Drogba was a technically gifted player, hench why he could still offer something even when past his best, Torres after he lost his pace and power was a pathetic excuse of a footballer and held us back as a club for many years.

Drogba became technically gifted i'd say, when we signed him he was an uncut raw diamond, Torres was the finnished article, just his legs had properly gone...

Edited June 18, 201610 yr by Ballack & Blu

You've obviously got a short memory, Torres at Atletico was one of the most feared strikers in Europe. He was also a huge thorn in the side of Barcelona for one, they often would adapt their game to try and cope with him. Nothing worked. Of course that doesn't make him one of the most feared in Europe on that little stat alone but it's an example of how good he actually was.

After that he was phenomenal for Liverpool until of course injuries changed all that and a move to us.

But even when with us he still finished top of the goal charts (alongside a few others of course) during the Euro's in 2012 for Spain.

Im going to quote Danny Murphy here because he explains it better than I do.

"I remember when he was doing well at Liverpool taking (sic) to a couple of the lads there and they were a bit negative about his technical ability and what he didn’t have, rather than what he did have, which was pace and power. But the rest of his game has never been perfect, far from it, in fact.

There was a spell at Liverpool when he was unplayable because of his power and his pace, but once he lost that and his confidence went he became reliant on his technical ability, which he’s not very good at – his hold up play, his passing, his decision making, which is terrible."

I'm on mobile so can't bold the quote or or put the quote bubble in, but that's what made Torres very good, his pace and power scared the sh*te out of defenders, but technically he was average, his movement wasn't great, and his link up play was terrible. Even at Liverpool he was clueless vs parked buses and arguably the main reason they had so many costly draws while he was there vs mid table sides.

Players who are reliant on physical attributes always have a short shelf (Torres and Essien the two major examples) life at the top level, thank f**k we sold Ramires, imagine how bad he will be when he ages and his pace wanes :O

Drogba became technically gifted i'd say, when we signed him he was an uncut raw diamond, Torres was the finnished article, just his legs had properly gone...

Drogba was a lot better than made out for us first two season's, that performance at Anfield in the 4-1 win I'll never forget, despite not scoring produced one of the best displays ive seen in a Blue shirt by anyone.

He had some problems, but co-lead the line (with Eidur then Hernan) in two run away 90 plus point title wins, you don't get that far if you're forwards sh*t.

Drogba was also reliant in his physical attributes.

The main reason Torres and Essien nosedived was injuries.

Drogba was also reliant in his physical attributes.

The main reason Torres and Essien nosedived was injuries.

Injuries which stripped them of their major attributes.

That's what worries me about Zouma, an ACL for someone who relies on physical attributes is not good.....

can't believe some people thinks Torres wasn't world class. what's next, Aguero is relegation material?

Drogba was also reliant in his physical attributes.

The main reason Torres and Essien nosedived was injuries.

Liverpool constantly brought him back before he had 100% ready and subsequently his body became more and more damaged. I'm not blaming his less than successful spell with us on that fact alone but it did contribute to the rest of his career. If he was allowed to recover from his injuries like most players I do wonder how it would have panned out.

can't believe some people thinks Torres wasn't world class. what's next, Aguero is relegation material?

Nah some people will say he was better than Eto'o the season both were here, oh wait....

Drogba was a technically gifted player, hench why he could still offer something even when past his best, Torres after he lost his pace and power was a pathetic excuse of a footballer and held us back as a club for many years.

Drogba for the large part after his return from China/Turkey was poor as a player, his main contribution at that point was being an onfield and dressing room leader. There were many a post on here of people proverbially tearing their hair out when Drog filled in for the injured Costa on the title run in in 2015.

Couldn't agree more about Torres though. There is a vid on YouTube which has every single one of his goals for Liverpool, genuinely looks like a different player.

Liverpool constantly brought him back before he had 100% ready and subsequently his body became more and more damaged. I'm not blaming his less than successful spell with us on that fact alone but it did contribute to the rest of his career. If he was allowed to recover from his injuries like most players I do wonder how it would have panned out.

And everytime they did it, his confidence took another hit. He looked a broken man sometimes for us.

Who could give a blue f*** about Torres although I note he still got to and played in the cl final this year. This thread is supposed to be about Morata, who I have yet to watch but who is starting for Spain. Seems like a pretty good endorsement if you ask me.

For the Spanish national team David Villa scored 59 goals in 97 matches, Raúl González 44 in 102 and Torres 38 in 110. In their respective clubs, Torres has scored 236 in 638 matches, Villa 314 goals in 642 matches. For me, Villa was underrated in comparison to Torres. Torres was very good for Atlético and Liverpool, but if I had a choice I would have taken Villa every day over Torres. He was more versatile, faster, technically better, and scored more goals.

 

And now to Morata... I'd take him to play together with Costa, but I wouldn't go crazy on the money, he still has to show that he can improve to become one of the best.

Who could give a blue f*** about Torres although I note he still got to and played in the cl final this year. This thread is supposed to be about Morata, who I have yet to watch but who is starting for Spain. Seems like a pretty good endorsement if you ask me.

It's also funny how it's the posters who usually complain about the lack of relevance who are now being irrelevant.

 

For the Spanish national team David Villa scored 59 goals in 97 matches, Raúl González 44 in 102 and Torres 38 in 110. In their respective clubs, Torres has scored 236 in 638 matches, Villa 314 goals in 642 matches. For me, Villa was underrated in comparison to Torres. Torres was very good for Atlético and Liverpool, but if I had a choice I would have taken Villa every day over Torres. He was more versatile, faster, technically better, and scored more goals.

And now to Morata... I'd take him to play together with Costa, but I wouldn't go crazy on the money, he still has to show that he can improve to become one of the best.

Agree with all that except Torres in his prime was faster than villa, but villa was the much better footballer, and I was gutted we never managed to get him despite being linked heavily for a number of seasons.

I think there is a real lack of top level strikers available, especially for us this summer without champions league football, so we might have to pay over the odds for a player with great potential. Morata fits that bill for me,and although his price tag is looking heavy, Leicester have just had a 25m bid rejected for Deeney, so it's a hard market.

It's okay saying let's just pay 65m for aubemayang but in all honesty he probably wouldn't want to come here anyway.

If we keep Costa then we need a striker that would be a good partner, versatile, and not kick up too much a fuss if they find themselves on the bench.

There aren't any options available, maybe lacazette would be an alternative, but I can't see him being much cheaper than morata, and had the stage to prove himself on the big occasions which morata already has.

For the Spanish national team David Villa scored 59 goals in 97 matches, Raúl González 44 in 102 and Torres 38 in 110. In their respective clubs, Torres has scored 236 in 638 matches, Villa 314 goals in 642 matches. For me, Villa was underrated in comparison to Torres. Torres was very good for Atlético and Liverpool, but if I had a choice I would have taken Villa every day over Torres. He was more versatile, faster, technically better, and scored more goals.

 

And now to Morata... I'd take him to play together with Costa, but I wouldn't go crazy on the money, he still has to show that he can improve to become one of the best.

 

I always rated Villa more than Torres, even when Torres was at his best i thought Villa was a lot better than him.

I was the opposite.

I thought Villa was a better finisher but for all round game I preferred Torres as a footballer (until he came to us obviously).

I keep coming to this thread thinking there's some news about our interest in the lad and then I just see a bunch of posts talking about Torres and I feel like it's 2013 all over again.

I'm intrigued by our interest in this player. He's not near to Costa's level but would be an improvement on Remy, Falcao and Pato.

Could be a good signing so hopefully we are in for him.

I've read that Arsenal are the team that are looking at him then that Madrid will be taking him back as they only have Benzema as a striker.

It's all speculation at this point, we probably are not even looking at him!

good clip of morata and cuadrado linking up to score vs bayern. 

 

good clip of morata and cuadrado linking up to score vs bayern.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-rd38mYczY

I don't rate either but I must admit that was a good run by Morata and a good finish by Cuadrado, especially against a defence like Bayern's.

Real Madrid have activated their buy back clause in his contract.

Could be the start of a complex transfer to ourselves.

Stuff of FIFA

Real Madrid have activated their buy back clause in his contract.

Could be the start of a complex transfer to ourselves.

So they basically want him to play for them...No deal.

So they basically want him to play for them...No deal.

Apparently for any transfer to happen Real were always going to exercise their right to buy back because of Morata's value.

So just because he's been bought by Real and despite what they may say about him linking up with their team it's possible it's all for show.

Reading the Real statement it's very business like rather than celebrating him returning to the club.

the suggest price of £45m is over priced by about £10-15m, but still much prefer him over lukaku.

 

Maybe we will structure the deal based on future performance and keep the initial payment in the reasonable zone.