Goku de la Boca Posted January 9 Author Posted January 9 Just now, Dr. Gonzo said: Can I just say: lol @ James Rodriguez. Surely Falcao or Higuita ahead of him? No, James is arguably the best Colombian player ever. He had a huge dip in form after he developed an attitude but he still was excellent in his first season at Madrid, Bayern and for a few months at Everton he showed his class. He also was Banfield’s best player in their only title win ever and lead Colombia to an unthinkable quarter final (and I say this because nobody believed me when I said they could go that far, not because of what an increíble team they clearly were).
Spike Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Or maybe its because Gazza looks like a bricklayer and his constant fuck ups despite being one of the best and most talented players in the world made him endearing to several generations of working class boys. Maybe it puts a smile in the heart of every footy playing boy that grew up to be a builder going on coke binges once a week.
Goku de la Boca Posted January 9 Author Posted January 9 2 minutes ago, Spike said: It’s because Gazza played in the Premier League and had more exposure to a wider audience I suppose, with the game being ‘more professional’. You’d have to think if Keegan had played in the 90s he’d be the biggest star in the world, but nah he has a terrible 70s perm and fucked off to Germany for a couple of years. This is important. Players these days are much better but I think it’s more fair to compare the legacy they left on an era and respect each era in its own right.
Spike Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Just now, Goku de la Boca said: This is important. Players these days are much better but I think it’s more fair to compare the legacy they left on an era and respect each era in its own right. No it isn’t important, because Gazza barely played in the Premier League, I fucked up. He is much older than I thought.
Dr. Gonzo Posted January 9 Posted January 9 2 minutes ago, Goku de la Boca said: No, James is arguably the best Colombian player ever. He had a huge dip in form after he developed an attitude but he still was excellent in his first season at Madrid, Bayern and for a few months at Everton he showed his class. He also was Banfield’s best player in their only title win ever and lead Colombia to an unthinkable quarter final (and I say this because nobody believed me when I said they could go that far, not because of what an increíble team they clearly were). I think longevity works against James when there's other players to consider. If he's their best player ever, and I don't think he is, I think he's massively overrated off the back of one tournament - it makes me wonder where Asprilla would list in their all time list of greats.
Goku de la Boca Posted January 9 Author Posted January 9 1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said: I think longevity works against James when there's other players to consider. If he's their best player ever, and I don't think he is, I think he's massively overrated off the back of one tournament - it makes me wonder where Asprilla would list in their all time list of greats. Falcao by that logic also doesn't have longevity. He was a very different player after injury. I will admit they aren't that far off though.
Dr. Gonzo Posted January 9 Posted January 9 Just now, Goku de la Boca said: Falcao by that logic also doesn't have longevity. He was a very different player after injury. I will admit they aren't that far off though. Yeah that's why I mentioned Asprilla the second time around - a player I remember being great at Parma, kind of less great at Newcastle, and then went back to Parma and won something again lol.
Rucksackfranzose Posted January 9 Posted January 9 14 minutes ago, Goku de la Boca said: As would most, I suppose the 2014 generation will be seen as legends as time goes on. From 2006-2014, they were the most consistent World Cup team and did manage to eventually win it. Not necessarily. Indeed the "Breslau Elf" from 1937, who won no International accolade is more of a name in football Germany than the European champions of 1980.Indeed the Euro winning squad of 1972 is more iconic than the WC champions from 2 years later. Also the team from the 80's that won the WC 1990 and ended as runners-up in both WC before that isn't more respected than that of 1966., argueably. It takes more than simply winning an International title for a German team to become legendary. Germans are much too spoilt with historical success. If Germans were asked for legendary teams of their history, most would probably only mention the WC winners of 54 and the Euro winners of 72l.
Goku de la Boca Posted January 9 Author Posted January 9 2 minutes ago, Rucksackfranzose said: Not necessarily. Indeed the "Breslau Elf" from 1937, who won no International accolade is more of a name in football Germany than the European champions of 1980.Indeed the Euro winning squad of 1972 is more iconic than the WC champions from 2 years later. Also the team from the 80's that won the WC 1990 and ended as runners-up in both WC before that isn't more respected than that of 1966., argueably. It takes more than simply winning an International title for a German team to become legendary. Germans are much too spoilt with historical success. If Germans were asked for legendary teams of their history, most would probably only mention the WC winners of 54 and the Euro winners of 72l. That is a neat German point of view and I respect it. However, I can definitely say that for a lot of people outside Germany it can be debated. Germany 2014 wasn't my favourite in terms of performances but in terms of quality it was an absolutely ridiculous team and even managed to beat Brazil 7-1 in a time where that is near impossible (especially in a place Brazil was deemed unbeatable). I have always said I liked the 2010 team more despite not winning but I get your point. 2002 was not a good side and they managed to reach the final.
Administrator Stan Posted January 9 Administrator Posted January 9 Happily take the comments about Keegan on board. I guess when I think of England legends he's not one that comes to mind straight away. Perhaps a generational thing.
Dr. Gonzo Posted January 9 Posted January 9 1 hour ago, Stan said: Happily take the comments about Keegan on board. I guess when I think of England legends he's not one that comes to mind straight away. Perhaps a generational thing. I probably know more about him than I would otherwise... because my dad wouldn't shut the fuck up about how much he loved Keegan when I was a kid Tbf, we're only going to be familiar with him from highlight reels on youtube cos like you say... we were born well after Keegan's playing days & from just hearing about him. We probably remember him better as a manager. But I think it's interesting there's players from the same era that kind of don't have their legacies as forgotten, while Keegan's one of the top players from that era and I guess doesn't have the same respect. And maybe a part of it is because of how Liverpool replaced Keegan after he went on to Germany, where he won those Balon d'Ors, like @LFCMike says. I think perhaps if we hadn't signed our best player ever as his immediate replacement... maybe the memory of how good he was for Liverpool would have been more established.
Goku de la Boca Posted January 9 Author Posted January 9 8 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: I probably know more about him than I would otherwise... because my dad wouldn't shut the fuck up about how much he loved Keegan when I was a kid Tbf, we're only going to be familiar with him from highlight reels on youtube cos like you say... we were born well after Keegan's playing days & from just hearing about him. We probably remember him better as a manager. But I think it's interesting there's players from the same era that kind of don't have their legacies as forgotten, while Keegan's one of the top players from that era and I guess doesn't have the same respect. And maybe a part of it is because of how Liverpool replaced Keegan after he went on to Germany, where he won those Balon d'Ors, like @LFCMike says. I think perhaps if we hadn't signed our best player ever as his immediate replacement... maybe the memory of how good he was for Liverpool would have been more established. Milenials have left a mark on social media football. You see so many people talk about Zidane nonstop but not about Platini or Van Basten.
LFCMike Posted January 9 Posted January 9 1 hour ago, Stan said: Happily take the comments about Keegan on board. I guess when I think of England legends he's not one that comes to mind straight away. Perhaps a generational thing. Probably doesn't help that he played for England at a time when they were shit, failing to qualify for two World Cups and a Euros in the 70s. His achievements outside of the national team though are obviously up there with the very best
Reluctant Striker Posted January 9 Posted January 9 I'd suggest perception of Keegan is effected by his 1972 - 1982 era. Similar for the likes of Trevor Francis, Ray Wilkins & Trevor Brooking. England did not qualify for 74 or 78. And 82 was underwhelming. So, yes, the 1966-70 players are obviously more highly talked of. And the 86-90 players. Even the 'Golden Generation'. Which actually was not.
Lucas Posted January 11 Posted January 11 On 09/01/2024 at 16:30, Goku de la Boca said: Brazil Pele Garrincha Chile Alexis Sanchez Arturo Vidal Germany Toni Kroos Franz Beckenbauer England Bobby Charlton Kevin Keegan France Kylian Mbappe Michel Platini Italy Paolo Maldini Roberto Baggio Got to say, I generslly try to think the first two players thst come to mind. Not always the best, but generslly good, probably more iconic. When I think of Brazil, it's 100% Fat Ronaldo. Absolute phenominan. And that's even over Rivaldo and Ronaldinho. Pure magic. He'd always be my pick over Garrincha. Chile for me has to contain one of either Marcelo Salas or Ivan Zamorano, maybe even both? Germany would contain Jurgen Klinsmann or Lother Matthaus over Kroos, easy. England would contain either Gary Lineker or Alan Shearer instead of Keegan for me. France would be Zinedine Zidane over Mbappe, easily. Italy I'd swap Baggio for Dino Zoff or Buffon I think, as much as I love Baggio. The other two are just more iconic, especially for the position they play too. A few I've not seen mentioned that spring to mind for me... Belgium Enzo Scifo and Kevin De Bruyne. Czech Republic Karel Poborsky and Paolo Nedved Romania Georghi Hagi and Gheorghe Popescu Bulgaria Hristo Stoichkov and Dimitar Berbatov Denmark Michael Laudrup and Peter Schmeichel Sweden Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Henrick Larsson Switzerland Xerdhan Shaqiri and Stephane Chapuisat Cameroon Roger Milla and Samuel Eto'o Senegal El-Hadji Diouf and Papa Bouba Diop Ghana Tony Yeboah and Sammy Kuffour
LFCMike Posted January 11 Posted January 11 1 hour ago, Lucas said: Got to say, I generslly try to think the first two players thst come to mind. Not always the best, but generslly good, probably more iconic. When I think of Brazil, it's 100% Fat Ronaldo. Absolute phenominan. And that's even over Rivaldo and Ronaldinho. Pure magic. He'd always be my pick over Garrincha. Chile for me has to contain one of either Marcelo Salas or Ivan Zamorano, maybe even both? Germany would contain Jurgen Klinsmann or Lother Matthaus over Kroos, easy. England would contain either Gary Lineker or Alan Shearer instead of Keegan for me. France would be Zinedine Zidane over Mbappe, easily. Italy I'd swap Baggio for Dino Zoff or Buffon I think, as much as I love Baggio. The other two are just more iconic, especially for the position they play too. A few I've not seen mentioned that spring to mind for me... Belgium Enzo Scifo and Kevin De Bruyne. Czech Republic Karel Poborsky and Paolo Nedved Romania Georghi Hagi and Gheorghe Popescu Bulgaria Hristo Stoichkov and Dimitar Berbatov Denmark Michael Laudrup and Peter Schmeichel Sweden Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Henrick Larsson Switzerland Xerdhan Shaqiri and Stephane Chapuisat Cameroon Roger Milla and Samuel Eto'o Senegal El-Hadji Diouf and Papa Bouba Diop Ghana Tony Yeboah and Sammy Kuffour Chile for me would be Salas and Zamorano too. Maybe because the 98 World Cup is the first tournament I remember properly and remember Salas scoring that brilliant volley against England at Wembley before that tournament.
Goku de la Boca Posted January 11 Author Posted January 11 2 hours ago, Lucas said: Got to say, I generslly try to think the first two players thst come to mind. Not always the best, but generslly good, probably more iconic. When I think of Brazil, it's 100% Fat Ronaldo. Absolute phenominan. And that's even over Rivaldo and Ronaldinho. Pure magic. He'd always be my pick over Garrincha. Chile for me has to contain one of either Marcelo Salas or Ivan Zamorano, maybe even both? Germany would contain Jurgen Klinsmann or Lother Matthaus over Kroos, easy. England would contain either Gary Lineker or Alan Shearer instead of Keegan for me. France would be Zinedine Zidane over Mbappe, easily. Italy I'd swap Baggio for Dino Zoff or Buffon I think, as much as I love Baggio. The other two are just more iconic, especially for the position they play too. A few I've not seen mentioned that spring to mind for me... Belgium Enzo Scifo and Kevin De Bruyne. Czech Republic Karel Poborsky and Paolo Nedved Romania Georghi Hagi and Gheorghe Popescu Bulgaria Hristo Stoichkov and Dimitar Berbatov Denmark Michael Laudrup and Peter Schmeichel Sweden Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Henrick Larsson Switzerland Xerdhan Shaqiri and Stephane Chapuisat Cameroon Roger Milla and Samuel Eto'o Senegal El-Hadji Diouf and Papa Bouba Diop Ghana Tony Yeboah and Sammy Kuffour I think Mbappe vs Zidane is debatable. Zidane at club level has achieved more easily, but in my opinion Mbappe has already done more at national team level. I suppose it really depends on what the end of his career will tell us, and we're still about 10 years away. The one I disagree with though is the Chileans. Alexis Sanchez is comfortably their best ever player and I don't think it's even a debate. Vidal could probably be debated but Sanchez carried them to their second Copa America win and was a top 3 player in the Premier League in his prime. My dad has told me that he was comfortably better than Zamorano (since I was too young to remember him). Also I think for Senegal that Sadio Mane is above El Hadji Diouf, but I guess it depends on where you rank what they achieved at the separate World Cups. Agree with the rest. I will admit Kroos was a very bold take.
DeadLinesman Posted January 11 Posted January 11 Zidane shits all over Mbappe both at domestic and international level. It’s not even a conversation.
Goku de la Boca Posted January 11 Author Posted January 11 3 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said: Zidane shits all over Mbappe both at domestic and international level. It’s not even a conversation. The latter I disagree with strongly. In only 2 World Cups Mbappe is proyected to be more important than Pele and is already breaking records. At club level I suppose it isn't a debate, Mbappe hasn't really been a "different player" yet.
Michael Posted January 11 Posted January 11 On 09/01/2024 at 19:45, Rucksackfranzose said: Not necessarily. Indeed the "Breslau Elf" from 1937, who won no International accolade is more of a name in football Germany than the European champions of 1980.Indeed the Euro winning squad of 1972 is more iconic than the WC champions from 2 years later. Also the team from the 80's that won the WC 1990 and ended as runners-up in both WC before that isn't more respected than that of 1966., argueably. It takes more than simply winning an International title for a German team to become legendary. Germans are much too spoilt with historical success. If Germans were asked for legendary teams of their history, most would probably only mention the WC winners of 54 and the Euro winners of 72l. Really? What about the 1974 World Cup winning team and the 1990 World Cup winning team? That 1990 squad was stacked with quality players who would go on to play for many more international tournaments.
Michael Posted January 11 Posted January 11 On 09/01/2024 at 23:16, Reluctant Striker said: I'd suggest perception of Keegan is effected by his 1972 - 1982 era. Similar for the likes of Trevor Francis, Ray Wilkins & Trevor Brooking. England did not qualify for 74 or 78. And 82 was underwhelming. So, yes, the 1966-70 players are obviously more highly talked of. And the 86-90 players. Even the 'Golden Generation'. Which actually was not. This is exactly the point that I wanted to make. The reason that Keegan is pretty much forgotten by a lot of people, is much less to do with the fact he didn't play in the 1990s or play in the Premier League. Because Bobby Charlton was much older than Keegan, but he was always regarded as an English footballing legend, arguably our best ever player. It's more to do with the fact that Keegan played at a time when the England national team of the 1970's were quite frankly a bit shit. We failed to qualify for both the 1974 and 1978 World Cups, as well as the 1976 Euros. Keegan only ever played in 2 international tournaments for England, namely the 1980 Euros and the 1982 World Cup. In the former tournament, England failed to even qualify from their group. Although Keegan played in both of these tournaments for England, he failed to score a single goal. I think shining for England and playing well at a major international tournament for England, goes a long way in helping a player gain that legend status. Keegan was no doubt an excellent player at club level, where he achieved a heck of a lot of accolades. But it's clear to me, that his lack of success with England is one of the major reasons people tend to forget him when thinking of the great England players through the generations. Although I am too young to have watched him live, I know many of the older people in my family who rave about how good Keegan was as a player. Some of the Youtube clips I've watched of him also seem to confirm how talented he was. He should definitely be classed as one of England's best ever players.
Rucksackfranzose Posted January 11 Posted January 11 29 minutes ago, Michael said: Really? What about the 1974 World Cup winning team and the 1990 World Cup winning team? That 1990 squad was stacked with quality players who would go on to play for many more international tournaments. The WC winners 74 are in parts identical with the 72 Euro winners. It's less talked about because the many contemporaries held the opinion the performance was better during the latter, therefore it's usually referred to as Euro 72 squad. As for the WC 90 winners had the political "issue" of having won during the year, when the German reunification happened. Therefore the societal attention and significance associated to their win was less than that to the one especially WC winners 54. Google "WM 1954- Wir sind wieder wer" and use google translate to become an impression what I'm talking about. Edit: Doesn't mean both teams you mentioned were disrespected in any kind. They're very liked just not seen as iconic.
LFCMike Posted January 11 Posted January 11 44 minutes ago, Michael said: This is exactly the point that I wanted to make. The reason that Keegan is pretty much forgotten by a lot of people, is much less to do with the fact he didn't play in the 1990s or play in the Premier League. Because Bobby Charlton was much older than Keegan, but he was always regarded as an English footballing legend, arguably our best ever player. It's more to do with the fact that Keegan played at a time when the England national team of the 1970's were quite frankly a bit shit. We failed to qualify for both the 1974 and 1978 World Cups, as well as the 1976 Euros. Keegan only ever played in 2 international tournaments for England, namely the 1980 Euros and the 1982 World Cup. In the former tournament, England failed to even qualify from their group. Although Keegan played in both of these tournaments for England, he failed to score a single goal. I think shining for England and playing well at a major international tournament for England, goes a long way in helping a player gain that legend status. Keegan was no doubt an excellent player at club level, where he achieved a heck of a lot of accolades. But it's clear to me, that his lack of success with England is one of the major reasons people tend to forget him when thinking of the great England players through the generations. Although I am too young to have watched him live, I know many of the older people in my family who rave about how good Keegan was as a player. Some of the Youtube clips I've watched of him also seem to confirm how talented he was. He should definitely be classed as one of England's best ever players. Keegan only made one substitute appearance in that World Cup due to injury
Cicero Posted January 11 Posted January 11 1 hour ago, Goku de la Boca said: The latter I disagree with strongly. In only 2 World Cups Mbappe is proyected to be more important than Pele and is already breaking records. At club level I suppose it isn't a debate, Mbappe hasn't really been a "different player" yet. Until he wins the Euros, Zidane has had a better international career. World Cup win against that Brazil team won him the Balon d'Or too.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.