Not at all overrated. Overrated is someone like Bale. Sanchez is not even getting the credit he deserves. He is amazing player and naturally gifted one. He is tearing defenses for fun. He was not preferred in the first half and was rarely used. In the last few months he has started to flourish.
Regardless of Bale's talent, Sanchez is still overrated. Right there you have given the definition of a player who is having a good run of form.
Same can be said about Spurs. Awful defense and Strikers but a good midfield. That doesn't mean they are average team. It is not about just the names, it is team as a whole. Napoli are doing excellently and fighting for league title.
Right, except Spurs aren't playing a formation that will more or less completely negate any advantages of the opposition side and give them a big advantage. If you want to credit Mazzari for introducing them to a formation that happens to give them an advantage every time they play a team using the predominant formation in the league, be my guest, it is a stroke of genius, but it doesn't automatically make Napoli a good team, it makes them a team which has benefitted from the tactical naivety of the Italian Leagues.
Also, since when does Napoli have a good midfield and bad strikers? It's the complete opposite: with Hamsik, Lavezzi and Cavani playing as a front three, it is their strikers who are the threat of the team. People like Pazienza and Walter Gargano are decent, tactically aware players, but they cannot compare with a player of Modric or VdV's quality.
Napoli are a decent team and I like them, but to say that they're fighting for the title when they're level on games and eight points off being level with Milan is a stretch by anyone's imagination.
Agree or disagree, artistic players are rare breed in premier league.
Maybe, but you yourself have just agreed that they exist. As such, we're not ALL "butchers and thugs". In people like Cesc Fabregas, Paul Scholes, Modric, Van der Vaart, Samir Nasri, Mikel Arteta (the list goes on) we have playmakers and artists on a par with any Serie A has to offer.
One tie wont prove anything. I haven't seen many saying Inter are the best team when they won Champions league. All the wanking was about how Barca played. Milan are great team with rich history. Just a matter of time they will be back to their best.
Blackpool beat Spurs, does that mean Blackpool are better team than Spurs?
One tie is all we have to compare them, unfortunately. We can say that Spurs are a better team than Blackpool because they're competing for Europe, whereas Blackpool aren't. Likewise, we can say Milan are better than Catania, because they're top and Catania aren't. But we have nothing to go on with Spurs and Milan past a simple head to head two legged tie, which Spurs won.
History has nothing to do with current success. Nottingham Forest have a rich history, so by those standards they should be better than Bolton, right? Unfortunately for Milan, they will need a big dollop of cash from Mr Berlusconi's pockets to be able to compete as (admittedly excellent) players like Jankulovski, Pirlo, Ambrosini, Seedorf, Gattuso, Nesta, Van Bommel and Zambrotta age and decline.
See, you are diverting the topic. Never i said Serie A is close to Premier league. I even rated Serie A in the 4th place behind Bundeslig. But to call Serie A as not among the best is delusional. After all they are the champions league holder and won more champions league than any league. Even in this decade they have dominated. Just after Falciopoli all the players were robbed by other leagues. It had so much impact on the league, they are struggling to recover. But the league is better than previous 2 seasons.
Calciopoli was their fault. I'm not going to cut them any slack for being corrupt.
The Italian leagues are not among the best (which are the Prem and La Liga). They are behind them. Being among them implies they are of relatively equal standards, which they are conclusively not. They're worse than the Bundesliga, which speaks volumes. I don't care how much they've dominated in the past, their decline has been precipitous. Even when Inter won, everyone still knew the Italian leagues weren't the best in the world. Inter were a good team, bought with quite a bit of cash, managed by the best non-Alex Ferguson manager in the world. They did well. But their league is not the best in the world. Italian team's performance in the European competitions this year rather reflects that.
One of the key player for United is VDS and in 2008-09 it was Giggsy. I dont even think it is a problem. Age is not a problem as long as the players are performing. Gattuso is the heart of the team and he would rather die than stopping to try to win. He is a winner. Ambrosini is a quality player to. They are aged players but in the game at Lane, Seedorf was the best player on the pitch. So age hardly matters as long as the player is doing his job.
Carvalho- 32 years, still key player for Jose's side.
Zanetti- 37 years, Key player in the Inter's treble winning side.
Puyol 32 years. Still key player for Barca
Lampard - 32 or 33 years still a goal machine.
Interesting argument. You make a good point, apart from one crucial thing. United and Chelsea do not rely on those players, and neither does Barca. If they do, then the old players in question are limited in number. Milan have both. If the players you mentioned as being the heart to Milan really are, Milan have a problem. Ambrosini, Pirlo and Gattuso are all pivotal to Milan, and I would add Seedorf and Nesta to that list. That's five players that the best team in Italy are relying on that are ageing fast.
Age doesn't matter so long as the player is doing his job, no, but how much longer are they going to continue to do that? Age brings a lot of things: decreased pace, increased injury proneness (interestingly, considering how their supposed spine of 30 pluses were all out, albeit Gattuso for psychopathic reasons) On top of that, you could rather argue that they aren't doing their job if they're losing to Tottenham...
