I said those players held us back from getting to the next level not the level we were at. Are you seriously telling me Ramires has a good first touch and is a good passer of the ball?

No you said he was a "crap" player.

Every single piece of evidence disproves that

What's the next level ?

I don't think any player who gets 52 caps for Brazil can be called "crap", even if the current generation of Brazilian players is not the best we've seen.
Ramires wasn't the greatest passer of the ball or dribbler, but he did the job we bought him for in his first few seasons. I wouldn't mind betting that quite a few opposing managers would have loved to have in their squad at that time. He was one of those players that Cantona called "water carriers", every team needs them .

He is the type of player you need if you want to win or compete for the Premiership.

I actually was a fan of Ramires, as others have said, he wasn't the most skillful but he reminded me of the likes of Ji-sung Park who put in a good shift, tracking back and covering, with the occasional moment of brilliance(i.e. that Barca goal).

He had a place in the squad IMO.

Crap when compared to top class of the players we once had -Terry, A Cole, Makalele, Lamps, Ballack, Robben, Drogba et al.
Ray Parlour was on the title winning Arsenal but that doesn't stop him from being way below the level of Henry, Vierra and co.

Still makes both of them very good footballers

A lot of Chelsea fans appear to have a soft spot for players who run around a lot. They don't care if they run around like a headless chicken (used to in that players case) or can't trap a bag of cement.

In your opinion and once again every single FACT disproves your opinion which is based on your personal likes and dislikes

Jack Charlton is a World Cup winner. I wouldn't rate him in the top few hundred of best English players.

And why is who you rate important?

They care that they contribute to winning trophies and he did whether you liked that or not.
No team is full of superstars. The great United teams had their runners to do the donkey work.

I remember basic stuff like that, it wasn't even that long ago. If you don't then I suggest you look it up next time to avoid looking foolish.

It's not even that where I think Dixon is talking complete nonsense

It call a player who is a full international has been a big part of the number of trophies won during his time at Chelsea and who has also received the personal honours he has as "crap" is maybe the most inane comment ever.

There are many players I don't "rate" who Dixon I am sure would call "world class" but I would not say they was crap because of a personal view.

It's ridiculous to say a player with so many caps and has contributed to trophy winning teams is crap. It really is a nonsense.

opinions have their place of course. But not when we dealing with these sort of things. There are just too much evidence disproving the theory.

You can say players at this level are not world class or fantastic player that's debatable there are many players who when have discussed with other football fans I have said are very good etc and been disagreed with and have myself disagreed with others who have talked but players but to dismiss their abilities utterly and completely like this really is going too far

Do you think over the past few seasons Chelsea have not been buying the right players I mean what was the point in buying Alexandre Pato

I never said it was important.
Going by your logic, Geoff Hurst must be a greater striker than Jimmy Greaves because he has was in the team that won the WC and Jimmy wasn't.
You just look at the medal rather than actual ability.
You'd ignore the fact that Hurst was only there because Greaves got injured. Ignore the fact that Greaves was hugely superior and just look at Hurst having one magical match and forget about how truly great Greaves was for club and country for his whole career.

It's ridiculous to think winning caps in an atrocious Brazilian team means anything. Pele would still be better than half of this sad bunch.

Another pointless comparison that has 0 to do with the topic being discussed I would say Hurst was a very good player which he was. We are not discussing who is superior to who.

Do you think England would have still won the World cup if Jimmy Greaves was playing instead of Geoff Hurst

You really think a player with 50+ caps for the Brazilian national team can't trap a ball and just runs around like a headless chicken ? imagine how many young kids in Brazil would give anything to pull on the shirt for their national team..tens of thousands.
Ramires will never go down as one of their greats, but he must still have been an exceptional talent to get anywhere near the level he reached.

And?

Nobody apart from you is comparing anyone to anyone.

Just because they are not as good as a random player has nothing to do with their abilities or level

Geoff Hurst 242 goals in 500 games, Player of the year for his team in 67,68,69 in the UEFA tournament team of the year in 68.

Yes Hurst was a decent player. Not as good as some but better then others.