frakey
1st team Player
Posts: 1,757
|
Post by frakey on Dec 23, 2010 13:47:14 GMT
You cannot compare from what was then and what is now. The game is now for athletes and the skill is about keeping the ball and defending well when you don't have it. There a few players of the of likes of Best and Bowles (or certainly not to that degree - perhaps Messi stands alone at present).
Fitness levels are so much higher now with different diets and while the present player has been known to drink to excess it is nothing like Best & Co did.
|
|
|
Post by mrneil on Dec 23, 2010 13:55:56 GMT
Players like Best, Charlton et al may have been greats of their generation, but how would they fare in today's game? I'm prepared to say that if George Best were playing now, he wouldn't get a game for Man Utd reserves. And what about the great Pele?, how would he fare?
|
|
|
Post by exiledinandover on Dec 23, 2010 15:05:43 GMT
if the greats of thier generation were playing now,all,things being relative,not onlywould they still be first team players ,they would be first on the team sheet,ahead of players like rooney and the likes,and best would be hailed as the greatest player since pele,like he was back in his day.
|
|
|
Post by dontpanic on Dec 23, 2010 16:25:44 GMT
Well said.
|
|
|
Post by exiledinandover on Dec 23, 2010 16:32:23 GMT
I'm not even a Man u fan.
|
|
|
Post by os on Dec 23, 2010 19:05:57 GMT
Every generation turns out great players, we only see them compared to their peers it would be impossible to say how good a player from one era was against another from a different one, even with all things being equal.
George Best is a legend, but was he any better then Samir Nasri ? I think they are very similar players.
Take a few mins to watch some youtube vids of both players.
(dribbling dead, not on your life!)
|
|
|
Post by Burtie on Dec 23, 2010 19:18:47 GMT
Quite so, you can't compare like with like. Which is why (bringing it back to the original few posts...) it's perhaps a little disingenous to say that in 'the good old days' players would plough through 70 games a season, not be rested for matches, not need to be substitued, not get injured so often, etc. It was a different game then.
However, I have no excuse or explanation for snood-wearing.
|
|
DaveF
1st team Player
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by DaveF on Dec 23, 2010 19:36:43 GMT
Your point is valid OS but the comparrison weakens your point. Only the most myopic of Gooners could mention Nasri in the same breath as Best. Whatever the era George Best would be rated as one of the greatest players of all time. Nasri isn't even the best player in Arsenal's midfield.
The likes of Best, Moore, Beckenbauer, Pele, Cruyff and even that fat, drug-taking, cheating ball of Argentinan lard (OK, I admit it, I don't like Maradona) would still stand out in the current game.
|
|
|
Post by os on Dec 23, 2010 20:36:44 GMT
Your point is valid OS but the comparrison weakens your point. Only the most myopic of Gooners could mention Nasri in the same breath as Best. Whatever the era George Best would be rated as one of the greatest players of all time. Nasri isn't even the best player in Arsenal's midfield. On the contrary I think the comparison makes my point, Best was ahead of his time while Nasri isn't and that I think is the difference? Maybe we can define great players as ones who come along and raise the bar for others to follow, in that context Nasri could be as good as Best because of Best? Does that make any sense
|
|
|
Post by exiledinandover on Dec 23, 2010 20:48:38 GMT
So,as Nasri si'nt the best midfielder at Arsenal but is as good as Best,you 're saying Fabrigas who is reguarded as Arsenal's best Midfielder would be better than Best
|
|
|
Post by Burtie on Dec 23, 2010 20:52:49 GMT
Your point is valid OS but the comparrison weakens your point. Only the most myopic of Gooners could mention Nasri in the same breath as Best. Whatever the era George Best would be rated as one of the greatest players of all time. Nasri isn't even the best player in Arsenal's midfield. On the contrary I think the comparison makes my point, Best was ahead of his time while Nasri isn't and that I think is the difference? Maybe we can define great players as ones who come along and raise the bar for others to follow, in that context Nasri could be as good as Best because of Best? Does that make any sense Yes - I agree. Best was outstanding in his generation, while Nasri is very good - so it's all relative. That's one of the reasons I do think Maradona was phenomenal though. For Napoli and Argentina, he was surrounded by fairly mediocre players, yet dragged them along single handed (pardon the pun... ) to become champions. I can't think of a single player who's carried a team like that, on a world stage.
|
|
|
Post by exiledinandover on Dec 23, 2010 21:02:19 GMT
i agree with youthere,but he was also a drug taking cheat,so when the Man c faithful appluded him the other week made me really angry,it was not the hand of god .It was the hand of a cheat.that's why i have no faith in fifa,they should have said replay the game,or at least call it 1-1,and have penaltys,we probaby would have lost,but there would have been a sence of justice.
|
|
DaveF
1st team Player
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by DaveF on Dec 23, 2010 21:44:56 GMT
OK, let's nail my colours to the mast 1/. Pele 2/. Best 3/. Cruyff Current generation ? Not one in my all-time top ten, nobody even close.
|
|
|
Post by os on Dec 23, 2010 21:53:46 GMT
OK, let's nail my colours to the mast 1/. Pele 2/. Best 3/. Cruyff Current generation ? Not one in my all-time top ten, nobody even close. I could only add to that list I could not put them in order: 4/ Sir Stanley 5/ Puskás The best player I have ever personally seen play was 'Keegan' at the top of his game. I am not a Liverpool fan but he is a legend at least to me
|
|
billy
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,628
|
Post by billy on Dec 23, 2010 22:15:46 GMT
1 Best 2. Pele
Pele got kicked out of the 1966 World Cup , as i said earlier noone could do that to Best.
How fit do you need to be to pass the ball sideways and backwards when the ball is only in play for 40 odd minutes ?
|
|