Aaron Ramsey ----Arsenal's best player

First topic message reminder :

To start with, I truly believe Rambo is Arsenals best player. I think he is future captain, talisman and regular team of the season contender if this season's form is anything to go by.

Having seen him out of the side for a portion of the season I can clearly see the difference he brings to the team. I would liken his movement when we have the ball to a younger Lampard or Stevie G. He provides am option to break the lines players like Ozil, Cazorla and Rosicky fail to do, preferring to take ball to feet rather than give and go.

I would like Wenger to build a team around Ramsay in the same way Liverpool have done with Gerrard.

What is other people's opinion on the quality of ramsay, his best position and if you think building the team to suit his style of play would be a good way to move forward. All opinions are welcome and I really would like supporters of other teams to voice their opinion as these should be less rose tinted than mine.

Surely you meant Sergio Ramos?

I was thinking of centre backs in the premier league that had scored a few tbh (although several for him are in his own net).

Kurt N. Jurqa wrote:Of course he did, but that's part of the argument I'm raising, goals for a CM are a bonus, a CM's main focus is passing and tackling rather than goals and assists, that's the focus of the strikers, wingers and attacking midfielders.
There's a clue in the name 'central midfielder', generally players in the centre of the pitch shouldn't be relied upon to be banging them in but instead be controlling the game.

Shall we base best centre back in the world on which scored the most goals too, step forward Martin Skrtel!

A bonus hahaha is tackling for a midfielder a bonus as well hahah

Ramsey scored more goals so based on that 1 stat alone he has had a better season.

A CM does not just focus on passing and tackling, it depends on that CM's role in the team and clearly Aaron Ramsey's role is to get forward and attack and score goals.

There's only one winner when arguing with an idiot so I'll move on at this point.

Kurt N. Jurqa wrote:There's only one winner when arguing with an idiot so I'll move on at this point.

Not my fault you are wrong.......

You can argue all you want that CM's should all be judged on passing and tackling and I will continue to say you are wrong because each teams CMs play differently and have different roles eg steven gerrard, pirlo, alonso are all deep lying CM who protect the back 4 so they make lots of tackles and receive the ball deep so they are usually under no pressure when they have the ball and thus their passing accuracy will be higher as they have more time on the ball to make a pass however Ramsey is a CM who gets forward and gets into the box and is expected to contribute with goals just like yaya toure and paul scholes etc and so makes less tackles as it is not his role as his role is to get forward and not protect the back 4.

AberdeenSteve wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Jesus Christ, this was his break out year? How do you know that? He played 20 games, that's it. Not a full season, I'd rather take players that I know can perform over a full season, we don't know that he can do that. Saying he's the best midfielder in the premier league is a stretch, the best in the world should get you your own padded cell.

No saying Modric is the best central midfielder in the world after riding the pine for a couple of seasons deserves a padded cell if we are handing out suites in the looney bin. I have argued much crazier propositions and plan to in the future.

Mate, you are watching the wrong sport if you think Modric being better than Ramsey is crazy.

Ramsey has had one good season. Modric did it at Tottenham and has now adjusted his game to run a Madrid side full of superstars.

Modric is the reason Madrid had their swagger back.

Modric is at best the 5th best player on Real Madrid. Ronaldo, Bale, Benzema, and Di Maria all are better and had better seasons. Not just statistically impact on their teams. Modric is a good player just simply not the reason they won the European title. He is at best at best the 5th best player and in no way the best central midfielder in the world. Ramsey meanwhile was head and shoulders the best player on his team this year. Something that you really can never say about Modric.

Kurt N. Jurqa wrote:There's only one winner when arguing with an idiot so I'll move on at this point.

Yeah exactly, move on when you having nothing to say and try to tell us that players who score less and assist less than Ramsey have had better years because they completed a slightly higher percentage of sideways passes which outweighs Ramsey's goals and assist advantage you have proven that you aren't worth discussing anything with. The same people who moan that we can't measure Ramsey's stats to discern that he had a better season (goals and assists psh those are meaningless) instead bring up statistics about completed pass percentage which is much more meaningless. If anyone has proven himself an idiot it is the guy who claims Ramsey is the 18th best player at his position in the world. Hilarious stuff really, look in the mirror before you throw out insults.

Serious like arguing with children, goals and assists are meaningless the true measure of a midfielder is how many times in a row he can complete sideways and backwards passes that don't amount to anything. I know when I think of the great midfielders of all time I remember the game where Scholes completed 6 straight sideways passes, the man was a genius. When he passed it back to his center half and he got the ball I was cheering my socks off now that is a legend. Statistics like goals and assists don't matter but pass completion percentage makes you a great Central midfielder.

Kevin Strootman-35 league appearances 6 goals and 6 assists. Wait now we will hear that his role is different although he plays in exactly the same box to box role as Ramsey. His role isn't to score, isn't to get assists as a central midfielder his job is to make sure he completes a high percentage of passes. The guy has half the production of Ramsey in a weaker league with 15 more league matches. And as for impact on a team, Ramsey's club won a trophy with Ramsey scoring the game winner, Strootman's didn't. Now we will find out Strootman is better because HH's superior English intellect upon viewing him determines that he is better and therefore he is. Regardless of not winning a trophy, not scoring as many goals, getting as many assists, playing in a weaker league, and playing in 15 more matches. He is more instrumental because I say so and you are American.

Strootman the second best player on Roma after Gervinho is better than Ramsey, there is that superior English intellect for you.

We all have to recognize that all midfielders are different, and their roles mean their dominating stat line will be different. A guy like Iniesta will never set the goals and assists chart alight, because these are the guys who are what Doc Rivers likes to call "The Pass Behind the Pass" type players. They take players out which decongests the attacking third. This in turn frees up the more attacking players to have a clearer path to goal. That said, football isnt Ballet, contemporary dancing, it is like nearly all major sports, still a stat dominated game. The currency in football is goals, and as such I tend to rate midfielders who score goals a little higher (except for obvious exceptions). A guy who scores goals, has scored goals. A facilitator-type player gives you the opportunity to create chances to score goals. I'd rather have goals. A bird in the hands and all that.

Bless you Socal, you in fact know less than I gave you credit for initially, I do wonder if you've watched any of these players play. Ramsey isn't a box to box midfielder, he's far too attacking for that, a role that effectively died out with Keane and Vieira. I suppose Ramsey had a better season than those two ever did because he scored more.

I think Aaron Ramsey, who appears to be a very humble lad, would be almost embarrassed to be called the best central midfielder in the world after an iniury-hit season.

socal1976 wrote:

Kurt N. Jurqa wrote:There's only one winner when arguing with an idiot so I'll move on at this point.

Yeah exactly, move on when you having nothing to say and try to tell us that players who score less and assist less than Ramsey have had better years because they completed a slightly higher percentage of sideways passes which outweighs Ramsey's goals and assist advantage you have proven that you aren't worth discussing anything with. The same people who moan that we can't measure Ramsey's stats to discern that he had a better season (goals and assists psh those are meaningless) instead bring up statistics about completed pass percentage which is much more meaningless. If anyone has proven himself an idiot it is the guy who claims Ramsey is the 18th best player at his position in the world. Hilarious stuff really, look in the mirror before you throw out insults.

Serious like arguing with children, goals and assists are meaningless the true measure of a midfielder is how many times in a row he can complete sideways and backwards passes that don't amount to anything. I know when I think of the great midfielders of all time I remember the game where Scholes completed 6 straight sideways passes, the man was a genius. When he passed it back to his center half and he got the ball I was cheering my socks off now that is a legend. Statistics like goals and assists don't matter but pass completion percentage makes you a great Central midfielder.

18th was perhaps harsh, but the statement was less idiotic than that of stating he's the best centre midfielder in the world.
You do also realise on the comment regarding sidewards/backwards passing that Ramsey has a lower forward pass rate than Modric and the crabesque Carrick?

He would, because he's the best player that ever lived and this debate is beneath his station.

One good year and he's better than players 'on' Real Madrid.

You can keep Ramsey and I'll go give a cake and a handshake to Yaya.

In what world is being Madrids fifth best player a bad thing? Those four players better than him would all be head and shoulders above anyone at Arsenal, so it's a false comparison, is Carrick better than Fernandinho because he's our best midfielder and he isn't City's?

socal1976 wrote: Serious like arguing with children, goals and assists are meaningless the true measure of a midfielder is how many times in a row he can complete sideways and backwards passes that don't amount to anything. I know when I think of the great midfielders of all time I remember the game where Scholes completed 6 straight sideways passes, the man was a genius. When he passed it back to his center half and he got the ball I was cheering my socks off now that is a legend. Statistics like goals and assists don't matter but pass completion percentage makes you a great Central midfielder.

I think that just shows Socal's level of football knowledge: zilch.

Oh now please teach me what opinions I should have about football. I just can't get the hang of the stats don't matter and my subjective opinion is right criteria you guys are using. If it is based on stats Ramsey on per minute basis out performed all of the players you are ranking better than him in two highly important categories. If it is based on impact than he hit the game winning goal in Arsenal's first trophy in 9 years. And when he was healthy we lead the league while alot of our stars were out injured, and then when he got hurt our season went to crap. Sorry, Ramsey plays a very similar position and role than players you guys listed and he has better numbers and a bigger impact than all of them.

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote: Serious like arguing with children, goals and assists are meaningless the true measure of a midfielder is how many times in a row he can complete sideways and backwards passes that don't amount to anything. I know when I think of the great midfielders of all time I remember the game where Scholes completed 6 straight sideways passes, the man was a genius. When he passed it back to his center half and he got the ball I was cheering my socks off now that is a legend. Statistics like goals and assists don't matter but pass completion percentage makes you a great Central midfielder.

I think that just shows Socal's level of football knowledge: zilch.

You do understand sarcasm Duty I don't have to explain that to your pubscent mind do I?

The toys have been thrown out the pram again, all hail the mighty Arsenal and their undeniably great squad.

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote: Serious like arguing with children, goals and assists are meaningless the true measure of a midfielder is how many times in a row he can complete sideways and backwards passes that don't amount to anything. I know when I think of the great midfielders of all time I remember the game where Scholes completed 6 straight sideways passes, the man was a genius. When he passed it back to his center half and he got the ball I was cheering my socks off now that is a legend. Statistics like goals and assists don't matter but pass completion percentage makes you a great Central midfielder.

I think that just shows Socal's level of football knowledge: zilch.

You do understand sarcasm Duty I don't have to explain that to your pubscent mind do I?

Does his mind smell like a pint of beer?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The toys have been thrown out the pram again, all hail the mighty Arsenal and their undeniably great squad.

better than your Poopie squad

Fellaini scored more goals the season before than Xavi and Iniesta combined, on your reasoning he's one of the best midfielders going too then.

Ramsey is a very good midfielder, but he has only really shown that form across half a season. He didn't even make PFA team of the year this year so it's hard to suggest he should be considered the best midfielder in the world, when it appears he's not even considered the best in the Premier League right now.

Socal, can you not appreciate that while goals and assists are important, on their own cannot be the basis of fact, they do not tell the full story, just like passing and tackling statistics do not. It is quite clear that your Arsenal bias is clouding your judgement, Aaron Ramsey has never been nominated for the Ballon D'Or, he's never made Teams of the Year, he's never been talked about as one of the best players in the world. You're fighting an argument with basically the entire footballing world.

If Aaron Ramsey can keep up the form which so far he has only shown over half a season, for a few years then yes his name can be brought when discussing best central midfielders in the world. As of right now, he might in the top 20.

Kurt N. Jurqa wrote:Fellaini scored more goals the season before than Xavi and Iniesta combined, on your reasoning he's one of the best midfielders going too then.

Do we give out awards for last year, by the way I was not one of the people who rated Fellaini as a world beater. But last year a great number of these socalled football experts put Fellaini on their team of the year list.

Crimey wrote:Ramsey is a very good midfielder, but he has only really shown that form across half a season. He didn't even make PFA team of the year this year so it's hard to suggest he should be considered the best midfielder in the world, when it appears he's not even considered the best in the Premier League right now.

Socal, can you not appreciate that while goals and assists are important, on their own cannot be the basis of fact, they do not tell the full story, just like passing and tackling statistics do not. It is quite clear that your Arsenal bias is clouding your judgement, Aaron Ramsey has never been nominated for the Ballon D'Or, he's never made Teams of the Year, he's never been talked about as one of the best players in the world. You're fighting an argument with basically the entire footballing world.

If Aaron Ramsey can keep up the form which so far he has only shown over half a season, for a few years then yes his name can be brought when discussing best central midfielders in the world. As of right now, he might in the top 20.

I can accept some of your points here as well reasoned. Maybe a more accurate way I could have presented my idea would be to say that Ramsey had as good or a better season than any other central midfielder when he was fit. Even from the outset I did not argue that he was as established as some of the others or has done it over the long haul. No my argument is more about this year. The only reason he didn't make team of the year because of the injury. When he played he made a huge difference to Arsenal and was putting up insane numbers. As a midfielder he averaged a goal every 170 minutes no one can match that.

Reputationally, as a young player with a history of injuries of course he can't measure up to Xavi and Iniesta or their CVs, but I wouldn't take either one of those guys over Ramsey right now in my team today.

socal1976 wrote:

Crimey wrote:Ramsey is a very good midfielder, but he has only really shown that form across half a season. He didn't even make PFA team of the year this year so it's hard to suggest he should be considered the best midfielder in the world, when it appears he's not even considered the best in the Premier League right now.

Socal, can you not appreciate that while goals and assists are important, on their own cannot be the basis of fact, they do not tell the full story, just like passing and tackling statistics do not. It is quite clear that your Arsenal bias is clouding your judgement, Aaron Ramsey has never been nominated for the Ballon D'Or, he's never made Teams of the Year, he's never been talked about as one of the best players in the world. You're fighting an argument with basically the entire footballing world.

If Aaron Ramsey can keep up the form which so far he has only shown over half a season, for a few years then yes his name can be brought when discussing best central midfielders in the world. As of right now, he might in the top 20.

I can accept some of your points here as well reasoned. Maybe a more accurate way I could have presented my idea would be to say that Ramsey had as good or a better season than any other central midfielder when he was fit. Even from the outset I did not argue that he was as established as some of the others or has done it over the long haul. No my argument is more about this year. The only reason he didn't make team of the year because of the injury. When he played he made a huge difference to Arsenal and was putting up insane numbers. As a midfielder he averaged a goal every 170 minutes no one can match that.

Reputationally, as a young player with a history of injuries of course he can't measure up to Xavi and Iniesta or their CVs, but I wouldn't take either one of those guys over Ramsey right now in my team today.

The problem is that it isn't as easy as taking a sample of a season and then just multiplying it to cover the gaps. It takes a lot to keep such form over the course of an entire season and while Ramsey had a fantastic 20 games, that does not necessarily mean the other 20 he could have played would also have been so fantastic and that is why there is still significant doubt as to how good Ramsey actually is. He hasn't shown this kind of form ever before, and while it is certainly possible that he will go on and continue to play at such a high level for a sustained period of time, until he does it is always going to be ridiculous when outlandish claims are made because hasn't been shown.

You can't even say he would have made the team of the year without his injuries, because it is certainly possible that his form would have tailed off in the middle part of the season and therefore not have warranted his place in the team of the year. It'd be pure speculation.

It may be the case that you wouldn't swap him for Xavi or Iniesta, but to say you wouldn't swap him for any midfielder in the world for me is a bit short-sighted and biased. He may go on to become the best central midfielder in the world but one fantastic half a season doesn't make him the best.

Crimey even if you took his half a season stats they were better than a lot of players PLAYING THE EXACT SAME POSITION as he played being touted as the best ever. His stats are better in half a season than Vidal's stats for the entire season. And Ramsey didn't have the benefit of being Juve's penalty kick taker. The only CM that puts up better goal and assist number is Toure in a lot more games and with the benefit of 6 penalties. I measured Ramsey's 20 games against guys playing 30 and 35 league games playing in pretty much the same position he played and he trounces them. If you say Vidal is the best CM in the world you would get half a dozen people jumping on board, but his full year stats aren't as good as Ramsey's abbreviated season. Plus I honestly can't think of a player I would trade for him as a CM taking into consideration his age. Maybe, Maybe Pogba but probably not.

Ramsey is better than Pogba.

Vidal does not play in the same position, his role is to break up the play and be a physical presence in midfield, you clearly haven't watched him play. If you look at Carricks stats last season I would imagine that they're pretty average and the only way to see how good he was was to watch him play.

A goal is a goal whether it's a 30 yard screamer or a penalty, it takes skill and composure to score from the spot hence why England always look shoot outs. A season consists of 38 matches not 20 so being good for half the year doesn't mean a great deal, Vidal and Toure were good the whole year and drove their teams to title success.

socal1976 wrote:Crimey even if you took his half a season stats they were better than a lot of players PLAYING THE EXACT SAME POSITION as he played being touted as the best ever. His stats are better in half a season than Vidal's stats for the entire season. And Ramsey didn't have the benefit of being Juve's penalty kick taker. The only CM that puts up better goal and assist number is Toure in a lot more games and with the benefit of 6 penalties. I measured Ramsey's 20 games against guys playing 30 and 35 league games playing in pretty much the same position he played and he trounces them. If you say Vidal is the best CM in the world you would get half a dozen people jumping on board, but his full year stats aren't as good as Ramsey's abbreviated season. Plus I honestly can't think of a player I would trade for him as a CM taking into consideration his age. Maybe, Maybe Pogba but probably not.

They don't play the exact same position though. The statistics are poor without context. Ramsey plays a role in the Arsenal team that isn't always directly comparable with any other team. There was more pressure on Ramsey to get goals from midfield because of Arsenal playing with Giroud up front. Vidal is a ball-winning midfielder, Ramsey is basically a Lampard-esque midfielder who is supposed to arrive in the box late and get goals.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Vidal does not play in the same position, his role is to break up the play and be a physical presence in midfield, you clearly haven't watched him play. If you look at Carricks stats last season I would imagine that they're pretty average and the only way to see how good he was was to watch him play.

A goal is a goal whether it's a 30 yard screamer or a penalty, it takes skill and composure to score from the spot hence why England always look shoot outs. A season consists of 38 matches not 20 so being good for half the year doesn't mean a great deal, Vidal and Toure were good the whole year and drove their teams to title success.

Ramsey played most of this season paired along with either Flamini or Arteta, like in the cup final with Ozil as the free player or CAM he was just as crucial in winning the ball and breaking up play. Sometimes he would play more advanced and sometimes he would play with one other deeper lying midfielder. Sorry a penalty belongs more to the guy who earned it than the spot kicker who hits it in. It doesn't count the same in my estimation. It counts the same for the team but I very much discount in a player's individual stats.

Tell that to Lambert with his 34 from 34, if they were so easy to score everyone would have a 100% conversion rate but guess what they're not.

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote: Serious like arguing with children, goals and assists are meaningless the true measure of a midfielder is how many times in a row he can complete sideways and backwards passes that don't amount to anything. I know when I think of the great midfielders of all time I remember the game where Scholes completed 6 straight sideways passes, the man was a genius. When he passed it back to his center half and he got the ball I was cheering my socks off now that is a legend. Statistics like goals and assists don't matter but pass completion percentage makes you a great Central midfielder.

I think that just shows Socal's level of football knowledge: zilch.

You do understand sarcasm Duty I don't have to explain that to your pubscent mind do I?

Yes I do understand sarcasm, hence my point.

You seem to think goals and assists are the be all and end all for midfielders, whereas passes and retaining possession matter very little, which is wrong.

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote: Serious like arguing with children, goals and assists are meaningless the true measure of a midfielder is how many times in a row he can complete sideways and backwards passes that don't amount to anything. I know when I think of the great midfielders of all time I remember the game where Scholes completed 6 straight sideways passes, the man was a genius. When he passed it back to his center half and he got the ball I was cheering my socks off now that is a legend. Statistics like goals and assists don't matter but pass completion percentage makes you a great Central midfielder.

I think that just shows Socal's level of football knowledge: zilch.

You do understand sarcasm Duty I don't have to explain that to your pubscent mind do I?

Yes I do understand sarcasm, hence my point.

You seem to think goals and assists are the be all and end all for midfielders, whereas passes and retaining possession matter very little, which is wrong.

Goals and assists are more important for ramsey because that is his role in the team.

They might be important for Ramsey but they aren't important for every midfielder, stats are a load of crap anyway, used by those who don't know what they're seeing.

Today they have stats that determine the distance a player runs, his take ons, tackles, touches, interceptions,clearances, saves, key passes, goals, etc. It very much assists in analysis. When taken as a whole and they are not the only indicator. In virtually, every walk of life statistical analysis is used from business to politics to football. The idea that they irrelevant or not indicative is pretty much antithetical to the way the world works. Governments and companies spend billions on gathering statistical analysis on pretty much anything you can think of, if it was meaningless and instead they should just rely on people eyeballing something and giving their impressions the world wouldn't work very efficiently. While the best statistical analysis still requires good analysis to make sense of it all it is invaluable.

Sure, clubs spend money on analysts and top of the range software because they don't know what they are seeing.