DISQUS

milly · 1 year ago

i think you are manche fan . so i don't get hesitated to read such a fan biased web site.you are representative of manchester.Any way i think the work done by fabregas is far more than goals of ronaldo .you know , the way fab passes with accuracy and see players is far more than the goals of ronaldo who has a habit of falling easily deceiving referre but with fab nothing is fabrication .he is just small pirlo of ac milan .Bye manch fan
stupid

Kenny · 1 year ago

To the idiot that posted the comment, the very idea of you trying to compare Ronaldo and Fabregas is just plain stupid, Ronaldo is a complete attacking footballer let alone the best in the world and i say that regardless of the fact that i am a "manch" fan as you put it. Fabregas has a vision far beyond his years and his passing certain rivals the likes of Pirlo, but don't ever make a stupid comparison like that again...Pirlo is of a completely different calibre to Fabregas. The pace, the power, the goalscoring ability, the vision, the bravery and the overall grace of Cristiano Ronaldo is what makes him PFA player of the year and very likely world player of the year and i would like to add is Fabregas favourite to win it this year? i think not.

Dominic · 1 year ago

How can a player several year into his 20's and a regular premiership player for several years be entitled to be called a young player?
Surely this title should be reserved for under 21's and/or players making their debuts.

Michael · 1 year ago

That's my point, Dominic, I don't think it's right. To be honest, I think a guy like Theo Walcott would be the perfect choice for Young Player of the Year.

chima · 1 year ago

to be honest why it that any time chritiano ronaldo is playing the top 4 or any top team in europe he his not always in the game compared to fabregas. young player of the year is not suppose to be player above 20. to me theo walcott is the young best player

Arnold · 1 year ago

Fabregas IS 20!! He's not 21,22 or 23..he's just 20!

damir · 1 year ago

I think you're a little bitter and judging by all your other articles you're not that big of an Arsenal fan, even though you say you 'respect' them and you're a neutral.

Besides that, Arnold is right, Fabregas is only 20.

I think you should be arguing to change the way the PFA votes and nominees are brought up. Not that Fabregas has won it.

I'm an Arsenal fan and I think Ronaldo does deserve the PFA Player of the Year award.

Although you are right to say that Fabregas shouldn't be considered a young player in terms of talking about the 100+ premiership appearances he has contributed for the Arsenal, but when you look at his age he's 20 years old... probably just the same age as you.

Michael · 1 year ago

Damir, read my post again.

I said that I've already talked about how the PFA needs to change the stipulations for Young Player of the Year and how I believe nominees need to be 20 years of age or younger while only playing 38 top-flight league games (at most) when the season starts to be eligible for the award.

I'm not arguing the fact that Fabregas deserves this award really; he's had a solid season although he's tailed off since his ridiculously hot start. I will say that Cristiano Ronaldo, as he was the Player of the Year and was also up for Young Player of the Year, should've won. How can you be the best player in a season, regardless of age, but not the best young player?? It doesn't make sense.

I'm actually 19, but thanks for the joke there. To me, it doesn't really matter that Fabregas is 20 years old, he's made 137 Premiership appearances and has played for Arsenal's first team since he was 16. You can't tell me that he is still a "young player", just like Torres, Ronaldo, and Young aren't really young players either.

Liz · 1 year ago

Im not gonna argue about Ronaldo winning Player of theYear cos it was obvious he was going to win.

However, I disagree with your comments about Young Player of the Year. For me the nominees need to be just breaking through into teams or beginning to show real class and quality for the first time in the Premiership so basically any player who's made an impact in a short space of time . I also agree for a player to be considered Young Player of the Year they must be perhaps under 23 as a maximum age limit but the main focus should be on how much experience they have had in terms of playing time as Ronaldo and Torres have been around for 6 or 7 years, Fabregas a little less but still have more experience.

I disagree with you saying Ashley Young, who I believed deserved to win it being the highest Assister in EPL behind Cesc should not have been nominated as he has only played in the Premiership for a short amount of time.

My nominees would have been Ashley Young, Gabriel Agbonlahor, David Wheater, Joe Hart, Gael Clichy and maybe Anderson.

Alex Hleb · 1 year ago

well i dont think its right that a divin twat should win player of the year.

to the second commenter who called the 1st commenter and idiot, but is actually an idiot himself....
when you see bravery and grace, you mean diving and sticking your tongue out in a grotesque manner right? right.

Michael · 1 year ago

Liz, again, go back and read my post.

What you're saying in your long paragraph is exactly what I'm saying. To be a young player of the year, I still think 20 years of age is younger is appropriate, but it's also the experience and number of games played that I care about. 38 top-flight league games is the maximum that should be allowed at the start of a season for a player eligible to win the award.

We seem to be in agreement with that notion, so I'm not sure why you disagreed?

If you've followed the blog, you know how high I am on Ashley Young. I think he's terrific. I think he should start on the left for England. I think he's a fantastic player who is very under rated by mainstream media.

How many Premier League games had he played before this season? First of all, he's 22, which would've ruled him out in my proposal, but I know he played half a season for Watford in the PL and also half a season for Villa. He may not have played the 38 league games, but I think he's too old to be considered a "young player", at least in terms of this award.

You have some decent nominees but seem to be forgetting Theo Walcott. Other than that, Hart, Wheater, and Anderson are all good choices.

Josh · 1 year ago

I would imagine that anyone who was able to vote for ronaldo did so, therefore not making much point to vote for him twice.

Michael · 1 year ago

But they're two separate awards. If Ronaldo is the Player of the Year and can be the Young Player of the Year, it makes no sense that he wasn't.

After all, he won both awards last year.

Matt · 1 year ago

Ronaldo did deserve to win the award and so did Fabregas.
Anyway, my question is how come Arsenal has the greatest number of players in the PFA team and yet is still trophyless?
could you shed some light.

Michael · 1 year ago

I was going to do a post on that later tonight, so check back for it and I'll try and answer that question...Still too much of a "Big Four" influence on the the team, even though Chelsea didn't even get one player on it and they could win the league.

jess · 1 year ago

maybe because you are dumb
HELLO?! YOUNG PLAYER YOUNG PLAYER ok?
CESC FABREGAS is 20 years old
CRISTIANO RONALDO is 23
WHAT DO YOU MEAN CESC SHOULDN't BE RUNNING, HE WAS 19 LAST YEAR OK?!


the award says under 23 players, stupid crynaldo is 23 so he shouldn't even be in the running for YOUNG PLAYER

Michael · 1 year ago

Jess, maybe you should read my post again as well.

Look, people, read it carefully before you make your comments.

I agree that Ronaldo shouldn't have been up for the Young Player of the Year award, but he was, and since he won the senior player award, it's ridiculous that he didn't win the young player award as well.

Fabregas is NOT a young player by my estimation. In age, sure he is, but he's made nearly 150 Premier League appearances for Arsenal, and that's probably three or four times more than many players five or six years older than him.

Neither of these two should've been in the running, and I've said time and time again. I've told you all my feelings on what should be considered a "young player". If you're going to make these ridiculous, moronic comments, then fine, but I'm getting tired of repeating myself over and over because you didn't read what I wrote.

Come on guys, seriously.

ossie's dream · 1 year ago

Michael, you must have the patience of a saint. There are some absurdly stupid people reading this blog.

Michael · 1 year ago

Some would say that there is an absurdly stupid person writing this post too, but that's ok, I can roll with it, haha.

Are you being sarcastic though? Because honestly, look at how many times I've had to repeat myself for these people who somehow think that I have it in for Fabregas or anything like that. They're missing the point, and it's frustrating trying to explain it again when I thought I did a pretty decent job of explaining it the first time around.

Brendan · 1 year ago

I understand what your saying Michale but Fabregas is 20 now , even if he had 150 prem. starts since he was 17 or 18 or whatever, do u think he could perform as well as all the other players that are older than him. No. He wasn't played very much in the first seasons. He was put in after Veari left and others were injuried. He has had to come out inexperienced and play what he plays. That it self is a achievement in its own right. Fabregas is in a niche and unfortunately he isn't being adequately rested though. Don't you think that its a bit hard to play nearly every game and not have not one injury or to be not fatigued. Isn't that something to achieve. My question in the end is why make an article on how its unfair for a player to win an award based on how many games he played compared to other players his age? Why can't you realize that its an achievement for Fabregas at the age of 20 , to be played so much because he is such an important role on Arsenal ? Other players nominated weren't as played as much because Fabregas is more of an key player to his team there for played more. Thats why he won the award.

Michael · 1 year ago

That's false, Brendan, completely false. Young, Torres, and Ronaldo meant just as much to their respective teams as Fabregas did.

Why write the article? Because Ronaldo was eligible for the award that Fabregas won, so Ronaldo should've won it going by their rules. Personally, I don't think any of the nominees should have been eligible, because none of them are "young" anymore, either age-wise or experience-wise.