I would say Suarez. Torres at his very best was an outstanding striker, but Suarez has the better all-round game. Torres relied heavily on pace and lightening reactions, that's why his game deteriorated so quickly when he lost that "edge".
I would say Suarez. Torres at his very best was an outstanding striker, but Suarez has the better all-round game. Torres relied heavily on pace and lightening reactions, that's why his game deteriorated so quickly when he lost that "edge".
That's probably my thoughts. I think Torres was the better striker, but Suarez is the far better player. He can change a game even when he's not fit or playing well.
Torres was world class but has declined so much it's easy to forget how good he was.
When was Torres' peak, was it just his first season at Liverpool, or more than that?
As I would be edging towards Suarez, if given the choice between peak players.
I remember Torres looking a terrific player before he arrived at Liverpool. I had been hoping we might sign him, but Liverpool had always been the English club he wanted to join. Then we did get him and he was crocked, don't know how he passed his MOT to be honest. Dalgish saw us coming with that one alright.
I remember Torres looking a terrific player before he arrived at Liverpool. I had been hoping we might sign him, but Liverpool had always been the English club he wanted to join. Then we did get him and he was crocked, don't know how he passed his MOT to be honest. Dalgish saw us coming with that one alright.
Indeed he did, but strangely we still got the better end of that deal!
I'm obviously referring to what Kenny did with that money, wasting it.
I wonder if the sMe thing has happened to the Suarez money, I guess we will soon find out
That's a completely different and separate deal which didn't involve Chelsea what so ever. You got no better end of the deal. You brought Torres for 50 million which ultimately turned out to be awful on your end. It happens.
That's a completely different and separate deal which didn't involve Chelsea what so ever. You got no better end of the deal. You brought Torres for 50 million which ultimately turned out to be awful on your end. It happens.
But you cannot take things in isolation, football doesn't work like that.
We could argue that Chelsea selling Luiz is a terrible transfer even though we got fifty million, you cannot play a bundle of cash on the pitch.
But I. Context, when we reinvested in Costa and fabregas it is a good deal for Chelsea.
Torres was a special player, the way he came here and hit the ground running. 24 PL goals in his first season was an incredible achievement, but overshadowed a bit because Ronaldo had an even more incredible season. At the time he was considered arguably the world's most lethal striker, but I can't say he was ever better than Suarez, if only because Suarez has more to his game.
Comments
I've never seen anything like it
Both are/were fantastic players - possibly two of the best ever in he prem.
That's probably my thoughts. I think Torres was the better striker, but Suarez is the far better player. He can change a game even when he's not fit or playing well.
Torres was world class but has declined so much it's easy to forget how good he was.
Really?
Drogba vs Carragher in the CL. Completely obliterated.
As between those two, I have never been a Torres fan, whereas Suarez is in my opinion the best in the world, so Suarez any day of the week.
As I would be edging towards Suarez, if given the choice between peak players.
I remember Torres looking a terrific player before he arrived at Liverpool. I had been hoping we might sign him, but Liverpool had always been the English club he wanted to join. Then we did get him and he was crocked, don't know how he passed his MOT to be honest. Dalgish saw us coming with that one alright.
Indeed he did, but strangely we still got the better end of that deal!
Liverpool got 50 million.
You got Torres.
Safe to say you're talking **** again.
I'm obviously referring to what Kenny did with that money, wasting it.
I wonder if the sMe thing has happened to the Suarez money, I guess we will soon find out
That's a completely different and separate deal which didn't involve Chelsea what so ever. You got no better end of the deal. You brought Torres for 50 million which ultimately turned out to be awful on your end. It happens.
But you cannot take things in isolation, football doesn't work like that.
We could argue that Chelsea selling Luiz is a terrible transfer even though we got fifty million, you cannot play a bundle of cash on the pitch.
But I. Context, when we reinvested in Costa and fabregas it is a good deal for Chelsea.
Do you see?
Err... no. Selling David Luiz for 50million before the World Cup was a genius deal in any circumstances.
Chelsea paid 50 million for Torres. What Liverpool went on to do with that 50 million is completely separate to Chelsea buying Torres for 50 million.
Do you see? Of course you do, but you're up to your usual tricks which most can see anyway. Wasting your time.