• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Suarez > Torres (at his peak)

Forums Unread posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
peterhague said:
1. I have
2. He wasn't among those players mentioned
3. I never saw him play for us at anything like his best
Click to expand...

It's shocking how you rate a player he played for us for a couple of seasons at his peak and left is ahead of a player ranked 4th on the list of players who shook the Kop.

Fowler in his 36 goal season was every bit the player Torres was and twice the finisher.
 
Lads, Peters allowed to think torres was our best striker. He's not gonna be swayed.

We're not talking to someone who only watched us for 5 years. He knows his stuff
 
I disagree. Torres at his best was a class above Fowler at his best. I don't see what's so shocking about that opinion, even if you disagree with it.
 
Fabio said:
Lads, Peters allowed to think torres was our best striker. He's not gonna be swayed.

We're not talking to someone who only watched us for 5 years. He knows his stuff
Click to expand...

Well, I might be swayed on the Suarez question, if he carries on like this for much longer. Even now there's so little in it that it basically just comes down to personal taste. But I'd definitely maintain that Torres was a better player than Fowler, Owen et al.
 
peterhague said:
1. Yes, I am *seriously* saying that Torres was better than Rush, Fowler, and Owen. Fowler couldn't even get in the England team at the very peak of his powers. He was a cracking player and a club legend, but never in Torres's class. Rush and Owen were both better finishers than him (although IMO not during those golden years of 2007-10) but not close in terms of overall ability.

2. His goals per season don't persuade, because accountant though I am, I don't take an accountant's approach to analysing a player's qualities. Figures are figures. But, there is, y'know, *more to it*.

3. I'm glad I make you laugh. It's nice to be able to return a favour. Those examples you give don't undermine my argument. They are all players of undoubted class and the rarest of ability. For one reason or another they never went on to become world class performers, whereas Torres did. Let's say they lacked the application to reach his heights (for the sake of argument): that doesn't mean they never had the class in the first place.

4. The details of Ronaldinho's career isn't the point. The point is that for a significant part of it he hasn't been close to the player he was for Barcelona, and the reason for that is a fucking lot more complex than him simply having a burst of good form in the mid 2000s.
Click to expand...

1. Fowler couldn't get into the team because of Alan Shearer - not because of his talent. It's odd, people are accusing various posters of revisionism, and here is one poster essentially saying Fowler's 3 year run from 94-96 'wasn't that special' (71 league goals in 112 games, not to mention he hit 20 league goals twice, and 30+ total goals in each season) ... I mean come on ... Torres' class must be Messi'esque if you've forgotten how shearly dominating, outrageous and gifted God was. As for Rush not being as good as Torres finishing wise, he hit 30 league goals TWICE ...

2. Arthur Anderson n' all.

3. Torres was a world class performer for 3 years, and that's really about it. I remember watching him at Madrid and he was never even half the player he was for Liverpool. If the arguement now for becoming a 'world class performer' is that of doing something for 3 years, what do you consider David Villa? or Soldado? Thought so ...

4. Ronaldinho, as I said earlier, peaked during those 4 years ... He had excellent seasons (by regular standards, 17 goals for Milan in one season, 20+ for some Brailian team) after that, Torres has not done that (and it's his 3rd year now away from Liverpool). So the point is clear - Ronaldinho has shown he's capable of being dominant, albeit not at the level during that 3 year stretch, but Torres has not. So the example, in my opinion, only solidfied my case that that world class 3 year burst by Torres was not what he was as a player, and not what he'll be remembered (unless your theory is right, and when he moves on next year, he'll score 20+ goals in La Liga, or Serie A or maybe Pep's Bayern).

Andy is pretty much spot on though, though I'd add that what sets Suarez apart is he never puts his head down and tries to win every second he spends on the pitch.
 
LeTallecWiz said:
1. Fowler couldn't get into the team because of Alan Shearer - not because of his talent. It's odd, people are accusing various posters of revisionism, and here is one poster essentially saying Fowler's 3 year run from 94-96 'wasn't that special' (71 league goals in 112 games, not to mention he hit 20 league goals twice, and 30+ total goals in each season) ... I mean come on ... Torres' class must be Messi'esque if you've forgotten how shearly dominating, outrageous and gifted God was. As for Rush not being as good as Torres finishing wise, he hit 30 league goals TWICE ...

2. Arthur Anderson n' all.

3. Torres was a world class performer for 3 years, and that's really about it. I remember watching him at Madrid and he was never even half the player he was for Liverpool. If the arguement now for becoming a 'world class performer' is that of doing something for 3 years, what do you consider David Villa? or Soldado? Thought so ...

4. Ronaldinho, as I said earlier, peaked during those 4 years ... He had excellent seasons (by regular standards, 17 goals for Milan in one season, 20+ for some Brailian team) after that, Torres has not done that (and it's his 3rd year now away from Liverpool). So the point is clear - Ronaldinho has shown he's capable of being dominant, albeit not at the level during that 3 year stretch, but Torres has not. So the example, in my opinion, only solidfied my case that that world class 3 year burst by Torres was not what he was as a player, and not what he'll be remembered (unless your theory is right, and when he moves on next year, he'll score 20+ goals in La Liga, or Serie A or maybe Pep's Bayern).

Andy is pretty much spot on though, though I'd add that what sets Suarez apart is he never puts his head down and tries to win every second he spends on the pitch.
Click to expand...


1. I didn't say his run during that time 'wasn't that special'. In fact, I never referred to it at all. I haven't forgotten how good Fowler was. I didn't say Rush wasn't as good a finisher as Torres. Congratulations on being wrong 3 times in one paragraph.

2. Pass

3. David Villa is a world class player. I've never seen Soldado play. What's your point?

4. What theory? I've never suggested that he can get back to his best. Those days are gone, IMO almost entirely due to injuries. Heck, I thought that when we sold him. So *your* theory therefore rests on him being a poorer player at Atletico than he was for us. This seems largely based (so far) on his goal return. I've already put forward several possible reasons why he didn't perform as well in that regard. Other posters have also mentioned that he often played deeper or wider in those days. Again, I find it hard to say because I never saw him then. What is beyond doubt, though, was that he had a reputation in the game far above what his bare goalscoring record would imply. He wasn't a Michu-esque signing: he was considered a world class player in waiting when we signed him - that must've been based on something.
 
peterhague said:
1. I didn't say his run during that time 'wasn't that special'. In fact, I never referred to it at all. I haven't forgotten how good Fowler was. I didn't say Rush wasn't as good a finisher as Torres. Congratulations on being wrong 3 times in one paragraph.

2. Pass

3. David Villa is a world class player. I've never seen Soldado play. What's your point?

4. What theory? I've never suggested that he can get back to his best. Those days are gone, IMO almost entirely due to injuries. Heck, I thought that when we sold him. So *your* theory therefore rests on him being a poorer player at Atletico than he was for us. This seems largely based (so far) on his goal return. I've already put forward several possible reasons why he didn't perform as well in that regard. Other posters have also mentioned that he often played deeper or wider in those days. Again, I find it hard to say because I never saw him then. What is beyond doubt, though, was that he had a reputation in the game far above what his bare goalscoring record would imply. He wasn't a Michu-esque signing: he was considered a world class player in waiting when we signed him - that must've been based on something.
Click to expand...

1- you obviously have forgotten our outrageously talented Fowler was, and even ridculed it by saying 'he couldn't get into the England team' (at least England didn't adopt a 4-6-0 with him on the bench though, eh?). So I guess it's tough to take you seriously when anyone who's watched Fowler in his pomp (on a team that wasn't only geared for him, or as good as Torres') put Torres that far ahead of him.

2. Acknowledged.

3. Well, Villa has been doing it for far longer than 3 years (he had a run, I think, in La Liga of 10 years with 15+ league goals) ... now, I dont' think he's ever been as dominating as Torres was in his 3 years, but what player is a 'better' world class player? That's what I'm getting at - how you're judging Torres and his place in our team based on that short spurt (which makes me realize how insane it was we never won a trophy for him).

4. I agree with this - he was a world class player IN WAITING. Rafa/Liverpool made him that. But he had never reached those heights, or even come close, be it as a lone striker, or out wide, or when he partnered Aguero etc ... The talent was there but he only really used it to it's fullest for 3 seasons ... So that goes back to my original post - was that his 'form' and was his class 'world class potential,' or was that his class shining through and his form was what we've seen elsewhere.
 
I haven't forgotten how talented Fowler was. It's not to ridicule him to say that he couldn't get into the England team, it's a simple statement of fact. The truth is that he never really even got close to being an imortant player for England, won few caps and scored few goals. Was Shearer a clearly superior player to Torres? I don't think he was. Fowler was wonderful but if you watch that compilation of Torres's goals it's pretty obvious he was not the all round talent that Torres was.
 
peterhague said:
I haven't forgotten how talented Fowler was. It's not to ridicule him to say that he couldn't get into the England team, it's a simple statement of fact. The truth is that he never really even got close to being an imortant player for England, won few caps and scored few goals. Was Shearer a clearly superior player to Torres? I don't think he was. Fowler was wonderful but if you watch that compilation of Torres's goals it's pretty obvious he was not the all round talent that Torres was.
Click to expand...

So now being an 'important player for England' is why Torres is better than Fowler. That he didn't get a chance isn't because of his talent, it's for reasons (I'm guessing) that he didn't fit into the 4-4-2 they played often. Considering how little Fowler played for England (and how often he was a sub), his goal per game return isn't half bad (bloody close to Torres in his 101 caps). Shearer was a far better goalscorer than Torres will be. Wasn't a better player overall, but a far better goalscorer.

I watched the compliation of Torres' goals twice in the last 24 hours. It's awesome. It's kinda obvious you've either forgotten Robbie's wide arra of goals - he scored every single way. Unfortunately, his 100 goals video isn't on youtube but a small clip just to highlight that despite him not having the technical skill of a Torres, his ability to find the net from anywhere on the pitch was far superior to that of Torres's:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI1OxOkPq94


I wonder what the board thinks of this ... Time to satisfy Ross.
 
You keep telling me that I've forgotten how good Fowler is, seemingly based on my opinion that Torres was better. Please stop doing so.

I've watched Fowler's '100' often and reently, and don't need any reminding of it.
 
Torres - 85 games - 50 goals
Joined in August, part of a strong squad run by a CL-winning manager and supported by a world-class, peak of his game, Gerrard in an attacking formation built around Torres.

Suarez- 85 games - 43 goals
Joined in Feb, part of a mediocre squad run by a returning-to-the-game manager with a confused attacking ideology (with the lumbering Carroll being the supposed showpiece for £35m), got into all sorts of trouble, got banned, gets booed wherever he plays and derided at every turn by the press, yet is only 7 goals short of Judas in spite of everything.

I'm saying Suarez, particularly because I believe Liverpool (Rafa) made Torres what he was during that golden period but right now I think Suarez is making us.
 
After both of their careers will be over, this will not be even close. Suarez will be remembered as one of the great players of his time. Torres as a 50-million flop who had 2 good seasons before fading into mediocrity.

Correction: 2 great seasons. He was one of my favorite players then. But he evidently lacks the mental strength to overcome adversity, which is what is required for someone to stay on top - and something Suarez has in abundance.
 
rurikbird said:
After both of their careers will be over, this will not be even close. Suarez will be remembered as one of the great players of his time. Torres as a 50-million flop who had 2 good seasons before fading into mediocrity.

Correction: 2 great seasons. He was one of my favorite players then. But he evidently lacks the mental strength to overcome adversity, which is what is required for someone to stay on top - and something Suarez has in abundance.
Click to expand...

And decent hamstrings. You cannot pin-point Torres' decline solely on his lack of mental strength.

Suarez is more likely to stay at the 'top' - if that's where he is - for longer because of his tendency to never get injured. Long may that continue.
 
gene hughes said:
1. Torres
2. Fowler
3. Suarez
4. Owen
5. Kuyt
6. Collymore
7. Garcia
8. Bellamy
9. Heskey
10. Crouch
11. Litmanen
12. Anelka
13. Babel
14. Saunders
15. Riedle
16. Carroll
17. Baros
18. Spanish bloke name began with M, slower than a constipated glacier
19. Cisse
20. Camara
21. N'Gog
22. Sinama-Pongolle
23. Mellor
24. Jovanovic
25. Le Tallec
26. Meijer
27. Dundee
28. Voronin
29. Diouf

Post-Rush era means strikers who played for us after Rush played his last ever game for us.
Click to expand...

I'd put Riedle, Baros, Camara and Cisse ahead of Babel, easily.
 
Neville on both

When I look at Suarez I see one hell of a footballer, a player whose name you can be sure will be dominating United’s preparations. This is no show-pony. This is a player who doesn’t know when he’s beaten. In that respect he’s better than Fernando Torres, who you feel might get despondent when things aren’t going well. Not Suarez. He’d be in your face, scrapping every minute of the game, even if all hope was lost."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom