Fabio Quagliarella (17 Viewers)
- Thread starter Dostoevsky
- Start date
Not a very convincing argument. I don't rate Gio as I do Quag, but I have defended him against unwarranted criticism on more than one occasion. My bias will always be towards all these guys coz they're Juve player's. Same goes for Osvaldo. Whether I rate him or I don't, I will support him. I'm not dodging anything.
You're saying the CL isn't important, which is completely untrue. We may not be in the competition anymore but that doesn't mean the contribution at the time was not important. That's a bit of a tangent, because it was. If Quag didn't score those goals in the CL, we would've recorded a loss against Copenhagen and Galatasaray, and it wouldn't even have gone to the last match day. Of course, in hindsight it's easy to conclude that it doesn't matter now. Just like his contribution in the competition last year didn't matter either, since we didn't end up going on to win it.
And nowhere have I said that Quag scored in the CL and that is way more important than the league where Gio has scored a goal. I think you perhaps misunderstood. What I said was, that you can't say his goals in the CL were not an important contribution. This is completely independent of Gio.
The comparison won't matter mid season, because we are going to look at the same stats end of the season, and a lot can change from now and then. Almost a half a season to go, and either player is capable of showing immense value. Those 200 minutes are a negiligible amount if you see it in the context of the next 5-6 months. At the end of last season, Quag had almost 1000 minutes less, if not more, than Gio. It may have been a lot different mid season. For eg. If you look at Licht, now, he's ahead of Pirlo in g/a, but it could be a very different story come end of season. Which is when you're really going to know if the player has been effective enough or not. And anything can happen in a half season, remember Matri and Amauri's run of form?
Again, you are looking at this without any context. The season before last (Conte's first season here), what you fail to point out is that we had not only switched formations, but Quag was coming off a career threatening injury and had almost 0 continuity. That was not a fair season to judge him on, and I think some here would agree with that. Some might debate it, but I think it would be within reason to say that he could be given some time to adapt to a new system and style of play under a new coach, as he came back up to speed physically. 1000 minutes is what? 11 games? And it's not like he got a run of games to build any form.
You go a season before that, and I'd say, Quag was the go to guy in attack before his unfortunate injury. He carried this team, and that could be seen by how rapidly we slid down the table post the match in Parma.
I also think there's a great misconception here about 'rating' and 'overrating' a player. Yes, I like Quag as a player, but I think I'm reasonable enough to know where he stands in the context of the club. I do believe that he has delivered reasonably well despite the odds (player's ahead of him, not enough continuity). I do defend him, that too is correct, but a lot of my defense is against inane or provocative comments. Not against warranted criticism. You probably see my defense too, but you don't see the multiple goal against Chelsea gifs, when one is trying to have a fair discussion regarding his contribution to the team, as an impact player. So I guess, to each their own.
