Typical that the English spent so long complaining about their lack of quality forwards and now they have a potentially world class batch they’re bickering about who is better.
Is Sterling the best english player at the moment?
- Thread starter TsuWave
- Start date
Imagine thinking Pep Guardiola would make Sterling his first choice winger ahead of Sané and Mahrez if he was just “a decent talent”.
If you're having those 4 as the front 4 I'd have Sterling and Sancho as the two wide players and play Rashford just behind Kane. Kane often drops deep anyway so they could interchange pretty often.
Frankly couldn't care less, I think Sterling - Kane - Sancho will be a world class attack for us. Rashford as the backup number 9 unless he continues his form under Ole up to the Euros. I think Kane and Sterling are top end players with different roles, and Rashford and Sancho can get there if they continue as they are.
My bigger concern is the midfield and GK positions. A lot of good players like Ox, Barkley, Pickford, Heaton etc but no one really stand-out good. Luckily the back line has lots of ball playing options so that should help us out.
My bigger concern is the midfield and GK positions. A lot of good players like Ox, Barkley, Pickford, Heaton etc but no one really stand-out good. Luckily the back line has lots of ball playing options so that should help us out.
Not much to pick from but yes he's the best English player atm. Never thought I'd ever say that due to his limitations. However, Pep worked around his shortcomings brilliantly and made him a very effective weapon.
I honestly think that argument about Sterling performing at this level being down to players around him is stale. I for one thought he'd stick out as a sore thumb when mixing it with the big boys but I and many others were wrong. We also thought that Bernado and then Mahrez (one time POTY) would easily take his place on the right but we were also wrong. When they play right he moves to left. To keep Sane and Mahrez on the bench takes some doing. He is one of the first names in their starting 11 every week. Playing with highly gifted players is not always a blessing as you can be easily found out if you don't belong in that level.
Many times last season he was the one that got those 1-0 wins for City when the gap between us and them wasn't much.
I thinl Steling is the number one english player now as magnificent as Kane is. Have they sorted out the contract renewal issue? I wouldn't mind having him at United.
The people who paint a picture of Kane as a somewhat limited player in terms of movement and his overall passing game can't have seen enough of him. He is extremely intelligent and can pass quick passes both long and short as well as hold the ball. In terms of movement he drops deep or runs behind, and is in my opinion a nightmare to mark if you have willing runners from midfield or forward positions. He is also a good runner with the ball in his own right despite not being the quickest since he doesn't get bullied off the ball, the timing of his runs is also great so he sometimes find himself one v one such as against Chelsea in the League cup semi.
Regardless, Sterling is a world class wide forward and Kane is a world class nr 9. I don't know who is the better player, but England should be happy to have both. I underrated Rashford for a while and didn't think he would become a top forward, but I'm starting to reconsider my position, still too early to be mentioned alongside Kane and Sterling though, as for Sancho, I haven't seen enough of him.
Regardless, Sterling is a world class wide forward and Kane is a world class nr 9. I don't know who is the better player, but England should be happy to have both. I underrated Rashford for a while and didn't think he would become a top forward, but I'm starting to reconsider my position, still too early to be mentioned alongside Kane and Sterling though, as for Sancho, I haven't seen enough of him.
He is so good at running at players and not just brainless running either. A real poison tbh.
Yeah, he is.
Kane and Sterling are 1a and 1b.
Rashford needs to show this form for a couple of seasons tbh.
Rashford needs to show this form for a couple of seasons tbh.
It's interesting that while last year it was the Sane - Aguero - Sterling (from left to right) setup that caused the most damage for opponents and I was actually a bit upset all the time Pep chose not to start Sane and played Sterling on the left instead, because while his runs and interplay might cause more havoc starting from there, his ability to simply run past opponents won't be such a factor. But now you can easily say that he's equally prolific starting from either side. And Azpilicueta is actually one of the better fullbacks in the league.
This season I've heard quite a few Chelsea fans being very unhappy with Azpilicueta. Perhaps Chelsea fans on here can correct me if I'm wrong.
I would suggest that of course, Sterling is one of the better English players, behind Kane though. Kane has a stronger, slightly more mature game, and importantly, Harry Kane is more a leader, a talisman on the pitch.
Sterling has benefited from a top coach, who has seen him focus on his game, bringing a consistency that was lacking. However, a couple of further thoughts... I agree that Sterling is playing with outstanding players, and I question whether he could elevate himself as he currently does, if he played for a mid-Table team. Secondly, I don't think there are too many English players who are actually playing really, really well right now.
Sterling has benefited from a top coach, who has seen him focus on his game, bringing a consistency that was lacking. However, a couple of further thoughts... I agree that Sterling is playing with outstanding players, and I question whether he could elevate himself as he currently does, if he played for a mid-Table team. Secondly, I don't think there are too many English players who are actually playing really, really well right now.
It's a strange comparison to make given they're completely different players but I do believe Kane is the better footballer. They're both superb at what they do. However if I did have to choose one I'd go for Kane. I think he's even better at his role than Sterling is at his. Also, seems able to 'carry' a heavier burden than Sterling.
Add Sancho into the mix soon and England have a brutal front three. I hope Rashford keeps developing because the competition is strong.
Add Sancho into the mix soon and England have a brutal front three. I hope Rashford keeps developing because the competition is strong.
James Maddison could be a good option in a couple of years. He is on the right path at the moment.
I know what you're saying in that any system is not rigid but fluent.
My point was more about forcing players to play in positions where they are not at their best but feel the need to force them in the squad.
For sake of argument if we play a 4231 formation with England..both Kane and rashford are smashing them in for their respective club. So therefore put one if them in and then see who is the best left / right and central sided attacker to fit those slots. If that means putting sterling out left, sancho right and someone other than rashford as a player behind Kane (e.g. lingard or alli etc) then so be it and we have an amazing sub to come on.
Is this a fetish or something? Let's take a world class player out of a world class team and see how he performs. Is there a desire to see how Kane would perform in the Championship? Why would this be any sign of further quality?
It should be enough that Sterling is a top performer in this City side, and is benching the likes of Mahrez, contrary to everyone's expectations when Mahrez was bought.
It's a stale argument if you're trying to argue that he's not a great player, but it's a valid argument if you're saying 'Sterling scored as many goals as Kane, haha look Kane's a fraud!'.
The point is yes, Sterling is scoring an exceptional amount of goals. But he's doing it in a team which is a machine for chance creation, scoring 20 more goals than Spurs overall. City have superior creative players to us, there's no doubting this. We're a good side but we're more pragmatic than City are, anybody who watches both sides can see that a City forward is going to get more opportunities to score goals than a Spurs forward.
That doesn't change the fact that yeah, since he's getting in to this City team (and ahead of some top class talents) he's clearly fantastic, and his off the ball movement in particular is absolutely world class. He's a fantastic player and I've no issue with people who prefer him to Kane, it's just the tweet I originally responded to was totally nonsensical and made out there was some huge gap between the two, which there isn't. They both offer very different qualities and it's mostly down to personal preference who you would want in your team more.
That has always very much been the way of things.I think Sterling is indeed the best English player at the moment. There are questions over whether he can be as good for England but he, Kane and Rashford are the best of this current crop.
In fairness to Mahrez, Sterling does have the advantage of having been in the side for much longer. He and Sane both took a season or so to get up to speed in Pep's system and it's not a surprise that Mahrez is also taking a bit of time to adapt.
Sterling and Kane are the only world class English players, then you have Rashford/Alli/Sancho who I think are on a similar level (though Sancho looks to have the most potential) and beyond that some decent players like Walker, Lingard, Stones, TAA and a few others who are good, but not great.
I don't think it's a surprise that England fans would debate who the best English player is, also I'm going to go ahead and suggest it's very possible a few of the people debating in this thread aren't even English.
I don't think it's a surprise that England fans would debate who the best English player is, also I'm going to go ahead and suggest it's very possible a few of the people debating in this thread aren't even English.
It's really weird the way people talk about Kane, maybe because he looks a little awkward on the ball?
Agree with pretty much everything you say. There's few players in world football who have superior movement off the ball than Kane, which is more important than pace. He's constantly finding himself in space despite defenders sticking to him like glue, you don't need breakneck speed if you're clever. Kane is constantly finding himself in 1 on 1 situations and is mostly deadly in them.
Right now I actually do think there's too much of a burden on him at Spurs, and that's impacted his goalscoring somewhat (not that much, he still scores loads!). He's expected to drop pretty deep and provide an outlet, spraying balls out left and right. That's why he doesn't get as many assists as some other attackers, he's mostly pushing it out wide for the ball to come in rather than being the one who plays the decisive pass, but that doesn't change the fact he's an extremely accomplished passer of the ball.
The question here being how you guys understand 'the best English player'. Is it the best player who's English or the best player playing for England because those two don't go hand in hand for me. If we factor in both of those, it's Kane, he's what he is in the league obviously and he seems to do just fine in the NT. Sterling is on comparable level in the league obviously but I won't buy into the system meme bullshit with his garbage stats for the NT so there's that.
I think it's just the English player who performs best for both club and country, rather than who performs best for England.
That is a fair point. So far Mahrez's cameos have shown poor decision making and a reluctance to find the open man instead of shoot. We'll see in his second season whether he can adapt.
Well if it's for the both then it's Kane, if it's just the league then it's a coin toss for me.
It's between Sterling and Kane.
Btw it should be great for England fans that so many young players are playing well. For Euro 2020 good chance England attack will be Kane, Sterling, Rashford, Sancho.
Btw it should be great for England fans that so many young players are playing well. For Euro 2020 good chance England attack will be Kane, Sterling, Rashford, Sancho.
In that case how do you explain a manager like Guardiola, who knows a thing or two about football, choosing a so-called decent player like Sterling when he should be playing far better players in that position? Why doesn't Sterling look out of place between all those unprecedented talents in the rest of the side?
It's actually looking good for once. Exciting times for England for sure.
Be a fullback's nightmare tbh.
Just wait until C.H.O and Mason Greenwood are up to full speed and ability...England really will have options!
Alli isn't too bad either.
It's not about a sign of further quality, there are just some players who I would find it genuinely interesting to see how they would perform if they were made the key player in a lesser quality side. Sterling is one of them, mainly because at City he is a cog in a wider system, and I feel he has more to offer if he had the freedom to do so. For instance, his playmaking skills are never really given a chance to shine at City because we have better players than him for that. Other players like Aguero, Kane or Silva would not interest me to see them in a smaller side as I don't believe you'd see anything new to their game that you aren't already seeing.
He's a good player but he doesn't have the ability or potential of Rashford and doesn't have the same proven pedigree as Harry Kane, so no.
I also think to be considered the best England player you kind of have to prove it in an England shirt. Otherwise it's like claiming Sanchez is our best player based on his performances for Arsenal.
If England use him correctly instead of in that stupid behind the striker role that he's invariably useless in, he'll be able to hurt teams. Same with Rashford.
I also think to be considered the best England player you kind of have to prove it in an England shirt. Otherwise it's like claiming Sanchez is our best player based on his performances for Arsenal.
If England use him correctly instead of in that stupid behind the striker role that he's invariably useless in, he'll be able to hurt teams. Same with Rashford.
Kane. Then sterling IMO, albeit they perform different roles.
I know I've already replied to this, but just had another thought. You could set up in a 4222/442 and have them all in peak positions.
------Rashford Kane
Sterling Cm Cm Sancho
Yes I agree with most of your points pal and a few others are down to personal judgement. I so much rever Kane that I belive he is one of the very very best strikers in the globe. He has shown that he belongs in the elite category. However point I was making was Sterling has dragged a star studded team out of the mud time and again. If you bring a player like Maddison or Sigurdson to City there's no guarantee that they will step it up. For most players they get overwhelmed by the level ahead of them and fizzle out. Sterling was supposed to fizzle out when Bernado Silva was bought but he didn't. He is one of the first names week in week out just like Fernandinho, Aguero and Laporte. Lets give this boy his due, common.
I think I give Sterling pretty much a fair assessment.
I think he's genuinely a world class wide man and one of the best players in the league, but that his goal/assist record is somewhat inflated compared to a player like Kane due to the nature of the City side he plays in. That's all, I'm certainly not on the 'he only looks good because of the system and any old player could replace him' boat, as that is blatantly nonsense.