villa is better than torres at everything except heading, being strong, and looking like a girl.
seriously, what is the point of this thread?
Exactly
I do, however, concur with La Furia's assessment of both players. Torres relies too much on pace and athleticism, exclude both and he wont be half the player he is now. Extremely overrated in the EPL and its followers.
In top CLUB FORM I rate both of them pretty high, neither one necessarily better than the other but both play different styles with certain strengths superior over the other. However on the national squad, Villa is more consistent, although the fantastic Torres-Villa link is one of the reasons that Villa IS so successful besides Villa's skills alone (ignore the poor performance of Torres this WC, we all know it's been bad but we all also know why).
Torres has always underperformed for his national team. I believe if you're top-class your quality 'll shine through in any team or circumstance. Villa being a case in point. He has been a success at both club and intl level. I wouldn't really attribute Villa's success to his link-up with Torres 'cause although he benefits from playing off a targetman, he has delivered regardless and scored plenty of goals for Spain without Torres's assistance. Villa would be just as succesful if it was Llorente in Torres's place. The man is exceptionally talented to be too reliant on any one particular factor.
The main reason I say that is because I rate it higher than most would, at least on here. He gets more flak for it than I think he deserves. not necessarily because I think he's better than Villa at it (certainly not on the national squad, but I more or less covered that in my post anyway) but on Liverpool I think he has a fine first touch. I'll get laughed at anyway but I don't care
"In the country of the blind, the one eyed man is king" , Thats Liverpool and Torres for you.
If you look at the quality around him or the lack thereof, one can understand why you rate his first touch.
He certainly doesn't 've a "fine" first touch. It can be very erratic and inconsistent. He'll stand out in a decent team(pool) but put him in a talented team(Spain) with top quality ard him, he gets outshined by his teammates. Either he can't handle pressure while playing for his country or hes just not as good as his fans or the EPL media claim him to be. For me, its a bit of both.
Isn't technique inter-related to both passing and dribbling? There are pure dribblers, like for example Robinho, who ain't that great at passing but still considered 'technical' & there are people like Fabregas, Xavi, etc who are great at passing and not so great at dribbling(I do know they are both under-rated when it comes to dribbling but still they ain't a world-beater like Ronaldo or Messi at that!!) and are believed the best in the business when it comes to 'technique'
How is Ronaldo a world-beater at dribbling?
His 'dribbling' is redundant in tight spaces and more often loses the ball on one-ones. Kicks the ball and tries to outpace his man. Thts basically his modus operandi. His 'dribbling' was effective in the 06/07 season when he used quick feet and change of directions to lose his markers but these days he struggles to get past anyone. Even Pedro is a better dribbler, so comparing him to Xavi and Fabregas is quite off the mark. The latter 2 can actually manouevre around a defender with ball skills, slight body feints etc.
So who should be considered exactly the best in technique? Or does technique means being brilliant on the ball like having great first-touch and having a good control on it? Like Ronaldinho, Messi, Iniesta, etc
Technique is the procedure or the manner in which you execute the fundamentals or the various aspects of the game. Its the way in which you perform a dribble, strike a ball(be it passing, shooting, taking setpieces), bring a ball in control or head it. The better the technique, the greater success at these aspects and as a player.
