Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Not really.Fonseca wrote:Dan wrote:Steadman wrote:
How is that relevant?
Both Bergkamp and Shearer were forwards, sure Bergkamp was a center forward while Bergkamp played as a withdrawn striker but you can still compare them easily enough. You can easily fit Bergkamp into the team by just moving one of the striker positions to make it a 4-4-1-1 wouldn't make any difference.
If you asked me if i'd rather have Shearer in my team as a center forward or Bergkamp in my team as a second striker, i'd still choose Bergkamp.
I'm just saying, we're looking at a striker. Shearer is a better striker. Having more 'talent' is irrelevant.
Yes Bergkamp plays as a striker
Where does he play then
+11
dena
Jamie
Theo Filippo
Mouse
Steadman
arsenalap11
Ricardo
crump
Drake
Kuled
SBSP
15 posters
Shearer or Bergkamp?
Poll
Title
- [ 13 ]
[41%]
- [ 19 ]
- [59%]
Total Votes: 32
Poll closed
Poll closed
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
Carlos Jenkinson-
- Posts : 10964
Steadman wrote:Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Not really.Fonseca wrote:Dan wrote:
I'm just saying, we're looking at a striker. Shearer is a better striker. Having more 'talent' is irrelevant.
Yes Bergkamp plays as a striker
Where does he play then
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
Can't agree two very different roles.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Not really.Fonseca wrote:
Yes Bergkamp plays as a striker
Where does he play then
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
SBSP-
- Posts : 50010
For this at least, it doesn't matter.
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
I was the one to argue in favour of that.SBSP wrote:For this at least, it doesn't matter.
AriseForLife-
- Posts : 2473
#10
Dr. Ján Ĩtor-
- Formerly known as : XxBradKennedyxX
Posts : 2983
Age : 30
Bergkamp was better but shearer did more in the premiership for longer so i voted him
Carlos Jenkinson-
- Posts : 10964
Steadman wrote:Can't agree two very different roles.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:
Not really.
Where does he play then
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Can't agree two very different roles.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.Fonseca wrote:
Where does he play then
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
arsenalap11-
- Posts : 6888
Location : London
Steadman wrote:A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Can't agree two very different roles.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:
Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
Gerrard disagrees
SBSP-
- Posts : 50010
Not really.Steadman wrote:A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Can't agree two very different roles.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:
Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
Carlos Jenkinson-
- Posts : 10964
Steadman wrote:A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Can't agree two very different roles.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:
Well he did play as a withdrawn forward, a second striker if you like.
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
They're not really, attacking mids are much more deeper. As 4-4-2 Bergkamp would be the link between the center mids just like Vieira would be the link between defence. Otherwise Vieira would have been a defencive mid and Bergkamp would have been an attacking midfielder
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
I said more or less, not exactly the same. Both attacking midfielders and second strikers act as a link from midfield to the attack, I never stated Bergkamp was a midfielder just that he played in a that gap between the midfield and the striker thus comparing his position to an attacking midfielder is relevant.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Can't agree two very different roles.Fonseca wrote:
But dude that's striker, it's in the name
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
They're not really, attacking mids are much more deeper. As 4-4-2 Bergkamp would be the link between the center mids just like Vieira would be the link between defence. Otherwise Vieira would have been a defencive mid and Bergkamp would have been an attacking midfielder
A second striker is not classified as a full out striker to me.
Carlos Jenkinson-
- Posts : 10964
Steadman wrote:I said more or less, not exactly the same. Both attacking midfielders and second strikers act as a link from midfield to the attack, I never stated Bergkamp was a midfielder just that he played in a that gap between the midfield and the striker thus comparing his position to an attacking midfielder is relevant.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:
Can't agree two very different roles.
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
They're not really, attacking mids are much more deeper. As 4-4-2 Bergkamp would be the link between the center mids just like Vieira would be the link between defence. Otherwise Vieira would have been a defencive mid and Bergkamp would have been an attacking midfielder
A second striker is not classified as a full out striker to me.
He didn't play in the gap between midfield and attack, he played on the boundaries of attack like a fullback plays on the boundaries of r/l midfielders. As similar as it sounds it's really not the same thing
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
Like I said, I didn't state it was the same thing. Maybe my terminology is different to yours but I have never classed a second striker like Bergkamp as a striker. Forward, yes; striker, no.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:I said more or less, not exactly the same. Both attacking midfielders and second strikers act as a link from midfield to the attack, I never stated Bergkamp was a midfielder just that he played in a that gap between the midfield and the striker thus comparing his position to an attacking midfielder is relevant.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.Fonseca wrote:
It's still a striker otherwise he'd be an attacking midfielder
They're not really, attacking mids are much more deeper. As 4-4-2 Bergkamp would be the link between the center mids just like Vieira would be the link between defence. Otherwise Vieira would have been a defencive mid and Bergkamp would have been an attacking midfielder
A second striker is not classified as a full out striker to me.
He didn't play in the gap between midfield and attack, he played on the boundaries of attack like a fullback plays on the boundaries of r/l midfielders. As similar as it sounds it's really not the same thing
AriseForLife-
- Posts : 2473
A second striker (Bergkamp) is basically a trequartista which he also played for us. With Bergkamp you could have said he was an attacking midfielder in a way because he picked the ball up at midfield on countless occasions so essentially they are very close depending on who is playing the role. Totti is another prime example of this pre-Spalletti.
Last edited by AriseForLife on Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
Which was kinda my point.AriseForLife wrote:A second striker (Bergkamp) is basically a trequartista which he also played for us.
AriseForLife-
- Posts : 2473
Steadman wrote:Which was kinda my point.AriseForLife wrote:A second striker (Bergkamp) is basically a trequartista which he also played for us.
I was just adding to what you said. I don't disagree which your posts.
Carlos Jenkinson-
- Posts : 10964
Steadman wrote:Like I said, I didn't state it was the same thing. Maybe my terminology is different to yours but I have never classed a second striker like Bergkamp as a striker. Forward, yes; striker, no.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:I said more or less, not exactly the same. Both attacking midfielders and second strikers act as a link from midfield to the attack, I never stated Bergkamp was a midfielder just that he played in a that gap between the midfield and the striker thus comparing his position to an attacking midfielder is relevant.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:
A second striker and an attacking midfielder are more or less the same thing.
They're not really, attacking mids are much more deeper. As 4-4-2 Bergkamp would be the link between the center mids just like Vieira would be the link between defence. Otherwise Vieira would have been a defencive mid and Bergkamp would have been an attacking midfielder
A second striker is not classified as a full out striker to me.
He didn't play in the gap between midfield and attack, he played on the boundaries of attack like a fullback plays on the boundaries of r/l midfielders. As similar as it sounds it's really not the same thing
But that is what you're suggesting, I disagree with your point completely and I'm reiterating why I feel it's different. You're saying you believe it's similar, but not the same thing... If you can't define it then accept a forward is not an attacking midfielder...
Steadman-
- Posts : 6134
Age : 32
Location : London
Supports : I have humor, yes.
Maybe not so much an attacking midfielder, following on from what Arise said a trequartista is more what I meant.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:Like I said, I didn't state it was the same thing. Maybe my terminology is different to yours but I have never classed a second striker like Bergkamp as a striker. Forward, yes; striker, no.Fonseca wrote:Steadman wrote:I said more or less, not exactly the same. Both attacking midfielders and second strikers act as a link from midfield to the attack, I never stated Bergkamp was a midfielder just that he played in a that gap between the midfield and the striker thus comparing his position to an attacking midfielder is relevant.Fonseca wrote:
They're not really, attacking mids are much more deeper. As 4-4-2 Bergkamp would be the link between the center mids just like Vieira would be the link between defence. Otherwise Vieira would have been a defencive mid and Bergkamp would have been an attacking midfielder
A second striker is not classified as a full out striker to me.
He didn't play in the gap between midfield and attack, he played on the boundaries of attack like a fullback plays on the boundaries of r/l midfielders. As similar as it sounds it's really not the same thing
But that is what you're suggesting, I disagree with your point completely and I'm reiterating why I feel it's different. You're saying you believe it's similar, but not the same thing... If you can't define it then accept a forward is not an attacking midfielder...
SBSP-
- Posts : 50010
SBSP wrote:While we're on the topic, I thought I'd ask this.I was thinking about doing the team thread like they do on Goal.com etc. Put the player with maybe a picture and write a few sentences about him, and who they beat to the position. If not that, I could just write the team. Does anyone mind either way, or...? I thought I might as well put a little bit of effort into it.
