they won (or drew but won on pens) and those they lost (that the media try and airbrush from history).

He could conjure up big moments and have a god like spell for 10 or 15 mins of a game v any opposition, but ultimately I don't think he was world class at anything (if the definition is being up with the best in the world for being good at something and doing it consistently). World class moments, but not a world class player.

Last comparison to make. Lampard also had a similar number, if not more of these moments. Huge goals in title run ins, goals in champions league finals, winners in FA cup finals, big goals at the World Cup and Euros. A trophy winner who won titles because his goalscoring from midfield was world class across 5 or 6 seasons. Yet he's always perceived as a lesser player than Gerrard. Why? Pure media bias built up over years of kopite fawning to become an entrenched view point.

Lampard's goalscoring and midfield influence was proven at the highest level time and time again yet England managers put this to one side in the hope of one magic Gerrard moment at a World Cup (which of course never materialised). Maybe we should have trusted multiple trophy winners like Scholes and Lampard to run midfield for England rather than playing second fiddle to a player who never showed consistency in anything.

Sorry pal, just making some pancakes. I would say his overall contribution as a player and captain made him world class. I accept your opinion I just disagree. I suppose when you look at his statistics there isn't really one I could pick out and say he was better then any one player at. His all round game, ability to adapt to different roles in the team, leadership and as you say moments of magic put him in that category for me.

In an attempt to get it back on topic I would say the same reasons Ross could be world class if he keeps progressing the way he has this season

 

[Eric Djemba-Djemba]

How come we're discussing whether Gerrard was world class or not in the Ross Barkley thread?

 

[BlueToff]

outplaying Pogba, and people still moan at him, incredible

No end product la

 

[Carlito]

How come we're discussing whether Gerrard was world class or not in the Ross Barkley thread?

Because we are not numbers. We are free men.

 

[Billy Dean]

Messi hasn't exactly set the international scene alight. Does that make him not world class? What about Scholes, Giggs, Best etc? I wouldn't really hold not playing well for your national team as criteria for being world class or not. Past players like Pele, Maradonna, Cryuff all played in a time when there was a handful of top nations. Would they have been as effective in modern international football? We will never know. What about Klose, his international record is top draw but I wouldn't put him in the elite striker category

Messy and Scholes did a whole lot more on the international stage than him despite not setting anything alight. Don't get me wrong he will go down as a PL great or legend or whatever but not done enough at the highest level for me to be considered world class

 

[ijjysmith]

Boss Fadeley

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[Tel001]

Not world class though, failed repeatedly at int'l level. Euro 2012 was the only tournament in which he was half decent.

Messy doesn't really deliver at international level either. But he's considered to be one of, if not the greatest player ever