Right, so these match winners i've been banging on about...

[Guest]

Match winners doesn't have to score goals. They win you games because they can take the game by the scruff of the next and dictate it. Torres and Gerrard are consistent scorers but Alonso, Babel, Benayoun and Kewell are also match winners in that sense, in that they have ability to win games. We discussed how we missed Xabi recently, precisely because he can control games and makes us play better. That's why I would call him a match winner.

[desertscouser]

Match winners doesn't have to score goals. They win you games because they can take the game by the scruff of the next and dictate it. Torres and Gerrard are consistent scorers but Alonso, Babel, Benayoun and Kewell are also match winners in that sense, in that they have ability to win games. We discussed how we missed Xabi recently, precisely because he can control games and makes us play better. That's why I would call him a match winner.

I disagree.

Since I've been a football fan, listening to managers, commentators, football fans etc a 'match winner' is a player who consistently scores match winning goals, sometimes out of nothing. You can put another spin on it if you want but what we're talking about in this thread are match winners who score goals such as Torres and Gerrard.

Fredo, I sometimes think that you just like to play devil's advocate. You don't like to hear anything negative about LFC even when at times the assessment is based on reality. You find it frustrating debating with DJS but I have to admit, at times I find that debating football with you is just as frustrating.

[Guest]

I disagree.

Since I've been a football fan, listening to managers, commentators, football fans etc a 'match winner' is a player who consistently scores match winning goals, sometimes out of nothing. You can put another spin on it if you want but what we're talking about in this thread are match winners who score goals such as Torres and Gerrard.

Fredo, I sometimes think that you just like to play devil's advocate. You don't like to hear anything negative about LFC even when at times the assessment is based on reality. You find it frustrating debating with DJS but I have to admit, at times I find that debating football with you is just as frustrating.

Well, we're just stubborn that's all. I probably see football differently and I'm the type of man who will back the manager until he's no more ours. It's not blind faith but it's support. I find it very frustrating to discuss semantics with DJS and you because you play to your own rules without acknowledging that it's all relative.

For me, match winners don't have to score goals. Lucas won us the derby without scoring. Babel and Torres won us the game against Fulham (albeit Torres scored) but Babel was equally important because he started stretching the Fulham defence and pulling them all over the place by giving us more width and running with the ball.

It's just the difference of opinions and the way that you people 'tag' certain posters for disagreeing with you. DJS likes to take the piss and you've once treated me as an idiot for having a different opinion. I find that extremely frustrating also and out of order in a discussion between so called adults.

I understand both your points and both are valid ones. No more no less than mine. Just accept that it's not a definite rule and that football is most of the time about opinions.

[desertscouser]

Well, we're just stubborn that's all. I probably see football differently and I'm the type of man who will back the manager until he's no more ours. It's not blind faith but it's support. I find it very frustrating to discuss semantics with DJS and you because you play to your own rules without acknowledging that it's all relative.

There aren't many people here that don't back Rafa. In fact it's a very small minority. But there are a few of us who are critical of some of his decisions...YET WE STILL BACK HIM. But your statement is yet another strange one. 'You'd back the manager until he's no longer ours?' Think about it, that's crazy. So even if the team is sinking fast and the manager has lost the plot (ala GH) you'd back him?

For me, match winners don't have to score goals. Lucas won us the derby without scoring. Babel and Torres won us the game against Fulham (albeit Torres scored) but Babel was equally important because he started stretching the Fulham defence and pulling them all over the place by giving us more width and running with the ball.

Lucas did not win us the derby but he definitely played a major part in it. And your Babel example was hardly a match winning performance. Citing these two specific examples hardly warrants saying that these players are consistent 'match winners' '

It's just the difference of opinions and the way that you people 'tag' certain posters for disagreeing with you. DJS likes to take the piss and you've once treated me as an idiot for having a different opinion. I find that extremely frustrating also and out of order in a discussion between so called adults.

What do you mean by 'the way you people tag certain posters for disagreeing with you??' I don't tag any posters but for some reason I tend to disagree with the majority of your football posts. It's nothing personal.

I understand both your points and both are valid ones. No more no less than mine. Just accept that it's not a definite rule and that football is most of the time about opinions.

Of course it's not a general rule but in this case stating Leiva and Babel as 'match winners' is just too way off the mark and I'm sure most would agree with that. As I said earlier, it's really nothing personal but I just disagree with most of your footie posts

[Craig_H]

Do you not consider Pepe a 'consistent world class match winner' then?

I dont consider any goalkeeper to be a matchwinner, by virtue of the fact that regardless of what a keeper does, to win a game, someone still has to score for you.

[Craig_H]

Well, we're just stubborn that's all. I probably see football differently and I'm the type of man who will back the manager until he's no more ours. It's not blind faith but it's support. I find it very frustrating to discuss semantics with DJS and you because you play to your own rules without acknowledging that it's all relative.

For me, match winners don't have to score goals. Lucas won us the derby without scoring. Babel and Torres won us the game against Fulham (albeit Torres scored) but Babel was equally important because he started stretching the Fulham defence and pulling them all over the place by giving us more width and running with the ball.

It's just the difference of opinions and the way that you people 'tag' certain posters for disagreeing with you. DJS likes to take the piss and you've once treated me as an idiot for having a different opinion. I find that extremely frustrating also and out of order in a discussion between so called adults.

I understand both your points and both are valid ones. No more no less than mine. Just accept that it's not a definite rule and that football is most of the time about opinions.

If a non-scoring "matchwinner" does all he can, but no one can find a goal, is the match won?

[Reece]

But surely no one can ever be a guaranteed "matchwinner", only a potential one........

[Craig_H]

But surely no one can ever be a guaranteed "matchwinner", only a potential one........

Nothing's guaranteed, who mentioned guarantees?

But some players DO produce something to win you a match, on a regular basis. This type of knack is priceless, and these are the players who i'm on about. Gerrard, Torres, Fabregas, Rooney, Ronaldo, Tevez, Drogba, Lampard....they all fall into this category.

[Reece]

Nothing's guaranteed, who mentioned guarantees?

But some players DO produce something to win you a match, on a regular basis. This type of knack is priceless, and these are the players who i'm on about. Gerrard, Torres, Fabregas, Rooney, Ronaldo, Tevez, Drogba, Lampard....they all fall into this category.

But are you not saying that they have to score a goal to be a match winner or have I completely lost the point of this debate?

[Guest]

But are you not saying that they have to score a goal to be a match winner or have a completely lost the point of this debate?

I was thinking about a reply to his question. I'll say no more now.

[bonzai]

I'll tell you what.......there's some ****ing idiots in here these days...........not meaning anyone in particular.....

[Craig_H]

But are you not saying that they have to score a goal to be a match winner or have I completely lost the point of this debate?

Well to win a match, you obviously need to score. Nobody is GUARANTEED to score, but those type of players do it on a regular basis, and therefore meet the criteria, IMO.

[Craig_H]

I was thinking about a reply to his question. I'll say no more now.

Better to let people just ASSUME you're clueless, than to post and remove all doubt.

[Reece]

Well to win a match, you obviously need to score. Nobody is GUARANTEED to score, but those type of players do it on a regular basis, and therefore meet the criteria, IMO.

On a general basis I would argue that you don't have to score to be a match winner as such. A winger could come on for example and produce a dazzling display -setting up a goal or two. I would argue that he was the match winner, not necessarily the player who sticks the ball away.
But to be honest I think this argument could be as futile as a discussion on who is and isn't World Class - as it is all fairly subjective.

[Parr_Zee]

Well to win a match, you obviously need to score. Nobody is GUARANTEED to score, but those type of players do it on a regular basis, and therefore meet the criteria, IMO.

But if someone creates some sublime peices of skill and craft every week and puts the ball on a plate for others to score ... who is the match-winner?

I.e. the match winner doesnt have to be the person who scores.