So, in your opinion, what was it with Van Dijk’s peak that made him far better than Vidic?, and how was Gerrard better than Scholes?
Virgil van Dijk | Performances
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
No you aren’t a united fan mate. I knew you were a Liverpool fan in our first interactions few pages back. If you are scared to come out it’s okay. If you think you are too smart for this forum, you won’t be the first one to think so. Just stop trying to be too clever. Nobody is buying your bullshit.
Last edited:
Because even though he’s 24 and he hadn’t seen past players in their prime but he has seen some matches of them so he now knows feck all thus when he says Gerrard and Van dijk are better than Scholes and vidic you better believe it because it’s coming from a united fan.
He has been a really good CB for Liverpool but people claiming he's the best are deluded.
He had 1 season at peak form (2 tops).
In a list of players ahead of him, you easily have Rio, Vidic, Terry & Kompany.
You then have arguments about him against players such as Sol Campbell, Ledley King etc
He had 1 season at peak form (2 tops).
In a list of players ahead of him, you easily have Rio, Vidic, Terry & Kompany.
You then have arguments about him against players such as Sol Campbell, Ledley King etc
At his best he was at least as good as those names you listed. So the definition of being the best is longevity?
I think that's probably accurate. His ability and command of the position is on par with some of the best the league has ever seen, but the fact that others (Terry, Vidic, Ferdinand, Adams, Kompany) have so far surpassed him in longevity and success in the role means they are correctly considered superior for the time being. If he is able to rediscover form and consistency/push Liverpool to another PL title, then he would absolutely be up there in my opinion.
Of course?
I said VvD 2019 was better than Vidic 2011. Because he was the best CB I saw play. In 2019 he played in a suit. He disarmed with a class without make foul in a way I've never seen before. His reading of the game and his positioning, in addition to his pace made him a freak of nature
I consider Gerrard better than Scholes for his all round game and peak performance. In his prime he was an attacking midfielder playing in front of the main midfielders of his team but he could also be a #8 box-to-box or even a #6 anchor-man
There was a post on r/soccer last week about France Football’s best XI of the decade (2010-2019) and the comment section - unanimously - was a collective pile-on regarding van Dijk’s inclusion. He stood out like a sore thumb in a defence with Lahm, Ramos and Marcelo.
Imagine including a player in the decade best XI, amongst legitimate hall-of-famers, who played for Groningen, Celtic and Southampton from 2011-2018. Incredible.
Imagine including a player in the decade best XI, amongst legitimate hall-of-famers, who played for Groningen, Celtic and Southampton from 2011-2018. Incredible.
Well yes, of course. Otherwise you could class somebody like Jack Wilshire the best player ever because of THAT game against Barca.
To be the best, or near the best, you have to be the best for a long period of time.
In his 62 posts, he hasn't once posted in [a Manchester United] player performances thread nor comments about any of our matches - before/during/after. Definitely not a fan.
In the last couple of pages there are at least 2 posters who are Liverpool fans but for some reason don't want to say it.
Last edited:
The measure of CB is not only how well they've done as part of a unit, but also - and perhaps more importantly - who they've faced and faired well against. Before VVD is thrown about above some of the greatest CB's of this century, can we have an extensive list of his great performances against the great forwards of his era, and peak?
Van Dijk better than Vidic
Vidic was a better tackler, stronger, better in the air defensively and offensively, didn't back off and let the midfield press do half of his defending for him, and was a fearless leader.
Vidic was a better tackler, stronger, better in the air defensively and offensively, didn't back off and let the midfield press do half of his defending for him, and was a fearless leader.
Will never not be funny that he and that all conquering lot only managed one title
You claim to be 24, what the feck have you seen to throw around your opinions as facts and then whine about being a balanced united fan?
People should have stopped responding to you the moment you said Gerrard is better than Scholes. Maybe we are just bored and egging you on to dig a deeper hole.
What next then, Klopp is better than Fergie as he almost got to 100 points?
Ok, I see. Fair enough about Van Dijk, but in my opinion it’s very hard to compare the two because they are to very different types of centre backs. As you said, van Dijk made it look easy because he had great pace and reading of the game, quite similar to Rio. In Vidic’s case he was a lot more aggressive and somebody who were willing to sacrifice any part of his body to avoid conceding a goal. I even remember he tried to block a shot with his head, something you would never see Van Dijk do. Their styles were different, but for me it’s not right to say that Van Dijk was better because he looked more effortless on the pitch. Sure he may look more comfortable on the pitch, and players didn’t even want to take him on for a long period of time, but Vidic was a player that terrified any opponent because they knew that he would take no prisoners. In the end they were both great defenders at their peak and it’s all about opinions, but to claim Van Dijk was FAR better is a bit of a stretch! As you said, for longvity Vidic is far ahead.
Regarding Gerrard and Scholes, I want to say that Scholes was at his peak and won the Treble around the time you were born. He came trough the academy as a forward and played many years as an attacking midfielder and box to box midfielder with Roy Keane, before he played a deeper playmaker role with Michael Carrick etc later on. Scholes was a great goalscorer, technical brilliant, controlled the tempo in the game, and could hit a three from 100m despite having an eye disease in his 30’s. My point is that Paul Scholes had quite a decent allround game himself… Gerrard, great as he was will never be at the level of Scholes in my opionion, because the type of player Scholes was is a lot more rare.
If that's his peak that's a hilariously low peak
You do realise Scholes also played as an attacking midfielder earlier in his career, or even a striker? He only really became a dedicated deeper midfielder after his eye problem in 2006.
Gerrard was always inconsistent as a deeper midfielder. Sure he'd have one game where he'd look like one of the best players in the world, but he'd turn around the very next game and actually be a net negative on his team as his hollywood balls would ensure Liverpool couldn't actually control or build anything. Somewhat like Pogba was for us, although obviously a bit better and he always at least bought a better workrate. There's a reason that I, and many other Utd fans, loved the fact that Liverpool basically 'wasted' most of his career by playing him in a role that never allowed him to be consistent.
If you're comparing their performances as an attacking midfielder, I'd agree he was better than Scholes. But both of them spent the majority of their careers playing as a central midfielder, and Scholes was comfortably better there.
Last edited:
Longevity is hugely important. Those players had an immense peak, longevity and big titles.
He was a poor 6. And he was an 8 when he wasn't a second striker. It's no surprise that he was at his best when he didn't have to think as much and played instinctively further forward. So no that's not his prime. You've just taken three versions and put then together.
2022-23 is part of his peak? As is the season where Liverpool collapsed (but recovered)? Two seasons ago or something.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. As great as Gerrard was, he was never good at controlling or conducting the pace of a game and would often contribute to conceding the midfield battle. He was unbelievable as a RW/AM, and his numbers back that up. But, Scholes was definitely the better midfielder.
Sorry not this season but last season.
Why is that?
There was a post on r/soccer last week about France Football’s best XI of the decade (2010-2019) and the comment section - unanimously - was a collective pile-on regarding van Dijk’s inclusion. He stood out like a sore thumb in a defence with Lahm, Ramos and Marcelo.
Imagine including a player in the decade best XI, amongst legitimate hall-of-famers, who played for Groningen, Celtic and Southampton from 2011-2018. Incredible.
Yet he was still picked by France Football, some people here are acting like he’s nowhere near that level.
He’s better than Kompany and even Kompany thinks he’s better than he ever was.
It’s funny if you give respect to Van Dijk people accuse you of being a Liverpool fan, despite commenting in many threads showing it’s obviously not the case. Same with Trent Alexander Arnold, those two players seem to hit a nerve. Sorry if we don’t all call for tribalism when judging players. Anyway I think Gerrard was overrated and Scholes was better. Van Dijk had the best one off season for a PL defender and I’d probably have Vidic with him in an all-time team, with considerations for Terry and Ferdinand.
Infighting. Don' stop them.
The end of aura defending though. Attackers no long overrespect him. They're having a go at his decline.
He really doesn't like tackling dose he?always leaves it to someone else even when that someone else is Joe Gomez! Surly he should no Gomez is poor and the team would be better off if he went for the tackle and aloud Gomez to drop off and cover? Starting to think all that nonsense about never getting dribbled went to his head and he wants to try keep that record.
Reminds me of vidic after his knee injury was just never the same
Agree
Remember when he was the best centre back in Premier League history? Hilarious times.
It’s funny isn’t it as he’s probably not in the top 5 best CBs. Rio, vidic and even terry did more over a longer period but this guy has a few good seasons and he’s better than everyone.
Was about to post the same thing. Vidic was never the same after his injury. Same happened with this dude. That’s always a risk with big injuries.
I’m taking great pleasure in this considering the abuse I took when I said Rio was better and everyone was on the Van Dijk is the best ever train.
Rio had his injuries and lost his pace, yet, he adapted and improved his positioning to make up for it and was still world class for awhile. This guy is finished.
Rio had his injuries and lost his pace, yet, he adapted and improved his positioning to make up for it and was still world class for awhile. This guy is finished.
Rio is miles clear of this guy.
Rio and JT probably the best two for longevity and maintaining such a prolonged peak.
VVD didn't do it for long enough. On a level below with Vidic, Kompany, Carvalho and I guess a few more from the 90's like Stam, Adams etc.
Vidic was extraordinary and in the top bracket.
Van Dijk is always backing off, he manages to shirk responsibility so much in defensive phases. He's a bystander in so many occasions
I loved him too, but I think JT and Rio are out on their own for the reasons stated. Rio defined a new era of central defenders.
Vidic was colossal for us, but probably only for 3/4 seasons. He never came back 100% from the ACL vs Basel.
As a pair, Rio and Vidic were perfect. Both covered each others weaknesses. If I could take a pair, it would be those two. Individually, I think JT shades Vidic.