Strikers debate. With a Suarez vs Tores poll. :/

Dan wrote:Anyway, if we're gonna talk about strikers then..


Rush >>>>> all





Big Al will back me up though.

As a Goal scorer Rushie was as good as any on his day and his workrate and closing defenders and players down was just as good he never let them settle and worked so hard for the team aswell as Scoring loads of goals. The other striker i saw at that time in the late 80's and Early 90's was also the Great Marco Van.basten who won the European footballer of the year 3 times and he was one of the most stylish Goal scorers ive ever saw up there with the Greats like Ronaldo ect.

B0dunrin wrote:Dixie Dean > All.

Did you ever see the goal differences back then the year he scored 60 League goals it was backies out i think, or they never new that defending was part of Football im not saying he was not absolute class. But i mean they back then never heard the word defend and played with formations like 1 2 3 5 or something like that.

ATTACK... ATTACK.... ATTACK.... ATTACK.... ATTACK.......

Jimmy McGrory.

polska. wrote:

blackskar wrote:

polska. wrote:

blackskar wrote:

polska. wrote:Ooh Henry! (*with accent* )

but Henry isn't a manager though? U confuse Me..!

Unless you mean as players, which in turn Henry by far >>>> Dalglish

Well seeing as we're in a thread about strikers Polska....

But then I don't get it? Why all the hate? Kyro is well correct.

Because not everyone has the same opinion Polska

Fucking ridicilous how someone could even debate that.



HENRY BY FUCKING FAR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But King Kenny Dalglish won more as a player.

I thought Kyro said something shocking like Redknapp > Dalglish in managing, but no, this is about Henry????

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Your opinion

All facepalms but no explanations

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

you clearly dont know much about football if you need an explanation about how good Dalglish was?

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

Explanations for what bud.

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

Explanations for what bud.

So is this book your bible or something? Just read what some guy write's and thats now your way of thinking?

The-Reporter wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

Explanations for what bud.

So is this book your bible or something? Just read what some guy write's and thats now your way of thinking?

I read the Daily mail.

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

you clearly dont know much about football if you need an explanation about how good Dalglish was?

No sorry I don't know how good the "domestic british legend" was, probably like how you don't know how good a "domestic north american legend" *cough* Hugo Sanchez *cough* was. I suppose you don't know much either hmm? Be realistic here, if I don't know.. what do you know about him? please tell me (no sarcasm intended)

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

you clearly dont know much about football if you need an explanation about how good Dalglish was?

No sorry I don't know how good the "domestic british legend" was, probably like how you don't know how good a "domestic north american legend" *cough* Hugo Sanchez *cough* was. I suppose you don't know much either hmm? Be realistic here, if I don't know.. what do you know about him? please tell me (no sarcasm intended)

I'm not saying comparing Hugo Sanchez with anyone trying to say that they're better than him though?

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

you clearly dont know much about football if you need an explanation about how good Dalglish was?

No sorry I don't know how good the "domestic british legend" was, probably like how you don't know how good a "domestic north american legend" *cough* Hugo Sanchez *cough* was. I suppose you don't know much either hmm? Be realistic here, if I don't know.. what do you know about him? please tell me (no sarcasm intended)

I'm not saying comparing Hugo Sanchez with anyone trying to say that they're better than him though?

No that's a reply to you saying I don't know much about football when I don't know about Dalglish. If you ask many people from our generation who aren't from Britain about Dalglish they'd probably scratch their heads.

I want to know what attributes Dalglish had over Henry... it's just a question that I would like to know

I thought you were English.

Same, and I don't even know why

SBSP wrote:I thought you were English.

I am but I'm being as neutral as possible

I didn't even know who Dalglish was until last year and I was born here, that's why I don't chat shit about how good he was because I haven't seen him myself

You can't really be neutral seeing as your an arsenal fan and you only heard of Dalglish a year ago :lol


But yeah, Im going to bed now; hopefully someone else will fill you in

Cam wrote:You can't really be neutral seeing as your an arsenal fan and you only heard of Dalglish a year ago :lol


But yeah, Im going to bed now; hopefully someone else will fill you in

Well yeah otherwise I'd say "lolz no one in britain knows who dalglish is cos I only heard of him a year ago except for pool fans therefore he is shite"

Cam wrote:You can't really be neutral seeing as your an arsenal fan and you only heard of Dalglish a year ago :lol


But yeah, Im going to bed now; hopefully someone else will fill you in

I take it you obviously havent seen him play?

The-Reporter wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

Explanations for what bud.

So is this book your bible or something? Just read what some guy write's and thats now your way of thinking?

Nope its actually just a wind up cause if you notice Dalglish is on the front with Best, Maradona and Pele and to be put on a cover with them three is enough for me to no how good he was. And well i did see Dalglish play live a few times and watched him at his best on the tele and ive saw loads of Video's and read what loads of other top football players and football people have said about him.

King Kenny

EdinsonCavani wrote:

Cam wrote:You can't really be neutral seeing as your an arsenal fan and you only heard of Dalglish a year ago :lol


But yeah, Im going to bed now; hopefully someone else will fill you in

I take it you obviously havent seen him play?

They show old games on LFCtv and I've seen over things. But what I meant is I'm going to bed so I can't explain to him now

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:All facepalms but no explanations

you clearly dont know much about football if you need an explanation about how good Dalglish was?

No sorry I don't know how good the "domestic british legend" was, probably like how you don't know how good a "domestic north american legend" *cough* Hugo Sanchez *cough* was. I suppose you don't know much either hmm? Be realistic here, if I don't know.. what do you know about him? please tell me (no sarcasm intended)

I'm not saying comparing Hugo Sanchez with anyone trying to say that they're better than him though?

No that's a reply to you saying I don't know much about football when I don't know about Dalglish. If you ask many people from our generation who aren't from Britain about Dalglish they'd probably scratch their heads.

I want to know what attributes Dalglish had over Henry... it's just a question that I would like to know

I would say Dalglish had Vison and had an amazing football brain and his passing and creating chances was his main points aswell as scoring great goals. Im not saying Henry did not have any of this but Henry had pace which he used to make things happen on the football pitch, Dalglish was not the qucikest on his feet but in his brain he was so sharp noing what he was going to do before he received the ball ect.

Dalglish played something like 930 odd games as a player and back then he got lumps kicked out him but he kept coming back for more cause back then you could get away with more fouls ect. Then again Henry was hard enough to get near to actual foul him. But Kenny was as tough as old boots he took a lot of hard tackles in his time which would have been red cards in todays game.

You have not heard to much about Dalglish you said well as player and manager he has won 40 Honours in his career. Im not having a go im just saying he won a lot of things in his time in football.

How would you rate bergkamp compared to daglish alan

that lad for Diego Forlanland.
Torres is solo striker. will never be productive in pair.

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:


you clearly dont know much about football if you need an explanation about how good Dalglish was?

No sorry I don't know how good the "domestic british legend" was, probably like how you don't know how good a "domestic north american legend" *cough* Hugo Sanchez *cough* was. I suppose you don't know much either hmm? Be realistic here, if I don't know.. what do you know about him? please tell me (no sarcasm intended)

I'm not saying comparing Hugo Sanchez with anyone trying to say that they're better than him though?

No that's a reply to you saying I don't know much about football when I don't know about Dalglish. If you ask many people from our generation who aren't from Britain about Dalglish they'd probably scratch their heads.

I want to know what attributes Dalglish had over Henry... it's just a question that I would like to know

I would say Dalglish had Vison and had an amazing football brain and his passing and creating chances was his main points aswell as scoring great goals. Im not saying Henry did not have any of this but Henry had pace which he used to make things happen on the football pitch, Dalglish was not the qucikest on his feet but in his brain he was so sharp noing what he was going to do before he received the ball ect.

Dalglish played something like 930 odd games as a player and back then he got lumps kicked out him but he kept coming back for more cause back then you could get away with more fouls ect. Then again Henry was hard enough to get near to actual foul him. But Kenny was as tough as old boots he took a lot of hard tackles in his time which would have been red cards in todays game.

You have not heard to much about Dalglish you said well as player and manager he has won 40 Honours in his career. Im not having a go im just saying he won a lot of things in his time in football.

Winning trophies is no way to judge a player.

Only things like individual honors should be considered. Henry was worth over 109 goals in 2 seasons at his peak, his playmaking was second to none, he was like Bergkamp on Nos.

EdinsonCavani wrote:How would you rate bergkamp compared to daglish alan

Its hard to compare really but Dalglish when at Celtic played slightly further forward and was more of a Goal scorer but when he went to Liverpool he played more in the roll like Bergkamp. But both had that football brain to do things you would not think possible like a pass or a movement. I saw these players all play but im probably being honest not quailfied to say who was best at what bud, But both where just amazing players as Henry was.

Dalglish is my Hero and if it was not for him i would not have started supporting Liverpool, but ive saw and listened to what the football people say and ive done this for 30 years but it really is hard to totally compare. Dalglish did not get the reconition he totally deserved outside the British game but if you listen to what some great football people have said about him people would realise how good he was. George best said he Dalglish was on a par with the great Di Stefano but i could not say but to be compared up there with players like that tells me he was a special player.

The-Reporter wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

No sorry I don't know how good the "domestic british legend" was, probably like how you don't know how good a "domestic north american legend" *cough* Hugo Sanchez *cough* was. I suppose you don't know much either hmm? Be realistic here, if I don't know.. what do you know about him? please tell me (no sarcasm intended)

I'm not saying comparing Hugo Sanchez with anyone trying to say that they're better than him though?

No that's a reply to you saying I don't know much about football when I don't know about Dalglish. If you ask many people from our generation who aren't from Britain about Dalglish they'd probably scratch their heads.

I want to know what attributes Dalglish had over Henry... it's just a question that I would like to know

I would say Dalglish had Vison and had an amazing football brain and his passing and creating chances was his main points aswell as scoring great goals. Im not saying Henry did not have any of this but Henry had pace which he used to make things happen on the football pitch, Dalglish was not the qucikest on his feet but in his brain he was so sharp noing what he was going to do before he received the ball ect.

Dalglish played something like 930 odd games as a player and back then he got lumps kicked out him but he kept coming back for more cause back then you could get away with more fouls ect. Then again Henry was hard enough to get near to actual foul him. But Kenny was as tough as old boots he took a lot of hard tackles in his time which would have been red cards in todays game.

You have not heard to much about Dalglish you said well as player and manager he has won 40 Honours in his career. Im not having a go im just saying he won a lot of things in his time in football.

Winning trophies is no way to judge a player.

Only things like individual honors should be considered. Henry was worth over 109 goals in 2 seasons at his peak, his playmaking was second to none, he was like Bergkamp on Nos.

Well maybe but the amount of trophy's and internationl caps must count fot something especially when your counted as the best player in that team like Henry and Dalglish where these players can make a big difference in what your team wins. And well back then there was not as much indivitial honours out there and well the English League did not get the reconiton it deserved when it won 7 out of 9 years of European cups IMO.

And through out that time Dalglish was Liverpool's main man. And also football was different back then maybe not as fast as today but players would get kicked all over the park and had to just get on with it and played with injuries and on pitches that well were not made for playing certain types of football. Better pitches would have suited Dalglish and Liverpool's play. And well it does not tell you what Dalglish was worth to Liverpool,s goals with assists stats i just no what Liverpool won with Dalglish as the main man in that team was top class.

I'm really glad that you're part of this forum Alan. Your knowledge and experience is a great asset.

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

The-Reporter wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

Cam wrote:


I'm not saying comparing Hugo Sanchez with anyone trying to say that they're better than him though?

No that's a reply to you saying I don't know much about football when I don't know about Dalglish. If you ask many people from our generation who aren't from Britain about Dalglish they'd probably scratch their heads.

I want to know what attributes Dalglish had over Henry... it's just a question that I would like to know

I would say Dalglish had Vison and had an amazing football brain and his passing and creating chances was his main points aswell as scoring great goals. Im not saying Henry did not have any of this but Henry had pace which he used to make things happen on the football pitch, Dalglish was not the qucikest on his feet but in his brain he was so sharp noing what he was going to do before he received the ball ect.

Dalglish played something like 930 odd games as a player and back then he got lumps kicked out him but he kept coming back for more cause back then you could get away with more fouls ect. Then again Henry was hard enough to get near to actual foul him. But Kenny was as tough as old boots he took a lot of hard tackles in his time which would have been red cards in todays game.

You have not heard to much about Dalglish you said well as player and manager he has won 40 Honours in his career. Im not having a go im just saying he won a lot of things in his time in football.

Winning trophies is no way to judge a player.

Only things like individual honors should be considered. Henry was worth over 109 goals in 2 seasons at his peak, his playmaking was second to none, he was like Bergkamp on Nos.

Well maybe but the amount of trophy's and internationl caps must count fot something especially when your counted as the best player in that team like Henry and Dalglish where these players can make a big difference in what your team wins. And well back then there was not as much indivitial honours out there and well the English League did not get the reconiton it deserved when it won 7 out of 9 years of European cups IMO.

And through out that time Dalglish was Liverpool's main man. And also football was different back then maybe not as fast as today but players would get kicked all over the park and had to just get on with it and played with injuries and on pitches that well were not made for playing certain types of football. Better pitches would have suited Dalglish and Liverpool's play. And well it does not tell you what Dalglish was worth to Liverpool,s goals with assists stats i just no what Liverpool won with Dalglish as the main man in that team was top class.

No doubt he was a quality player and football was different back then.. Ian Rush was just as important as Kenny though.

Suarez is quality, but Torrres has the X Factor. The problem is that he's lost it.......I hope for his sake that he gets it back though......an off form Torres is so fucking useless.

At least an off form Rooney goes to the midfield and does something......

Comparing people like Dalglish to people like Henry is foolish. Dalglish was a heavy drinker, as were most footballers in those days (including the great BRYAN ROBSON), you could afford to be, whereas footballers today are highly trained athletes. When Arsene Wenger revolutionised English football in the late 1990s, Henry was at the forefront of that, the dieticians, the superior athleticism, if Dalglish had been dropped forward in time 15 years he would have been made to look like an idiot. Sure, he might have adjusted, but equally he might not.