Originally Posted by gingeZizou82
Le Tissier was very skilful but the downside to him was a lack of ambition & discipline (he did eat all the pies), but he was not world class.
Shearer played for Southampton, Blackburn & Newcastle, in that order.
|
|
Le Tissier was very skilful but the downside to him was a lack of ambition & discipline (he did eat all the pies), but he was not world class.
Shearer played for Southampton, Blackburn & Newcastle, in that order.
[QUOTE=Alcohomicide;7669849]Luca Toni went from a semi-professional to a world cup winner sought by some of the worlds biggest clubs and Rivaldo was just as effective at Deportivo as he was at Barca but let's be honest - a lot of people judge players for all the wrong reasons, which is why Zidane is in my eyes incorrectly considered the best player of recent times and no one even -cosiders- people like Laudrup who I think was far better for team work, end product and match winning ability - the difference between winning 5-0 and losing 5-0.
There have been some players that I'd say were comfortably just as good as Messi, but they didn't play at the best time to play at their respective clubs or satellite television just wasn't as big then - it's about exposure. Romário for instance - he's the best striker I've ever seen bar none. Like Fowler, Owen and Súarez in one player. A machine who was as good a passer as he was a finisher - a poet in fact. He's never hailed for his creativity, though.. people just see 950+ legitamate career goals and assume he just hung around in the box all his career. Even Fowi over in EST is guilty of this. But the truth is Sky wasn't as big back when he was in his prime so you didn't get millions of people watching him every week to see just how good he was purely as a creative player, let alone probably the deadliest modern day goal scorer of them all who in an inferior to the current Barca side with the most over rated manager ever still had a very similar goals to game ratio.
They don't think "Wow, he formed amazing partnerships with the likes of Ronaldo, Edmundo and Bebeto - playing as a unit and not letting ego get in the way. Working as one even with people he had off the field disagreements with. But with Romário these are just extra things he could do whilst also being one of the best goal scorers ever. The best in my eyes. He was even a threat when the ball was in the air. Just seemed to have everything in his locker - but its the exposure that matters and I honestly think if Messi played for Roma all these years, let alone Newcastle he'd be considered half the player by default even if he was no worse and in fact better. Like Totti is considered inferior to Zidane even though I've seen the latter bossed by him with my own eyes, let alone showing an abundance of more consistency over a longer period. It's football. Imagine if John Barnes had done what he did for us at AC Milan. Do you honestly think he'd be remembered for "that one goal he scored for England"?[/QUOTE]
Who cares what the rest of England think, when he pulled on the the red shirt for us he was arguably the best player in Europe, we know it & that is all that matters.
Was Le Tissier..................? How about Shearer for not going to the mancs..............? Is Gerrard not great because he doesn't have a league winning medal? Would Torres be second rate for the same reason?
Le Tissier was as talented a player as the league has ever seen and for that reason he was a world class player. His decisions that hindered his career are the only reason some think he wasn't.
In terms of Shearer he probably could of moved to a top club every single summer after Blackburn and opted not to, but he is still arguably the best number 9 the league has ever seen. I'm aware of where they played, its sort of the reason I gave them as examples.
"the cream always rises to that top"
"If you are good enough you will make it"
The above two statements i have read in this thread and i dont think they are true.
It all depends on the individual, his atitude, how he behaves and conducts himself, Talent is by no means the only attribute needed to become a succesfull sportsperson.
There will be people with more ability than some premiership footballers that never made it as they could not behave or do what was required of them, there is so much more to that discussion than just raw ability.
Anyway twas a bit off topic that, i think big clubs make big names, you can become a good player for any old team but you will only be recognised by a lot of folks as a truely great player if you are at the top of the game. Players like Le tissier and shearer would have been much bigger if they played for bigger better clubs i reckon.
That's a bit of a none arguement. For example if an average player has a terrible attitude or doesn't conduct themselves in the correct way they stand little chance of making it to a top club too.
The 'cream always rises to the top' was meant that if two players at small clubs have good attitiudes and one is a far better player than the other the vast majority of the time the better player plays at a higher level over the course of his career than the lesser player.
Mean it how you like, it has its meaninings and it was applicable to my post, like it or not.
The cream does not always rise to top in my opinion.
OOOOOOOOOOOO Oh no he didddddnnnnnnnn
Is this a real thread?
Enjoy this.Growing up England had players like Waddle, Le Tiss, Beardsley, Hoddle etc who played like continental players. I firmly believe we lost the ability to play like this because A. as Keegan said our kids got lazy. (I know I was lazy, anyway as well as pretty much everyone I knew) and also because this type of play gets beaten out of kids at a very young age. It can't be a coincidence that so many English players play with fear and such little appreciation of the football these days. I often wonder how many kids with the potential to be the next Messi were shunned just for being "too small" or had their potential curtailed by the fear instlled in them to express themselves on the pitch and take risks.
a ridiculos thread with completely the wrong question
great and good are different.
as great no- this is because he wuldnt have won as many things, wouldnt be as famous, wouldnt be as influencial.
as good yes- he is just naturally class, form is temporary class is permanent. he would be just as good.
again, ridiculos qn.
no simple, 0 goals in world cup messi's value drops without xavi n iniesta giving endless 1 on 1s to dink the keeper n so on
Another hat trick for the King yesterday.
There isn't anything he does now that can surprise.
At least we can put to bed who is better messi or Ronaldo, Messi scoring a hat trick while Ronaldo was trying to look good
To a certain degree but he wouldn't get the same level of service or quality like he does from his team mates at Barca.
I think this thing about Xavi and Iniesta providing him with all this service is a little bit of a myth. The amount of goals he scores, much like the one against Brazil yesterday, where he receives a simple five yard pass before doing the rest himself is unreal. He also provides countless assists for his team-mates.
Guardiola even said that his priority was to get the ball to Messi and let him do this thing.
Ah, but could they be considered "world class" by the same measure people say others aren't, lack of strong performances in their nation's shirts? Add to that Barnes, Fowler, McManaman etc. Personally I think performances at international level mean nothing, Crouch picked off sides in friendlies and weaker sides in qualifiers to at one point have a ridiculous scoring record, is he "world class"? Does that make him better than players who didn't score against the same sides? Or does his domestic goal record actually mark his ability, what he does when playing week in, week out rather than for five weeks when he might be in form or out of it, playing top sides or rubbish ones, when he is playing every few months and jetting off for qualifiers compared to travelling by coach for fixtures within a few hundred miles mainly?
when Messi finds space and has the ball he is quite simply magic, what ever club he played for he would be the same. he may not score as many goals but he would still be the same player
I dont think he would have been a lot worse but i think that the right coaching may have also played a part, with the wrong coaches he might have turned out a bit differently.
Great, yes of course! The little man defines "great".
But he definitely wouldn't score 50 league goals with Newcastle...
Anyone who saw the early footage of messi playing in argentina when he was a kid could see the natural talent he had, thats why barca wanted him. you cant teach genius its already there .
I think regards of the team around them you cannot cap natural talent which messi or players similar to him. There is an argument which barca's midfield has a lot to do with the success of messi with the ball and the passes which they use but personally I think he is just a natural gifted player which will end up one of the worlds great players.
Is that like saying your Auntie would be your uncle if she had meat and two veg?
Sorry R&P just had to get that in
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
