Liverpool FC Forum

by **115-1073096938** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:08 pm

What gets me is that our Champion teams of the past are not capable of winning anything in todays Premiereship??
Are fitness levels so much greater now? Wasn't the old First Division bigger than the Premiereship? Didn't the same team compete in the League Championship, FA Cup, League Cup, European Championship/EUAFA Cup(sorry can't spell it). In those days, there was no such thing as rotating players to give the poor dears a rest. They usually didn't play cos they were injured!! Also, a big point is this, Liverpool, nor any other team at that time would dream of playing a second stream team in the early stages of any domestic cup. It was a matter of pride, and at one stage was considered to be a matter for the FA to investigate.
The difference between then and now is MONEY and INVESTMENT. Players, whether they warrant it or not have been subject to inflation, liken it to the house market; a garage can sell for far more than it is worth, well over £200,000 in London. So too can a player in my opinion.
Any player who is valued in the £million bracket is an investment, he has to be looked after, his every whinging need pampered to.

Firstly the game was at NOWHERE NEAR the pace it is these days. Are you suggesting back then most top class defenders and players had every attribute? They didn't i can assure you. Untill 10 years or so ago Pace was never the biggest thing in football. Look at all the old centre halfs, Adams, Wright, Howey, Pallister, Bruce... the only one who had any pace was Keown. The rest couldn't run to save there lives.

Secondly, these players today are ATHLETES. Not pub players, the standard of professionalism is 10 times what it was and the fitness regime's and diets are structured as apose to players doing what the ****** they like. Also the players of today's technique is on a totally different level as are the footballs they play with.

Totally different game to what it was.

Also, southernscouser...

If Dalglish said "If you can run for 90 minutes and tackle, there's a fair chance you can play in the Prem League" then that explains his failiure as manager at Newcastle. Thats the biggest pile of ****** i've ever heard. One of the lads who plays for my team can run endlessly and is a superb tackler, yet he's not the outstanding player at the club.

by **taff** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:15 pm

Sorry Stu but although faster its naive to belittle the game in the past as they were fit and I think your believing the hype with the blase attitude of some players

people also adapt to the era they are in so a great in any era would be a great now

With Ernie although Im tired of his name now he is a GOALSCORER and no amount of stats or facts or my mate can run all day blah blah will convince me otherwise as he is a natural scorer simple as that and your scientific argument reminds me of that guy Taylor had when he was England Manager.

Real football is not stats human beings are odd that way

by **bigmick** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:18 pm

Stu you can talk about attributes all you like mate. You can post up anything you want but I'm sure I speak for most of the older members of the forum when I say the best Liverpool teams would have held their own in this or any other Premiership. FWIW, it's only in the last 4 or 5 years that I can honestly say we wouldn't have won the thing. Sure the game has moved forward but we are talking about the best team in the world here. I'm not saying that through red specs, we were THE team in the European Cup. We were the ones who if you drew you went "oh no. Not them".
If you're telling me Stu that those teams wouldn't have beaten say the Tottenham and Charlton teams of today (I picked on those 'cos I expect them to be about 12th) then our beautiful friendship is over bud. We'll have to agree to disagree. To coin one of your favourite phrases, End of!

by **115-1073096938** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:13 pm

Mick, i just find it shocking the way people comment on things they know little about. Firstly about the standard of players. If you put a Unibond premiership player or a conference player in a sunday league side, they stand out immensely. You would have NO TROUBLE AT ALL telling who that player is if you watched the game unless you have no clue about the game. Players of this standard are well above "average". If you put a division 2 player in a sunday league side, he can make an average sunday league side into a quality sunday league side on his own. If you were to put a premiership player in there, you'd probably make a poor side into a league winning one. People who haven't seen these can't grasp how big the gap actually is yet they still sit here and tell me i'm wrong.

My other point is, i've watched football for 15 years... i've played for about the same time and the game has changed IMMENSELY over that period.

People say Fowler and Shearer lost pace, Owen lost pace etc etc... but did they? or did the defenders become quicker? The game now moved up miles in terms of fitness, sylte and physique.

A prime example, look at the formations and tactics. Look at the number of out an out WINGERS there are in todays game. When do you every see goal poachers (like Fowler, Shearer, Ferdinand and Sheringham) in todays game without them actually being those players? Where do you see out an out wingers like Kanchelskis? this is not even a decade ago and the game's changed that much already.

Also look at fullback these days, attacking players now. Jamie Carragher 25 years ago would have been one of the best full backs in the world. Today people moan because he lacks Zidane's flair.

I can see what you're saying about the greats adapting. I except that... but thats part of my point, they'd have to adapt.

Players can't play every game a season CONSISTENTLY anymore, the game is faster and tougher on a person mentally and physically. Also with all the press coverage, the game can be stressful to be involved in at times.

by **DAV** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:24 pm

nicely put stu

by **115-1073096938** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:43 pm

I know

Thanks

by **bigmick** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:53 pm

Yeah it was nicely put but he's still wrong.

Stu, The great Liverpool sides would beat the Charlton team of today, end of.

by **JBG** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:57 pm

If Liverpool of 1978 or 1984 played Arsenal, Man UTD or Chelsea of today they'd probably be beaten.

If the Madrid side of 1961 or the great Hungarian team of the 1950s played the top 3 in England today, they'd be slaughtered.

There has been a huge improvement in athleticism and fitness. Johan Cruff was one of the greatest players ever but he smoked 60(!) fags a day and wouldn't survive in todays game doing that.

However, those comparisons are artificial as it goes on the assumption that the former great sides and players wouldn't have the benefit of increased professionalsim and athleticism.

Of course, some players from the past would inevitably fall by the wayside as their personalities wouldn't adapt to the pressure and dizzying wealth and the game nowadays is probably too rigid and authoratarian for them to come through the youth ranks (years ago most great players started off with lower division sides rather than in big clubs youth teams).

However, our former great sides would teach most modern team a lesson in discipline and organisation, team spirit and the oft fogotten art of defending.

by **adayinthelife** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:03 pm

John Barnes' Granny wrote:There has been a huge improvement in athleticism and fitness. Johan Cruff was one of the greatest players ever but he smoked 60(!) fags a day and wouldn't survive in todays game doing that.

What about Le Tissier

He used to stroll around in the not too distant past yet kept Southampton in the prem lge year after year.

Never looked anywhere near fit but what a player.

by **JBG** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:07 pm

adayinthelife wrote:
John Barnes' Granny wrote:There has been a huge improvement in athleticism and fitness. Johan Cruff was one of the greatest players ever but he smoked 60(!) fags a day and wouldn't survive in todays game doing that.

What about Le Tissier

He used to stroll around in the not too distant past yet kept Southampton in the prem lge year after year.

Never looked anywhere near fit but what a player.

Le Tissier came through the youth ranks in the 1980s and was well past his best by the end of the 1990s.

There will always be a few exceptions but what player now could get away with smoking 3 packets of fags a day?

by **adayinthelife** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:11 pm

John Barnes' Granny wrote:
adayinthelife wrote:
John Barnes' Granny wrote:There has been a huge improvement in athleticism and fitness. Johan Cruff was one of the greatest players ever but he smoked 60(!) fags a day and wouldn't survive in todays game doing that.

What about Le Tissier

He used to stroll around in the not too distant past yet kept Southampton in the prem lge year after year.

Never looked anywhere near fit but what a player.

Le Tissier came through the youth ranks in the 1980s and was well past his best by the end of the 1990s.

There will always be a few exceptions but what player now could get away with smoking 3 packets of fags a day?

Apparently alot of Italian players smoke.

by **JBG** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:17 pm

60 a day?

I'm adicted to the cancer sticks myself and I'm a fairly heavy smoker but 20 a day is my limit.

Cruff smoked 60 a day with no filters, including a fag at half time of matches!

by **bigmick** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:47 pm

In twenty years time when there are a couple of 'mini Stu's' telling their Dad that such and such is "the best central midfielder ever to wear the red shirt" he will argue that there have been some in the past that were pretty special as well. When his kids tell him "Nah Dad, Gerrard wouldn't cope with the pace, power and tactical awareness required these days" he will know how some of us oldies feel when we hear the likes of Souness, Dalglish, Hansen, Barnes, Beardsley, Rush etc etc etc etc dismissed so lightly.
He will think the kids are wrong and he is right. And for one of the few times in his life, we will all agree with him.

by **JBG** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:56 pm

Each player must be judged in their own era.

Beardsley, Barnes and Daglish were superb players and were they playing now (all things being even we assume their fitness levels to todays) they would be among the very best players in Europe.

Barnes was sensational in his first three years at Liverpool, and in 1990 Liverpool turned down a 5m bid for him from Sampdoria. I think the World record fee back then was around 6.5m, so that puts it into perspective.

Daglish was an even better player and were he born 20 years later, he would have been even better than Dennis Bergkamp at his peak.

Beardsley had mixed fortunes at Liverpool. He arrived for a British record transfer fee, was superb in 1987/88 but there were rumours of a falling out with Daglish and he sometimes found himself on the bench thereafter. Souness selling him to Everton was a mjor mistake, as Bearsdley was excellent at Goodison and even better in his second spell at Newcastle.

I'm not looking at the past with rose tinted glasses. Steve McMahon was an excellent player for us and was the best "engine" midfielder in England in 1987/88, but he wasn't really in Roy Keanes, Patrick Vieira or Steven Gerrard's league.

Then again, those three guys could have learned a lot from Graeme Souness in his prime.

by **bigmick** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 11:09 pm

Too right JBG. Putting aside his calamitous spell as manager, Souness was an absolutely fantastic player in my view. Those performances that we've all seen too often over the last ten years, you know the ones, Liverpool start brightly but concede a goal on the half-hour mark. Rest of game, lots of Liverpool posession but no penetration and we never look like scoring. Those games never occured when Souness played, seriously he'd drag the equaliser and likely the winner out of the team. What a footballer.

Liverpool FC Forum

I'm so predictable but... - I can't help it.

Who is online