Jump to content

Most Overrated Player in History


Zatman

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Tomaszk said:

Still Beckham.

Has to be Beckham. If he wasn’t pretty he wouldn’t even be in the conversation for best midfielders. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob182 said:

I have lots of friends who played for France with him, and they all agree with me that he is exactly the 51st best PL player. No more.

What kind of comment is that? 

Was it a dig at me knowing players that played with him because I work in football?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

So . . . if a person disagrees with the tenor of that assessment, that would be the evidence that he was over-rated, no? 

Every player that anyone names in this thread is going to be garlanded, have a load of trophies and titles, have a legion of people who rate him. If they didn't, they wouldn't qualify for the thread! That's the whole point of it.

I know the point of the thread. And to say Cantona was overrated and is not in the top 50 PL players is insane. Not a single ex pro out of the 100 or so I know and work with would agree with that. And they played with him and against himm

And not a single Man U fan who watched him play would say that either.

 

Edited by GlobalVillan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GlobalVillan said:

What kind of comment is that? 

Was it a dig at me knowing players that played with him because I work in football?

It’s just a joke. It was more a dig at the idea that footballers opinions should hold some weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GlobalVillan said:

I know the point of the thread. And to say Cantona was overrated is insane.

OK, but if you understand the point of the thread, why add stuff that's about the esteem players are held in, like being in a Hall of Fame? Or a list of titles they won? 

You can argue that *you* think they were great, and hence not over-rated, but pointing out *other people* think they were great proves nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

It’s just a joke. It was more a dig at the idea that footballers opinions should hold some weight.

The opinions of players that played with him and against him (or any other player) hold a hell of a lot of weight. What a crazy thing to suggest they don't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

OK, but if you understand the point of the thread, why add stuff that's about the esteem players are held in, like being in a Hall of Fame? Or a list of titles they won? 

You can argue that *you* think they were great, and hence not over-rated, but pointing out *other people* think they were great proves nothing. 

Because people saying things like "they were poor or not very good" etc can be proven demonstrably wrong by such metrics. 

People aren't just saying overrated they have taken it further to say they were not very good etc... 

Players like that don't win all those trophies and accolades. 

And Cantona not in the top 50 is just cookoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GlobalVillan said:

The opinions of players that played with him and against him (or any other player) hold a hell of a lot of weight. What a crazy thing to suggest they don't. 

Unless they’ve played against *all of the other players* and can form a direct comparison, then yeah, it doesn’t really hold a lot of weight. Crazy to suggest it does, when you think about it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GlobalVillan said:

The opinions of players that played with him and against him (or any other player) hold a hell of a lot of weight. What a crazy thing to suggest they don't. 

But again that's why he's overrated - because he's a snap shot in time and at that time he stood out because of where English football was, I have no doubt that a defender playing in 1994 thought he was the bollocks 

It went on to overtake him and leave him behind 

Players who played with him and against him didn't then play against Henry or Ronaldo or Drogba or Rooney or Suarez players that were all better than him 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, villa4europe said:

But again that's why he's overrated - because he's a snap shot in time and at that time he stood out because of where English football was, I have no doubt that a defender playing in 1994 thought he was the bollocks 

It went on to overtake him and leave him behind 

Players who played with him and against him didn't then play against Henry or Ronaldo or Drogba or Rooney or Suarez players that were all better than him 

Drogba and Suarez? Better than Cantona? Gee whizz. We are way off on our views on this one.

Let's leave this one here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GlobalVillan said:

Because people saying things like "they were poor or not very good" etc can be proven demonstrably wrong by such metrics. 

People aren't just saying overrated they have taken it further to say they were not very good etc... 

Players like that don't win all those trophies and accolades. 

And Cantona not in the top 50 is just cookoo.

Here's the scenario:

SCENE: A forum thread named 'Most Over-rated Player In History'

Poster 1: I think too many people rate Player A. He was over-rated.

Poster 2: No, you're wrong about that! Player A was inducted into a Hall of Fame, and loads of people say he was brilliant!

It's a non-sequitur. 

 

 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

Unless they’ve played against *all of the other players* and can form a direct comparison, then yeah, it doesn’t really hold a lot of weight. Crazy to suggest it does, when you think about it.

But people are rating players from different eras! The only way you can rate a player is on the basis of what he did against his contemporaries. You can't say Puskas was overrated because Ronaldo was better. Bobby Moore rating Pele is irrelevant because he didn't play against Zlatan.

Makes no sense.

Edited by GlobalVillan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HanoiVillan said:

Here's the scenario:

SCENE: A forum thread named 'Most Over-rated Player In History'

Poster 1: I think too many people rate Player A. He was over-rated.

Poster 2: No, you're wrong about that! Player A was inducted into a Hall of Fame, and loads of people say he was brilliant!

It's a non-sequitur. 

 

 

That's not what non-sequitir means but ok. 

I can say that Cantona not being in the top 50 CLEARLY shows he isn't overrated. 

Check mate 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GlobalVillan said:

That's not what non-sequitir means but ok. 

Yes it is. 

'a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.'

Poster 2's response does not logically follow from Poster 1's claim. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, GlobalVillan said:

Because people saying things like "they were poor or not very good" etc can be proven demonstrably wrong by such metrics. 

People aren't just saying overrated they have taken it further to say they were not very good etc... 

Players like that don't win all those trophies and accolades. 

And Cantona not in the top 50 is just cookoo.

Nope you’re just jumping down everyone’s throats who dares to say they think a player isn’t as good as many suggest- which is the exact point of the thread

Rather than slagging off everyone else’s suggestions, why don’t you put one forward yourself? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said:

Yes it is. 

'a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.'

Poster 2's response does not logically follow from Poster 1's claim. 

No there's an equivocation fallacy.

But anyway, the thread is a paradox and I pointed out why. 

The second someone calls a player overrated it means that they don't rate them. Ergo, the player is NOT overrated.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JPJCB said:

Nope you’re just jumping down everyone’s throats who dares to say they think a player isn’t as good as many suggest- which is the exact point of the thread

Rather than slagging off everyone else’s suggestions, why don’t you put one forward yourself? 

I have not slagged anyone off. Wtf are you talking about???

But Cantona not being in the top 50 players is just patently madness. Some things are actually objective and that's one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said Cantona wasn't very good, he quite clearly was

I said that he shouldn't be in a conversation for best PL ever 

And then added that he does well to get in the PL conversation seeing as no one ever will drag him in to a conversation about best in Europe or the world because he did so little outside of the PL 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, villa4europe said:

I never said Cantona wasn't very good, he quite clearly was

I said that he shouldn't be in a conversation for best PL ever 

And then added that he does well to get in the PL conversation seeing as no one ever will drag him in to a conversation about best in Europe or the world because he did so little outside of the PL 

You said he wouldn't be in the top 50 in the PL. I responded to that.

He clearly, CLEARLY was 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â