They are good players who've done well though Ward-Prowse is a big reach in particular. The rest, I don't disagree. But the point is that I can't see how any of those you've mentioned have a huge case over and above those who have been picked.
I'd put Danny Ings in that same bracket as those you've mentioned too, with the same logic applicable to him.
ings is a good call...
i just reckon it's tougher to shine and stand out in the premier league when you are not surrounded by so much quality like those at the lesser clubs... i'm not knocking those on the list, all top players, but i think there should be more recognition for those who have been every bit as consistent, and have been stand-out performers week in week out for those teams that find it a tougher slog week in week out..
i just reckon it's tougher to shine and stand out in the premier league when you are not surrounded by so much quality like those at the lesser clubs... i'm not knocking those on the list, all top players, but i think there should be more recognition for those who have been every bit as consistent, and have been stand-out performers week in week out for those teams that find it a tougher slog week in week out..
This is a debate (interesting one imo) that pops up every year
i just reckon it's tougher to shine and stand out in the premier league when you are not surrounded by so much quality like those at the lesser clubs... i'm not knocking those on the list, all top players, but i think there should be more recognition for those who have been every bit as consistent, and have been stand-out performers week in week out for those teams that find it a tougher slog week in week out..
Maybe, but there have been many examples of players who find it easier to perform when they're a big fish in a small pond, then they move to a bigger team where the pressure is on to perform at the same standard every week and they struggle.
Do players get to vote for the same player in both categories? I'm guessing no, and people are sort of alternating with putting their second choice in the young PFA category. In which case I'm not sure how you'd counter that, besides maybe simply discounting those who are in the PFA category regardless of how many have voted for them.
Do players get to vote for the same player in both categories? I'm guessing no, and people are sort of alternating with putting their second choice in the young PFA category. In which case I'm not sure how you'd counter that, besides maybe simply discounting those who are in the PFA category regardless of how many have voted for them.
The simple answer is to make young player an under 21 award. It is faintly absurd that at 24 Hazard is in the young player list.
i just reckon it's tougher to shine and stand out in the premier league when you are not surrounded by so much quality like those at the lesser clubs... i'm not knocking those on the list, all top players, but i think there should be more recognition for those who have been every bit as consistent, and have been stand-out performers week in week out for those teams that find it a tougher slog week in week out..
Its a pity you kicked off your contribution with a dig at it being for exclusive preserve of the top six, because the rest of what you've said is fair.
I don't know what recognition you can give them really. The incentive is for them to maintain these standards in order to attract the attention of the top clubs.
the format definitely needs tweaking. I don't necessarily mind players being nominated in both categories, but as others have said it would be absurd for different players to win each one when they had been nominated in both. I think they've definitely got to reduce the age of eligibility for the Young Player award though. 21 at an absolute maximum.
the format definitely needs tweaking. I don't necessarily mind players being nominated in both categories, but as others have said it would be absurd for different players to win each one when they had been nominated in both. I think they've definitely got to reduce the age of eligibility for the Young Player award though. 21 at an absolute maximum.
Absolutely. Having such a generous maximum age for the young player award seriously detracts from the main player of the year award.
Yeah that'd make sense. But then they can qualify for the U21s for some strange reason, so it might be because of that that they count.
Yes, 1 January 1992 is the cut off for the under 21s.
This would eliminate Hazard and De Gea is 25 this year...and he's in the young player category, my god.
I do think that being nominated in both categories is wrong - should be one or the other and as has been said 'young' as in Young Player Award should be defined - 21 or under at the time of the dinner seems a good place to put it imo.
My votes would go to De Gea in the main award and Kane in the Young Player Award. For me CFC have a number of key players who have been factors in their being likely champs - Hazard yes but also Costa, Fabregas and Terry spring to mind. I think without Hazard CFC would be in much the same position as they are now, whereas without De Gea I do not think MUFC would be. Up till the game V THFC at OT I was genuinely not worried by MUFC as they had played well in very few games but now for sure they have got their act together and will finish at least 4th if not above. Even tho I am a LFC fan I am not sure Coutinho deserves a nomination - great but only sometimes, far too inconsistent to win a national award tho yes I'd prob agree he has been LFCS best player.
Kane has simply been the most impressive young player, for a new player on the scene he has been outstanding and is to me clearly the best candidate.
I do think that being nominated in both categories is wrong - should be one or the other and as has been said 'young' as in Young Player Award should be defined - 21 or under at the time of the dinner seems a good place to put it imo.
My votes would go to De Gea in the main award and Kane in the Young Player Award. For me CFC have a number of key players who have been factors in their being likely champs - Hazard yes but also Costa, Fabregas and Terry spring to mind. I think without Hazard CFC would be in much the same position as they are now, whereas without De Gea I do not think MUFC would be. Up till the game V THFC at OT I was genuinely not worried by MUFC as they had played well in very few games but now for sure they have got their act together and will finish at least 4th if not above. Even tho I am a LFC fan I am not sure Coutinho deserves a nomination - great but only sometimes, far too inconsistent to win a national award tho yes I'd prob agree he has been LFCS best player.
Kane has simply been the most impressive young player, for a new player on the scene he has been outstanding and is to me clearly the best candidate.
For a goalkeeper to win the award he would have had to have a season that is completely off the scale, its just not a popular choice compared to creative players and goalscorers. I think the voting is also ridiculously early for these things so Manchester United wouldn't have been having any sort of season at the time.
I think a Chelsea player will walk it. Probably Hazard but Costa was having a stormer up until the new year so his recent absence may not count.
I do think that being nominated in both categories is wrong - should be one or the other and as has been said 'young' as in Young Player Award should be defined - 21 or under at the time of the dinner seems a good place to put it imo.
I do disagree on that one. let's say the cutoff is 21 and someone like Kane is a shoo-in for the Young Player award but has also played well enough to be in contention for the main award. if he has to forfeit the former and loses in the latter. it wouldn't be fair for him to - in effect - be punished for doing [TOWNSEND]too well[/TOWNSEND]
He has been tremendous this season, his football is outstanding. One day he will be the best in the world.
I urge all fans of football to watch the chelsea games just for him.
this one again...? Hazard is only three and a half years younger than Messi, but even now isn't anywhere near as good as Messi was ten years ago. he's a fine player, for sure, but just one of many other fine players his age or thereabouts in the world. no matter how much you'd like him to be, he's simply not anywhere NEAR the level you keep trying to elevate him to.
I do disagree on that one. let's say the cutoff is 21 and someone like Kane is a shoo-in for the Young Player award but has also played well enough to be in contention for the main award. if he has to forfeit the former and loses in the latter. it wouldn't be fair for him to - in effect - be punished for doing [TOWNSEND]too well[/TOWNSEND]
You are bang on there too. I think we all understand more than one player being nominated for both then having different winners amongst those players is a nonsense.
If you win the main award as a young player, logic is you win both.
If you are good enough for the main award nomination and come fourth, its not right to be excluding that player for young player.
Only other outcome making the main award for over 21s only. But we have two 24 yos in for young player and as you and others say, absurd.
this one again...? Hazard is only three and a half years younger than Messi, but even now isn't anywhere near as good as Messi was ten years ago. he's a fine player, for sure, but just one of many other fine players his age or thereabouts in the world. no matter how much you'd like him to be, he's simply not anywhere NEAR the level you keep trying to elevate him to.
And yet here he is, winning player of the year and all the plaudits.
I guess all the people who watch him must be wrong.
He is not on the messi level.
However i am going to trot out the age old cliche, how would messi do in the PL against defenders like shawcross?
Hazard is the most fouled player in the PL, teams try and stop him by hacking/scything him down, He gets up, black and blue, and continues without fuss.
In the spanish league he would get the protection messi does and would appear to be a much improved player.
If messi came to the PL, ive no doubt he would go down in "quality".
winning POTY doesn't automatically qualify you as being among the best in the world.
I can't take that tired cliche in the slightest bit seriously, in all honesty. Messi's body of work really shouldn't be being questioned at this point, but if you're genuinely convinced that he'd suddenly come back to the field as a result of facing the likes of Ryan bloody Shawcross, then so be it.
wake me up when Hazard starts to dominate against top-quality opposition outside of the PL. because that'll be when we can even discuss him amongst those that have done so once or on the odd occasion, even if still some considerable way from a guy who has been doing so in his sleep almost non-stop for 10 years.
Hazard and Kane will get the awards - de Gea is the only one who may spring a surprise as he's been so consistently good this season. Yes, Hazard may become the best in the world one day - but that'll be a day after Messi, Ronaldo and Suarez retire.
it's not just Messi and Ronaldo though. look at what other players like Sanchez, Neymar, Bale, Aguero etc have done at the very top level...Hazard really isn't in that category at all.
Comments
ings is a good call...
i just reckon it's tougher to shine and stand out in the premier league when you are not surrounded by so much quality like those at the lesser clubs... i'm not knocking those on the list, all top players, but i think there should be more recognition for those who have been every bit as consistent, and have been stand-out performers week in week out for those teams that find it a tougher slog week in week out..
This is a debate (interesting one imo) that pops up every year
It's difficult to measure it relatively alright
Hazard should win it a canter.
Maybe, but there have been many examples of players who find it easier to perform when they're a big fish in a small pond, then they move to a bigger team where the pressure is on to perform at the same standard every week and they struggle.
The simple answer is to make young player an under 21 award. It is faintly absurd that at 24 Hazard is in the young player list.
Its a pity you kicked off your contribution with a dig at it being for exclusive preserve of the top six, because the rest of what you've said is fair.
I don't know what recognition you can give them really. The incentive is for them to maintain these standards in order to attract the attention of the top clubs.
Yeah that'd make sense. But then they can qualify for the U21s for some strange reason, so it might be because of that that they count.
Absolutely. Having such a generous maximum age for the young player award seriously detracts from the main player of the year award.
Agree with this.
Yes, 1 January 1992 is the cut off for the under 21s.
This would eliminate Hazard and De Gea is 25 this year...and he's in the young player category, my god.
My votes would go to De Gea in the main award and Kane in the Young Player Award. For me CFC have a number of key players who have been factors in their being likely champs - Hazard yes but also Costa, Fabregas and Terry spring to mind. I think without Hazard CFC would be in much the same position as they are now, whereas without De Gea I do not think MUFC would be. Up till the game V THFC at OT I was genuinely not worried by MUFC as they had played well in very few games but now for sure they have got their act together and will finish at least 4th if not above. Even tho I am a LFC fan I am not sure Coutinho deserves a nomination - great but only sometimes, far too inconsistent to win a national award tho yes I'd prob agree he has been LFCS best player.
Kane has simply been the most impressive young player, for a new player on the scene he has been outstanding and is to me clearly the best candidate.
For a goalkeeper to win the award he would have had to have a season that is completely off the scale, its just not a popular choice compared to creative players and goalscorers. I think the voting is also ridiculously early for these things so Manchester United wouldn't have been having any sort of season at the time.
I think a Chelsea player will walk it. Probably Hazard but Costa was having a stormer up until the new year so his recent absence may not count.
I completely agree. I'm baffled at how they can place 24 year-olds into the young category.
He has been tremendous this season, his football is outstanding. One day he will be the best in the world.
I urge all fans of football to watch the chelsea games just for him.
As for the young player, its ridiculous players like DDG, Eden and so on are even nominated.
It should be courtois or kane
You are bang on there too. I think we all understand more than one player being nominated for both then having different winners amongst those players is a nonsense.
If you win the main award as a young player, logic is you win both.
If you are good enough for the main award nomination and come fourth, its not right to be excluding that player for young player.
Only other outcome making the main award for over 21s only. But we have two 24 yos in for young player and as you and others say, absurd.
And yet here he is, winning player of the year and all the plaudits.
I guess all the people who watch him must be wrong.
He is not on the messi level.
However i am going to trot out the age old cliche, how would messi do in the PL against defenders like shawcross?
Hazard is the most fouled player in the PL, teams try and stop him by hacking/scything him down, He gets up, black and blue, and continues without fuss.
In the spanish league he would get the protection messi does and would appear to be a much improved player.
If messi came to the PL, ive no doubt he would go down in "quality".
I can't take that tired cliche in the slightest bit seriously, in all honesty. Messi's body of work really shouldn't be being questioned at this point, but if you're genuinely convinced that he'd suddenly come back to the field as a result of facing the likes of Ryan bloody Shawcross, then so be it.
wake me up when Hazard starts to dominate against top-quality opposition outside of the PL. because that'll be when we can even discuss him amongst those that have done so once or on the odd occasion, even if still some considerable way from a guy who has been doing so in his sleep almost non-stop for 10 years.