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

Mal wrote:

blackskar wrote:Wish we still had Henry

What a player and most importantly what a man.

Well i totally agree with this what a player and what a man Henry was and is but if your saying what a man he was i cant explain what a man Dalglish has been through out his career and what he has done for Liverpool through out the years and what he is doing now is just untouchable. He took over at Liverpool the day after Hysel and helped them through what happened then.

And well Hillsborough what that man did was just something so special and well his own health eventually suffered cause of what he did for Liverpool football club through out that time and not that im one for Knighthoods but how he was not made Sir Kenny Dalglish i will never no, but then again i would rather have KING KENNY DALGLISH than Sir Kenny Dalglish and noing him i think he would rather have the same. But Kenny Dalglish should go down as one of the Greatest people to have ever been involved in football the man is just a complete Legend on and off the park.

KING KENNY DALGLISH

blackskar wrote:Why would you include youth caps and u23's?

Cause it was on the thing i copied and if i had not someone would have probably brough it up that i had not added them thats all.

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote: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.

Excuse me this is Kenny Dalglish we are talking about, not George Best And im not saying Dalglish and others did not have a drink back then but where do you get your imformation, Was you alive back then cause if Dalglish was that Heavy a drinker how did he manage to play 938 games for Celtic, Liverpool and Scotland. And if you drop players of today back they would find it different without the things they have today and if players years ago had to play today they would have had to adjust to what is happening today.

Tell me who you think is the top 10 players that ever played the game and tell me who you think is Manchester.United's top 10.

If you dropped Henry in an Arsenal team from the 1980s, and his team-mates were all drunken gambling addicts like Tony Adams (a player who made over 700 appearances) he could still have a top diet even if his team-mates didn't, healthy foods weren't invented in 1997. It's not a dig at Dalglish, all players were doing it to some extent back then, it'd just give Henry a massive advantage over him.

A top 10 of all time is extremely difficult to do, as you're comparing across eras. If you dropped someone like Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo into 1960 they would lay waste to everything to got in their paths, far far more than any great players at the time like Pele did, because they are far superior athletes, and have incredible talent to boot. My top 10 would consist only of players who have made their careers in the last 10 years, and Ronaldo and Messi would be the top two. There's be no room for the likes of Pele and Garrincha in there, because I think someone like Gareth Bale, Ryan Babel or Michael Owen would be much better.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote: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.

Excuse me this is Kenny Dalglish we are talking about, not George Best And im not saying Dalglish and others did not have a drink back then but where do you get your imformation, Was you alive back then cause if Dalglish was that Heavy a drinker how did he manage to play 938 games for Celtic, Liverpool and Scotland. And if you drop players of today back they would find it different without the things they have today and if players years ago had to play today they would have had to adjust to what is happening today.

Tell me who you think is the top 10 players that ever played the game and tell me who you think is Manchester.United's top 10.

If you dropped Henry in an Arsenal team from the 1980s, and his team-mates were all drunken gambling addicts like Tony Adams (a player who made over 700 appearances) he could still have a top diet even if his team-mates didn't, healthy foods weren't invented in 1997. It's not a dig at Dalglish, all players were doing it to some extent back then, it'd just give Henry a massive advantage over him.

A top 10 of all time is extremely difficult to do, as you're comparing across eras. If you dropped someone like Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo into 1960 they would lay waste to everything to got in their paths, far far more than any great players at the time like Pele did, because they are far superior athletes, and have incredible talent to boot. My top 10 would consist only of players who have made their careers in the last 10 years, and Ronaldo and Messi would be the top two. There's be no room for the likes of Pele and Garrincha in there, because I think someone like Gareth Bale, Ryan Babel or Michael Owen would be much better.

But if you drop the players of today back to years ago they would not be as fit cause they did not have the facilities and did not do what they do today and well if the players back then were about today they would have to be athletes to be able to play.

today you need to be a athlete first, footballer second.

LFCJordan wrote:today you need to be a athlete first, footballer second.

And when you get someone like Henry who is an athlete, that has all the talent as well.. wow.

And that's just why I think if him and Dalglish were on the same pitch Henry would stand out, but for his time Dalglish was sensational from what I've seen, if he came into the game these days as a young player, maybe he'd turn into an even better player than he was.

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote: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.

Excuse me this is Kenny Dalglish we are talking about, not George Best And im not saying Dalglish and others did not have a drink back then but where do you get your imformation, Was you alive back then cause if Dalglish was that Heavy a drinker how did he manage to play 938 games for Celtic, Liverpool and Scotland. And if you drop players of today back they would find it different without the things they have today and if players years ago had to play today they would have had to adjust to what is happening today.

Tell me who you think is the top 10 players that ever played the game and tell me who you think is Manchester.United's top 10.

If you dropped Henry in an Arsenal team from the 1980s, and his team-mates were all drunken gambling addicts like Tony Adams (a player who made over 700 appearances) he could still have a top diet even if his team-mates didn't, healthy foods weren't invented in 1997. It's not a dig at Dalglish, all players were doing it to some extent back then, it'd just give Henry a massive advantage over him.

A top 10 of all time is extremely difficult to do, as you're comparing across eras. If you dropped someone like Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo into 1960 they would lay waste to everything to got in their paths, far far more than any great players at the time like Pele did, because they are far superior athletes, and have incredible talent to boot. My top 10 would consist only of players who have made their careers in the last 10 years, and Ronaldo and Messi would be the top two. There's be no room for the likes of Pele and Garrincha in there, because I think someone like Gareth Bale, Ryan Babel or Michael Owen would be much better.

But if you drop the players of today back to years ago they would not be as fit cause they did not have the facilities and did not do what they do today and well if the players back then were about today they would have to be athletes to be able to play.

I reckon modern day athletes know how to keep themselves very fit with the facilities available 60 years ago, certainly enough to give them a big advantage over the people who actually played football then. I know you probably watched it at the time, but go and download some matches from 20, 30 years ago, and compare it with a match from today, it's not something you notice when you're watching football continuously, but the difference is staggering.

You're right that old footballers could have adapted (and I stress could), but I think we have to judge players on how they actually played, rather than how they would have played if circumstances had been different.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Liverpool fc 4 ever wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote: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.

Excuse me this is Kenny Dalglish we are talking about, not George Best And im not saying Dalglish and others did not have a drink back then but where do you get your imformation, Was you alive back then cause if Dalglish was that Heavy a drinker how did he manage to play 938 games for Celtic, Liverpool and Scotland. And if you drop players of today back they would find it different without the things they have today and if players years ago had to play today they would have had to adjust to what is happening today.

Tell me who you think is the top 10 players that ever played the game and tell me who you think is Manchester.United's top 10.

If you dropped Henry in an Arsenal team from the 1980s, and his team-mates were all drunken gambling addicts like Tony Adams (a player who made over 700 appearances) he could still have a top diet even if his team-mates didn't, healthy foods weren't invented in 1997. It's not a dig at Dalglish, all players were doing it to some extent back then, it'd just give Henry a massive advantage over him.

A top 10 of all time is extremely difficult to do, as you're comparing across eras. If you dropped someone like Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo into 1960 they would lay waste to everything to got in their paths, far far more than any great players at the time like Pele did, because they are far superior athletes, and have incredible talent to boot. My top 10 would consist only of players who have made their careers in the last 10 years, and Ronaldo and Messi would be the top two. There's be no room for the likes of Pele and Garrincha in there, because I think someone like Gareth Bale, Ryan Babel or Michael Owen would be much better.

But if you drop the players of today back to years ago they would not be as fit cause they did not have the facilities and did not do what they do today and well if the players back then were about today they would have to be athletes to be able to play.

I reckon modern day athletes know how to keep themselves very fit with the facilities available 60 years ago, certainly enough to give them a big advantage over the people who actually played football then. I know you probably watched it at the time, but go and download some matches from 20, 30 years ago, and compare it with a match from today, it's not something you notice when you're watching football continuously, but the difference is staggering.

You're right that old footballers could have adapted (and I stress could), but I think we have to judge players on how they actually played, rather than how they would have played if circumstances had been different.

Well maybe but the likes of Maradona and Pele and the likes always get voted high up in the Greatest Footballers ever by people.

Just to point out Resurrection's point.

Shankly and Paisley were some of the first managers to focus on diets and fitness etc.

Shankly used to go through the teams shirts and feel them. If they weren't drenched in sweat they would get a bollocking.

Cornholio wrote:Just to point out Resurrection's point.

Shankly and Paisley were some of the first managers to focus on diets and fitness etc.

Shankly used to go through the teams shirts and feel them. If they weren't drenched in sweat they would get a bollocking.

There are a lot of bullshit myths about football managers in England, about crazy or outrageous things they've done. If Shankly really did that then it doesn't sound like he had much of a clue about diets and fitness, if your shirt is drenched in sweat then you're probably not very fit. It also discourages sensible conservation of energy. With an attitude like that it's no wonder he never won the European Cup.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Cornholio wrote:Just to point out Resurrection's point.

Shankly and Paisley were some of the first managers to focus on diets and fitness etc.

Shankly used to go through the teams shirts and feel them. If they weren't drenched in sweat they would get a bollocking.

There are a lot of bullshit myths about football managers in England, about crazy or outrageous things they've done. If Shankly really did that then it doesn't sound like he had much of a clue about diets and fitness, if your shirt is drenched in sweat then you're probably not very fit. It also discourages sensible conservation of energy. With an attitude like that it's no wonder he never won the European Cup.

Drench was a bit of an exaggeration

Trust you to run with that one though

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Cornholio wrote:Just to point out Resurrection's point.

Shankly and Paisley were some of the first managers to focus on diets and fitness etc.

Shankly used to go through the teams shirts and feel them. If they weren't drenched in sweat they would get a bollocking.

There are a lot of bullshit myths about football managers in England, about crazy or outrageous things they've done. If Shankly really did that then it doesn't sound like he had much of a clue about diets and fitness, if your shirt is drenched in sweat then you're probably not very fit. It also discourages sensible conservation of energy. With an attitude like that it's no wonder he never won the European Cup.

Shankly did win the Uefa Cup and did get to the Cup Winners Cup Final and in 1965 Shankly and Liverpool got cheated in the Semi finals by Inter.Milan a goal disallowed in the first game in which Liverpool won 3 1 that they say should have stood, and well the 2nd Leg Inter scored with an Indirect Free kick by scoring straight from it and the Liverpool Keeper had the Ball kicked out of his hands. Or shankly and Liverpool could have been the first British winners.


A Ref also was bribbed the year earlier when Inter got some well lets say some decisions for them and Inter also tried to pay a different ref in another semi final but he did not take the bribe.


The infamous second leg


The referee had been bribed for this game. It was widely recognised that Inter had paid him. Reputable journalists at the time saw the ref drinking champagne with Inter officials after the game. The ref retired (was banned) after that game and never refereed again. He later admitted that Inter bribed him.There was one good goal by Inter. But the second came when the ball was kicked out of Tommy Lawrence’s hands ‘“ a definite foul, play was allowed to continue and they netted. More incredibly, the third was scored DIRECT from an INDIRECT free kick!!!!!!!!


‘Three years in a row, Inter made offers to referees in the second legs of European Cup semi-finals to be played at the San Siro and twice it worked, in 1964 and 1965, when they went on to win the final. On the third occasion, in 1966, Gyorgy Vadas, a brave Hungarian official, refused to be bribed. Real Madrid held out and went on to lift the trophy.In 1964, the sufferers were Borussia Dortmund, who had a key player sent off. In 1965 it was Liverpool, victims of two dreadful decisions by Ortiz de Mendibil, the Spaniard.’ (2) Glanville

Who cares, it wasn't even the Final. Man Utd had a bad decision go against them in the 2005/06 group stages, should we add another European Cup to Ferguson's tally?

Cornholio wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Cornholio wrote:Just to point out Resurrection's point.

Shankly and Paisley were some of the first managers to focus on diets and fitness etc.

Shankly used to go through the teams shirts and feel them. If they weren't drenched in sweat they would get a bollocking.

There are a lot of bullshit myths about football managers in England, about crazy or outrageous things they've done. If Shankly really did that then it doesn't sound like he had much of a clue about diets and fitness, if your shirt is drenched in sweat then you're probably not very fit. It also discourages sensible conservation of energy. With an attitude like that it's no wonder he never won the European Cup.

Drench was a bit of an exaggeration

Trust you to run with that one though

No, you were right Ryan. He did it in pre-season.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Who cares, it wasn't even the Final. Man Utd had a bad decision go against them in the 2005/06 group stages, should we add another European Cup to Ferguson's tally?

Maybe you could, but you said no wonder Shankly never won the European cup so if he had not been cheated out of the semi he could have.

If his intention was to make sure his players were drenched in sweat in all of their matches then yeah, it's no wonder he didn't win the European Cup, his players would probably have been too knackered. It's probably bollocks mind, no manager that stupid could progress as far as Shankly did.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:If his intention was to make sure his players were drenched in sweat in all of their matches then yeah, it's no wonder he didn't win the European Cup, his players would probably have been too knackered. It's probably bollocks mind, no manager that stupid could progress as far as Shankly did.

He got them fit yes but i dont think he was that stupid as you have said.