Axel Witsel

[mediator 2,026]

He can play cm, cam, or RW too. The most versatile player ever. Always 200%, won't never see a bad game of him.

He's got 3 lungs

[Leif 6,006]

I've not seen much of him, but isn't he just a younger version of Meireles pretty much?

[Jype 6,398]

From what I've seen him play he has always impressed me. 10 games or so isn't much but I like him. Benfica value him a bit too highly though.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Haven't seen much of him but I'm starting to get pretty sceptical that all these Belgians are as good as advertised.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

  On 04/07/2012 at 15:04, TorontoChelsea said:

Haven't seen much of him but I'm starting to get pretty sceptical that all these Belgians are as good as advertised.

Same could have been said of Spanish players, years ago. Look how that turned out...

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

  On 04/07/2012 at 15:05, KonohasOrangeFlash said:

Same could have been said of Spainish players, years ago. Look how that turned out...

Spain was very different. Everyone knew Spain was incredibly talented and their national team players were excellent and pretty much all playing at a high level. The problem was that they were always falling apart and under-performing. These were teams filled with fabulous players. Raul, Hierrro, Zubbizaratta, Guardiola etc..They were also making tournaments and doing OK in them but just not winning. They got to the quarter-finals in the World Cup in 86, 94, and 02. They got to the quarter finals in the Euro in 96 and 00. Belgium has not even qualified for their last 5 attempts at the Euro and World Cup. Belgium is currently the 53rd ranked team in the world. It's like comparing England (disappointing, often advance past the group stage, but never win) to Scotland (almost never get in.) Also,this generation of players generally first started playing regularly for Spain around 2004 and really became the core of the squad in 2006 when they made it to the round of 16 in the World Cup. The disappointments belonged to a different generation. On the other hand, it was this generation of Belgian players that finished third in qualifying. It was Fellaini, Hazard, Dembele, Witsel, etc...

My point is that if these Belgian players were all as good as people said they were, they would be cruising through the group stages of the Euro tournament. England won their group and the team was quite poor. I bet if you asked people here who had a more talented squad, many, if not most people would say Belgium but it's not true. I think a lot of this is the tendency to overrate players that we don't see as much which is something that happens constantly when assessing transfers. Now, I think Belgium is likely to make the World Cup. Their qualifying group is very easy and they should be improving, but this past qualifying for the Euro has all of these supposed excellent players and they finished with something like the 22nd best record in qualifying. This is not slight on Witsel or on any particular player for Belgium, just that I can't believe that all these players are great.

[Kisho 33]

  On 04/07/2012 at 16:09, TorontoChelsea said:

Spain was very different. Everyone knew Spain was incredibly talented and their national team players were excellent and pretty much all playing at a high level. The problem was that they were always falling apart and under-performing. These were teams filled with fabulous players. Raul, Hierrro, Zubbizaratta, Guardiola etc..They were also making tournaments and doing OK in them but just not winning. They got to the quarter-finals in the World Cup in 86, 94, and 02. They got to the quarter finals in the Euro in 96 and 00. Belgium has not even qualified for their last 5 attempts at the Euro and World Cup. Belgium is currently the 53rd ranked team in the world. It's like comparing England (disappointing, often advance past the group stage, but never win) to Scotland (almost never get in.) Also,this generation of players generally first started playing regularly for Spain around 2004 and really became the core of the squad in 2006 when they made it to the round of 16 in the World Cup. The disappointments belonged to a different generation. On the other hand, it was this generation of Belgian players that finished third in qualifying. It was Fellaini, Hazard, Dembele, Witsel, etc...

My point is that if these Belgian players were all as good as people said they were, they would be cruising through the group stages of the Euro tournament. England won their group and the team was quite poor. I bet if you asked people here who had a more talented squad, many, if not most people would say Belgium but it's not true. I think a lot of this is the tendency to overrate players that we don't see as much which is something that happens constantly when assessing transfers. Now, I think Belgium is likely to make the World Cup. Their qualifying group is very easy and they should be improving, but this past qualifying for the Euro has all of these supposed excellent players and they finished with something like the 22nd best record in qualifying. This is not slight on Witsel or on any particular player for Belgium, just that I can't believe that all these players are great.

I have the same concern

[Superblue 6,372]

  On 04/07/2012 at 16:09, TorontoChelsea said:

Spain was very different. Everyone knew Spain was incredibly talented and their national team players were excellent and pretty much all playing at a high level. The problem was that they were always falling apart and under-performing. These were teams filled with fabulous players. Raul, Hierrro, Zubbizaratta, Guardiola etc..They were also making tournaments and doing OK in them but just not winning. They got to the quarter-finals in the World Cup in 86, 94, and 02. They got to the quarter finals in the Euro in 96 and 00. Belgium has not even qualified for their last 5 attempts at the Euro and World Cup. Belgium is currently the 53rd ranked team in the world. It's like comparing England (disappointing, often advance past the group stage, but never win) to Scotland (almost never get in.) Also,this generation of players generally first started playing regularly for Spain around 2004 and really became the core of the squad in 2006 when they made it to the round of 16 in the World Cup. The disappointments belonged to a different generation. On the other hand, it was this generation of Belgian players that finished third in qualifying. It was Fellaini, Hazard, Dembele, Witsel, etc...

My point is that if these Belgian players were all as good as people said they were, they would be cruising through the group stages of the Euro tournament. England won their group and the team was quite poor. I bet if you asked people here who had a more talented squad, many, if not most people would say Belgium but it's not true. I think a lot of this is the tendency to overrate players that we don't see as much which is something that happens constantly when assessing transfers. Now, I think Belgium is likely to make the World Cup. Their qualifying group is very easy and they should be improving, but this past qualifying for the Euro has all of these supposed excellent players and they finished with something like the 22nd best record in qualifying. This is not slight on Witsel or on any particular player for Belgium, just that I can't believe that all these players are great.

I understand the concerns but a couple of things to consider -

Firstly the Euro 12 qualifying started in 2010. A lot of the Belgian players gaining big reputations are very young and would have had even less experience 2 years ago. Even the more experienced 'go to' players in the squad like kompany, vermaelen and fellaini have improved drastically in that time.

The other problem for Belgium is they don't have a top class striker. Anyone could see against England they are a talented bunch but they lack a goalscorer. It's why hopes are pinned so high on

Lukaku.

One of spain's big positives IMO is that a core group play in the same club side (barcelona) and ironically Chelsea could potentially have that effect in the future on the Belgium team.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

  On 04/07/2012 at 17:18, Superblue_1986 said:

I understand the concerns but a couple of things to consider -

Firstly the Euro 12 qualifying started in 2010. A lot of the Belgian players gaining big reputations are very young and would have had even less experience 2 years ago. Even the more experienced 'go to' players in the squad like kompany, vermaelen and fellaini have improved drastically in that time.

The other problem for Belgium is they don't have a top class striker. Anyone could see against England they are a talented bunch but they lack a goalscorer. It's why hopes are pinned so high on

Lukaku.

One of spain's big positives IMO is that a core group play in the same club side (barcelona) and ironically Chelsea could potentially have that effect in the future on the Belgium team.

Spain played the Euro without a striker and won! I generally agree with you that Belgian players were younger then and so on, but even so, I have a very difficult time believing that this group of Belgian players are all stars. This is nothing against Belgians, they have a young and exciting squad, it's just the fact that people almost always overrated players that they hardly ever see.

[Superblue 6,372]

  On 04/07/2012 at 17:40, TorontoChelsea said:

Spain played the Euro without a striker and won! I generally agree with you that Belgian players were younger then and so on, but even so, I have a very difficult time believing that this group of Belgian players are all stars. This is nothing against Belgians, they have a young and exciting squad, it's just the fact that people almost always overrated players that they hardly ever see.

Spain didn't play much of the Euros without a striker but were still top goalscorers as they have a number of attacking players with a good end product in the final third of the pitch. At the moment the only player of real quality in that area for Belgium is Hazard and he is only 21 himself.

The glut of their talent at the moment is in defence (Vermaelen, Vertonghen, Kompany) and in deeper midfield positions (Fellaini, Witsel, Dembele) which also explains the problems they are currently experiencing. If Lukaku can become a pretty decent striker over the next couple of seasons with still the potential to progress it will make a lot of difference IMO. The other thing is that a lot of the players in the squad now still have years left in them, and there is a big pool of talent emerging so I think it is too early to judge Belgium at the moment. They are on the verge of becoming a very good team, and the acid test for them will be to qualify for the 2014 World Cup which will give this crop of players a big experience of tournament football at international level. I believe Euro 2016 will be when their true potential is realised.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

  On 04/07/2012 at 18:06, Superblue_1986 said:

Spain didn't play much of the Euros without a striker but were still top goalscorers as they have a number of attacking players with a good end product in the final third of the pitch. At the moment the only player of real quality in that area for Belgium is Hazard and he is only 21 himself.

The glut of their talent at the moment is in defence (Vermaelen, Vertonghen, Kompany) and in deeper midfield positions (Fellaini, Witsel, Dembele) which also explains the problems they are currently experiencing. If Lukaku can become a pretty decent striker over the next couple of seasons with still the potential to progress it will make a lot of difference IMO. The other thing is that a lot of the players in the squad now still have years left in them, and there is a big pool of talent emerging so I think it is too early to judge Belgium at the moment. They are on the verge of becoming a very good team, and the acid test for them will be to qualify for the 2014 World Cup which will give this crop of players a big experience of tournament football at international level. I believe Euro 2016 will be when their true potential is realised.

I think you are exaggerating the youth of the team. Witsel is 23, Fellaini is 24, Dembele is 24. Kompany is 26, Vermaelen is 26. Lukaku is very young and Hazard is only 21 but that's it for extremely young players. 23-24 is an age where many top players have already started to establish themselves. Look at Spain. Alba is 23, Mata is 24, Sergio is 23, Pedro is 24, Fabergas is 25, Pique is 25. (Yes, I know they have older, superstar players, but I am simply saying that 23 or 24 is old enough where you should be producing results. Anyway, this has gotten off topic.I just think that the talent of a player like Witsel is being massively overstated.

[mediator 2,026]

Axel Witsel's sister, Whitney : http://www.7sur7.be/7s7/fr/8012/photo/photoalbum/detail/1359332/1059598/2/La-soeur-de-Witsel-en-cheerleader.dhtml

[DDA 9,772]

  On 04/07/2012 at 18:32, mediator said:

Axel Witsel's sister, Whitney : http://www.7sur7.be/...eerleader.dhtml

She'll do !

[Superblue 6,372]

  On 04/07/2012 at 18:26, TorontoChelsea said:

I think you are exaggerating the youth of the team. Witsel is 23, Fellaini is 24, Dembele is 24. Kompany is 26, Vermaelen is 26. Lukaku is very young and Hazard is only 21 but that's it for extremely young players. 23-24 is an age where many top players have already started to establish themselves. Look at Spain. Alba is 23, Mata is 24, Sergio is 23, Pedro is 24, Fabergas is 25, Pique is 25. (Yes, I know they have older, superstar players, but I am simply saying that 23 or 24 is old enough where you should be producing results. Anyway, this has gotten off topic.I just think that the talent of a player like Witsel is being massively overstated.

I actually meant there are reportedly a number of highly rated young Belgians coming under Hazard's age group still in their teens. The current stars you mentioned in the national team will be important over the next few years as they will provide real experience within this squad which they perhaps didn't have enough of in 2010. They seem to be going through a spell of producing good players, whether that materialises or not who knows?

On the subject of Witsel, I don't know much about him. I know he was highly rated at Standard and saw him a couple of times against Liverpool I think and he impressed, I have watched him a couple of times for Benfica and Belgium since and he seems to have developed but I haven't watched enough of him to be able to give a constructive opinion of him I feel.

[mediator 2,026]

Why Witsel is a great prospect : http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18310262

England vs Belgium 2th june.

"Belgium had only had one player sitting in midfield: Axel Witsel..."

"Belgium's sole defensive midfielder Axel Witsel had the highest pass completion rate of players that started and finished the game (98.1%)".

He mastered the midfield, once again.

[Hamilton 2,120]

Witsel with an excellent dribble and assist today in a friendly

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=e_xecX19c8M#!

[Duppy Conqueror 1,495]

  On 04/07/2012 at 11:49, mediator said:

He can play cm, cam, or RW too. The most versatile player ever. Always 200%, won't never see a bad game of him.

He's got 3 lungs

he can play 3 positions. norman whiteside and clayton blackmore played every position apart from goalkeeper. dave webb played an entire game for chelsea in goal.his normal position was CB and sometimes FB he played in Midfield a few times too. John Charles one of the greatest players in the world in his day slipped into CB when the other team had the ball and stormed upfield to play his base position of CF when his team was attacking. the ultimate version of a box to box player.

that`s just 4...there`s plenty more i could call upon.

i know ever is a nice short word to use but it doesn`t have to be thrown about so lightly.

[Hamilton 2,120]

He scored a header today against Real Madrid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgBQlsvrpMs&feature=youtube_gdata