I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep.
Also think many people forget Henry prime since it was more than 10 years ago and they were still young kids who didn't watch him
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 26 minutes ago
I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is best will always be completely subjective. If you look at Henry's era then you had him, Ronaldinho and Zidane. Even Kaka and Ronaldo (original) although he was past his best at that point. If you take the original 3 I'd say the player you prefer is largely based on personal preference, they type of player you happen to like.
I wouldn't put too much stock in awards (Owen won it after all!) but what I would say is people tend to give a bit more latitude now because we're definitely in the Messi and Ronaldo era. They've had it sewn up for years and rightly so, they're the best of the generation. Had they been around in Henry's era then they would have been the best then as well.
comment by Rauben_Hoody (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
I'm 36
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? Sound like a 5 year old
comment by Ibe-Wan Kenobi (U6997)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 26 minutes ago
I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is best will always be completely subjective. If you look at Henry's era then you had him, Ronaldinho and Zidane. Even Kaka and Ronaldo (original) although he was past his best at that point. If you take the original 3 I'd say the player you prefer is largely based on personal preference, they type of player you happen to like.
I wouldn't put too much stock in awards (Owen won it after all!) but what I would say is people tend to give a bit more latitude now because we're definitely in the Messi and Ronaldo era. They've had it sewn up for years and rightly so, they're the best of the generation. Had they been around in Henry's era then they would have been the best then as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree - it's always subjective and I don't consider the awards to be gospel by any means; I was just responding to what I thought was a bizarre implicit argument that Suarez was better than Henry on the basis that the latter was supposedly never considered to be the best at any point.
I understand what you're saying about Messi and Ronaldo, and why more weight is placed on performing well in this era, although I think as Sheriff alluded to, the differences between different teams and different generations can make it hard to compare.
When Ronadinho first won WPOTY, for example, he had scored 17 league goals and 11 assists for Barcelona in the 2003/2004 season. One might argue that this is evidence that he was a level below the current elite (many of whom average nearly a goal a game), but you have to consider that that Barcelona side only scored just over half the amount of league goals that this current Barca side did last season (63 vs 110).
There's been a real polarisation of La Liga over the last decade, and I don't think it's unreasonable to say that a peak Ronaldinho would himself be achieving an incredible return of goals and assists if he was in the current Barcelona set-up, and could well have mounted a very strong case for WPOTY.
Similarly, whilst the Invincibles may go down as one of the best club sides of their generation, I would have to concede that they are simply not at the level of this current Barcelona side.
Henry's goalscoring record may not have been as good as Suarez's is currently, but the creativity provided by a 34 year old Bergkamp (who started barely over half the Premiership games, and was often rotated with players like Kanu and Wiltord), Pires (a great player, but not one of the very best in the world after his cruciate ligament injury), and Vieira (an exceptional midfielder and one of the best of his generation, but much more of a box-to-box midfielder than a natural playmaker), doesn't compare to the creativity afforded by being flanked by Neymar (one of the best in the world) and Messi (arguably the greatest player of all-time), supported by what is almost certainly the most technically gifted midfield triumvirate in the world right now.
Henry even won the golden boot comfortably (27 goals in 30 starts) in the 2005/2006 season when the team was in dire straits and we had to rely on a poorly made lasagna to secure top 4, so I don't think it would be unreasonable to assume a peak Henry could have also been averaging a goal a game (or more) if he had the service Suarez does currently.
Not trying to derogate Suarez' achievements at all - I think he's a world-class player - I just don't think it's fair when people point to the ridiculous goalscoring records of some current players as evidence that they're a level above some players of old.
For the record, I'm not actually implying you did that, but that seems to be a general theme in these sorts of debates (much like when people argue Cristiano Ronaldo is a level above his Brazilian namesake based on his superior goalscoring record) and I just wanted to get it off my chest.
There is an argument that Suarez is disadvantaged in his quest to win the Ballon D'Or by playing in the same generation as players like Messi and Neymar, but at the same time, he also benefits massively by playing alongside them.
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
I agree - it's always subjective and I don't consider the awards to be gospel by any means; I was just responding to what I thought was a bizarre implicit argument that Suarez was better than Henry on the basis that the latter was supposedly never considered to be the best at any point.
I understand what you're saying about Messi and Ronaldo, and why more weight is placed on performing well in this era, although I think as Sheriff alluded to, the differences between different teams and different generations can make it hard to compare.
When Ronadinho first won WPOTY, for example, he had scored 17 league goals and 11 assists for Barcelona in the 2003/2004 season. One might argue that this is evidence that he was a level below the current elite (many of whom average nearly a goal a game), but you have to consider that that Barcelona side only scored just over half the amount of league goals that this current Barca side did last season (63 vs 110).
There's been a real polarisation of La Liga over the last decade, and I don't think it's unreasonable to say that a peak Ronaldinho would himself be achieving an incredible return of goals and assists if he was in the current Barcelona set-up, and could well have mounted a very strong case for WPOTY.
Similarly, whilst the Invincibles may go down as one of the best club sides of their generation, I would have to concede that they are simply not at the level of this current Barcelona side.
Henry's goalscoring record may not have been as good as Suarez's is currently, but the creativity provided by a 34 year old Bergkamp (who started barely over half the Premiership games, and was often rotated with players like Kanu and Wiltord), Pires (a great player, but not one of the very best in the world after his cruciate ligament injury), and Vieira (an exceptional midfielder and one of the best of his generation, but much more of a box-to-box midfielder than a natural playmaker), doesn't compare to the creativity afforded by being flanked by Neymar (one of the best in the world) and Messi (arguably the greatest player of all-time), supported by what is almost certainly the most technically gifted midfield triumvirate in the world right now.
Henry even won the golden boot comfortably (27 goals in 30 starts) in the 2005/2006 season when the team was in dire straits and we had to rely on a poorly made lasagna to secure top 4, so I don't think it would be unreasonable to assume a peak Henry could have also been averaging a goal a game (or more) if he had the service Suarez does currently.
Not trying to derogate Suarez' achievements at all - I think he's a world-class player - I just don't think it's fair when people point to the ridiculous goalscoring records of some current players as evidence that they're a level above some players of old.
For the record, I'm not actually implying you did that, but that seems to be a general theme in these sorts of debates (much like when people argue Cristiano Ronaldo is a level above his Brazilian namesake based on his superior goalscoring record) and I just wanted to get it off my chest.
There is an argument that Suarez is disadvantaged in his quest to win the Ballon D'Or by playing in the same generation as players like Messi and Neymar, but at the same time, he also benefits massively by playing alongside them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great post and I agree with pretty much everything you say.
Playing with Messi is definitely a double edged sword where the individual awards are concerned, you stand much less chance of winning one but by playing with him then you get a much better chance to show your ability!
I also agree with your thoughts on Henry's scoring rate and what he might do today if playing. All I would say is that Suarez is doing it. Whilst I suspect Henry would as well, it's a guess/assumption based on his ability. Also worth noting that Suarez scored at that rate in the EPL for a season and as good as they were that season, Sturridge and Sterling are no Messi and Neymar!
All that said, I agree that goalscoring stats are only so useful as a guide, albeit an understandable one where strikers are concerned. And what Messi & Ronaldo (this season Suarez & Lewandoski also) are doing in terms of strike rate can't be compared to previous years IMO.
This might read as a play for Suarez but it's really not, my answer to the question at this moment would still be Henry. If Suarez plays at his current level for another couple of seasons though then it would be a very interesting debate. By that time we will probably be including Neymar's name as well...
Any clown that thinks Suarez was even close to Henry's level is not worth having a football debate with.
Some idiots think using stats can show a true reflection of how magical a player can be, sorry but it doesn't work like that.
Henry was capable of truly magical moments. Suarez is just an efficient footballer.
Henry will be remembered as a legend decades from now. Suarez will be remembered as great striker who scored a lot of goals.
Lets leave it at that.
Sign in if you want to comment
Henry vs Suarez
Page 4 of 4
posted on 21/2/16
I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
posted on 21/2/16
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 11 minutes ago
I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep.
Also think many people forget Henry prime since it was more than 10 years ago and they were still young kids who didn't watch him
posted on 21/2/16
I'm 36
posted on 21/2/16
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 26 minutes ago
I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is best will always be completely subjective. If you look at Henry's era then you had him, Ronaldinho and Zidane. Even Kaka and Ronaldo (original) although he was past his best at that point. If you take the original 3 I'd say the player you prefer is largely based on personal preference, they type of player you happen to like.
I wouldn't put too much stock in awards (Owen won it after all!) but what I would say is people tend to give a bit more latitude now because we're definitely in the Messi and Ronaldo era. They've had it sewn up for years and rightly so, they're the best of the generation. Had they been around in Henry's era then they would have been the best then as well.
posted on 21/2/16
comment by Rauben_Hoody (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
I'm 36
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? Sound like a 5 year old
posted on 21/2/16
comment by Ibe-Wan Kenobi (U6997)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 26 minutes ago
I don't understand the 'Was Henry ever considered the best' argument; it would be tenuous at best even if it was axiomatic that Suarez was currently number 1, but as Sheriff says, it's far from a closed case that Suarez is the best in the world, and many would argue that Messi, Neymar, and/or Ronaldo are currently ahead of him, so I don't see how that can be used to support Suarez's case - particularly when Henry has actually twice come closer to winning the award than Suarez ever has.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is best will always be completely subjective. If you look at Henry's era then you had him, Ronaldinho and Zidane. Even Kaka and Ronaldo (original) although he was past his best at that point. If you take the original 3 I'd say the player you prefer is largely based on personal preference, they type of player you happen to like.
I wouldn't put too much stock in awards (Owen won it after all!) but what I would say is people tend to give a bit more latitude now because we're definitely in the Messi and Ronaldo era. They've had it sewn up for years and rightly so, they're the best of the generation. Had they been around in Henry's era then they would have been the best then as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree - it's always subjective and I don't consider the awards to be gospel by any means; I was just responding to what I thought was a bizarre implicit argument that Suarez was better than Henry on the basis that the latter was supposedly never considered to be the best at any point.
I understand what you're saying about Messi and Ronaldo, and why more weight is placed on performing well in this era, although I think as Sheriff alluded to, the differences between different teams and different generations can make it hard to compare.
When Ronadinho first won WPOTY, for example, he had scored 17 league goals and 11 assists for Barcelona in the 2003/2004 season. One might argue that this is evidence that he was a level below the current elite (many of whom average nearly a goal a game), but you have to consider that that Barcelona side only scored just over half the amount of league goals that this current Barca side did last season (63 vs 110).
There's been a real polarisation of La Liga over the last decade, and I don't think it's unreasonable to say that a peak Ronaldinho would himself be achieving an incredible return of goals and assists if he was in the current Barcelona set-up, and could well have mounted a very strong case for WPOTY.
Similarly, whilst the Invincibles may go down as one of the best club sides of their generation, I would have to concede that they are simply not at the level of this current Barcelona side.
Henry's goalscoring record may not have been as good as Suarez's is currently, but the creativity provided by a 34 year old Bergkamp (who started barely over half the Premiership games, and was often rotated with players like Kanu and Wiltord), Pires (a great player, but not one of the very best in the world after his cruciate ligament injury), and Vieira (an exceptional midfielder and one of the best of his generation, but much more of a box-to-box midfielder than a natural playmaker), doesn't compare to the creativity afforded by being flanked by Neymar (one of the best in the world) and Messi (arguably the greatest player of all-time), supported by what is almost certainly the most technically gifted midfield triumvirate in the world right now.
Henry even won the golden boot comfortably (27 goals in 30 starts) in the 2005/2006 season when the team was in dire straits and we had to rely on a poorly made lasagna to secure top 4, so I don't think it would be unreasonable to assume a peak Henry could have also been averaging a goal a game (or more) if he had the service Suarez does currently.
Not trying to derogate Suarez' achievements at all - I think he's a world-class player - I just don't think it's fair when people point to the ridiculous goalscoring records of some current players as evidence that they're a level above some players of old.
For the record, I'm not actually implying you did that, but that seems to be a general theme in these sorts of debates (much like when people argue Cristiano Ronaldo is a level above his Brazilian namesake based on his superior goalscoring record) and I just wanted to get it off my chest.
There is an argument that Suarez is disadvantaged in his quest to win the Ballon D'Or by playing in the same generation as players like Messi and Neymar, but at the same time, he also benefits massively by playing alongside them.
posted on 21/2/16
comment by DaStuDogg (U9291)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
I agree - it's always subjective and I don't consider the awards to be gospel by any means; I was just responding to what I thought was a bizarre implicit argument that Suarez was better than Henry on the basis that the latter was supposedly never considered to be the best at any point.
I understand what you're saying about Messi and Ronaldo, and why more weight is placed on performing well in this era, although I think as Sheriff alluded to, the differences between different teams and different generations can make it hard to compare.
When Ronadinho first won WPOTY, for example, he had scored 17 league goals and 11 assists for Barcelona in the 2003/2004 season. One might argue that this is evidence that he was a level below the current elite (many of whom average nearly a goal a game), but you have to consider that that Barcelona side only scored just over half the amount of league goals that this current Barca side did last season (63 vs 110).
There's been a real polarisation of La Liga over the last decade, and I don't think it's unreasonable to say that a peak Ronaldinho would himself be achieving an incredible return of goals and assists if he was in the current Barcelona set-up, and could well have mounted a very strong case for WPOTY.
Similarly, whilst the Invincibles may go down as one of the best club sides of their generation, I would have to concede that they are simply not at the level of this current Barcelona side.
Henry's goalscoring record may not have been as good as Suarez's is currently, but the creativity provided by a 34 year old Bergkamp (who started barely over half the Premiership games, and was often rotated with players like Kanu and Wiltord), Pires (a great player, but not one of the very best in the world after his cruciate ligament injury), and Vieira (an exceptional midfielder and one of the best of his generation, but much more of a box-to-box midfielder than a natural playmaker), doesn't compare to the creativity afforded by being flanked by Neymar (one of the best in the world) and Messi (arguably the greatest player of all-time), supported by what is almost certainly the most technically gifted midfield triumvirate in the world right now.
Henry even won the golden boot comfortably (27 goals in 30 starts) in the 2005/2006 season when the team was in dire straits and we had to rely on a poorly made lasagna to secure top 4, so I don't think it would be unreasonable to assume a peak Henry could have also been averaging a goal a game (or more) if he had the service Suarez does currently.
Not trying to derogate Suarez' achievements at all - I think he's a world-class player - I just don't think it's fair when people point to the ridiculous goalscoring records of some current players as evidence that they're a level above some players of old.
For the record, I'm not actually implying you did that, but that seems to be a general theme in these sorts of debates (much like when people argue Cristiano Ronaldo is a level above his Brazilian namesake based on his superior goalscoring record) and I just wanted to get it off my chest.
There is an argument that Suarez is disadvantaged in his quest to win the Ballon D'Or by playing in the same generation as players like Messi and Neymar, but at the same time, he also benefits massively by playing alongside them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great post and I agree with pretty much everything you say.
Playing with Messi is definitely a double edged sword where the individual awards are concerned, you stand much less chance of winning one but by playing with him then you get a much better chance to show your ability!
I also agree with your thoughts on Henry's scoring rate and what he might do today if playing. All I would say is that Suarez is doing it. Whilst I suspect Henry would as well, it's a guess/assumption based on his ability. Also worth noting that Suarez scored at that rate in the EPL for a season and as good as they were that season, Sturridge and Sterling are no Messi and Neymar!
All that said, I agree that goalscoring stats are only so useful as a guide, albeit an understandable one where strikers are concerned. And what Messi & Ronaldo (this season Suarez & Lewandoski also) are doing in terms of strike rate can't be compared to previous years IMO.
This might read as a play for Suarez but it's really not, my answer to the question at this moment would still be Henry. If Suarez plays at his current level for another couple of seasons though then it would be a very interesting debate. By that time we will probably be including Neymar's name as well...
posted on 22/2/16
Any clown that thinks Suarez was even close to Henry's level is not worth having a football debate with.
Some idiots think using stats can show a true reflection of how magical a player can be, sorry but it doesn't work like that.
Henry was capable of truly magical moments. Suarez is just an efficient footballer.
Henry will be remembered as a legend decades from now. Suarez will be remembered as great striker who scored a lot of goals.
Lets leave it at that.
Page 4 of 4