Jump to content
IGNORED

England's Greatest XI


Super

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Super said:

Just noticed this on a FB page, Some awful shouts mind! 

 

Image may contain: stadium and text

Why do the fans of football, unlike cricket fans, disrespect the past of the game?  Wedlock in central midfield for me everytime.  Why no Billy Wright or Stanley Matthews ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

Why do the fans of football, unlike cricket fans, disrespect the past of the game?  Wedlock in central midfield for me everytime.  Why no Billy Wright or Stanley Matthews ?

I think the most likely reason is because not many people can remember those players anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I think the most likely reason is because not many people can remember those players anymore

Point invalid I am afraid, because the same applies to cricket.

Football fans simply, whilst professing a love for the game, actually know little of its history, even of their own club's.

Not surprising then that the majority of Robins are acquiescent when it comes to BS and its approach.  Example, despite promises, no museum still at Ashton Gate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

Point invalid I am afraid, because the same applies to cricket.

Football fans simply, whilst professing a love for the game, actually know little of its history, even of their own club's.

Not surprising then that the majority of Robins are acquiescent when it comes to BS and its approach.  Example, despite promises, no museum still at Ashton Gate.

Hardly. It's pretty simple - there's plenty of good quality video footage featuring Barnes, Lineker and Gascoigne and it's not quite long enough ago that people have forgotten.

With respect, Billy Wedlock was born in the 1800s and finished playing for England around the time of the first World War! Billy Wright - born in the 1920s and finished his playing career almost 60 years ago. You'd have to be very elderly to legitimately remember those two players.

There is lots more footage of Matthews and I think he's still pretty well remembered out of those you mentioned.. but even so.. lots of people who watch football now weren't alive when these guys retired!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duncan Edwards, Tom Finney, Stan Matthews, Billy Wright, Johnny Haynes, Jimmy Greaves, Geoff Hurst, Bobby Charlton, Ray Wilson are just a very few of the post second war players who should have consideration. Apologies to any not in this very brief list.

Pre-war I would only be going on what I've read about players but I suspect that several would merit consideration.

It's almost impossible to pick an all time best eleven at international and club level. Best to do it in blocks of two/three decades, which would be more manageable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I think the most likely reason is because not many people can remember those players anymore

Far too sensible a suggestion. People will naturally pick those that they've seen play over those that they haven't.

Still, your reply gave him a chance to shoehorn in another whine about Bristol Sport, so it's all good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Ivor Guy on this one. The question is what is England's Greatest XI? Not what is England's Greatest XI since about 1966? With regards to cricket I notice that the players of past eras are respected more in general maybe because their stats can still be compared to modern day players and commentators don't keep ramming It down viewers throats how fantastic a current player is. In football we seem to be constantly fed the line that football and footballers improve with each passing season as they need our dosh to fund the multi billion dollar business it has become so even the commentators have a vested interest in peddling this line. I doubt Sky Sports will ever run adverts telling us that OK, we don't in England produce world rated talents such as Edwards, Finney, Lawton and Matthews any more but can you please continue with your subscription over the summer because England have some prestigious friendlies in which they will be fielding a fair bit of dross. 

Football has improved simply because playing surfaces and equipment are better as well as diet etc. But it means that players from the past will also have had the benefit of tools and conditions they could only of dreamed of when they were playing. Comparing Best with Ronaldo for instance, modern day fans would probably opt for the latter because they have seen a lot more of him and have been fed the line that football is much better now. However, we don't know how Ronaldo would have coped on quagmire pitches with a heavier ball and rigid boots and being the target for hatchet men. However, we can safely assume that had Best been transported to modern day football minus all the handicaps he encountered on a daily basis he would have thought he had died and gone to heaven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing football nowadays to how it was years ago, in terms of standard and ability, is pretty much impossible, unlike cricket whereby the technology might have changed but the standard will always be comparable.

Things like this is always down to opinion as I believe Scholes to be one of the best midfielders of recent generations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

What, no Carlton Palmer?

Greatest England team in my lifetime has to be

Banks

Wilson Charlton J Moore Cohen

Ball Charlton R Stiles Peters

Hurst Hunt

How can there be any question about that?

I’m too young, but from the tv stuff you see, how good was Bobby Charlton?  He was brilliant and I don’t think he gets the credit, probably because of Hurst and Moore.  Ball was bloody good too.

I certainly think Banks has been our best ever keeper, Moore our best ever centre-back, Charlton our best ever midfielder.

I would probably go for something like this - taking into account the modern game to some extent:

Banks

G.Neville, Ferdinand, Moore, Pearce

Edwards, R.Charlton, Gascoigne

Hurst, Lineker, Greaves

Subs:

Shilton

J.Charlton

Adams

Ball

Beckham

Robson

Owen

Shearer

T.Francis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Hardly. It's pretty simple - there's plenty of good quality video footage featuring Barnes, Lineker and Gascoigne and it's not quite long enough ago that people have forgotten.

With respect, Billy Wedlock was born in the 1800s and finished playing for England around the time of the first World War! Billy Wright - born in the 1920s and finished his playing career almost 60 years ago. You'd have to be very elderly to legitimately remember those two players.

There is lots more footage of Matthews and I think he's still pretty well remembered out of those you mentioned.. but even so.. lots of people who watch football now weren't alive when these guys retired!

Still disagree.  Every cricket fan in the world knows WG and Hammond, just to name local men. My point stands I think

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Northern Red said:

Far too sensible a suggestion. People will naturally pick those that they've seen play over those that they haven't.

Still, your reply gave him a chance to shoehorn in another whine about Bristol Sport, so it's all good.

As you've picked up on BS, can't imagine Glos fans accepting another Lansdown take over without huge negative reaction. But as you say it's all good except .......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballs changed more than cricket, to echo @formerly known as ivan.

Football is essentially a different game to the one it was 50 years ago. Pitches, conditioning, training, diet, footballs, more double barrelled names. Footballers of today are unquestionably better athletes but it's so hard to compare, for example, Lionel Messi and Pele, because they played different games.

For anyone pre-historic enough to have watched Pele, Maradona, Matthews, Best, Charlton and even big John - could they have cut it today, if they were given the same pitches, conditioning, training, diet, footballs, and double barrelled names of the current crop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Hardly. It's pretty simple - there's plenty of good quality video footage featuring Barnes, Lineker and Gascoigne and it's not quite long enough ago that people have forgotten.

With respect, Billy Wedlock was born in the 1800s and finished playing for England around the time of the first World War! Billy Wright - born in the 1920s and finished his playing career almost 60 years ago. You'd have to be very elderly to legitimately remember those two players.

There is lots more footage of Matthews and I think he's still pretty well remembered out of those you mentioned.. but even so.. lots of people who watch football now weren't alive when these guys retired!

So WG Grace or Don Bradman cannot be considered when picking a "Greatest XI" for their respective countries?

Nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

Point invalid I am afraid, because the same applies to cricket.

Football fans simply, whilst professing a love for the game, actually know little of its history, even of their own club's.

Not surprising then that the majority of Robins are acquiescent when it comes to BS and its approach.  Example, despite promises, no museum still at Ashton Gate.

I cannot opine on a player I have barely seen play!  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

So WG Grace or Don Bradman cannot be considered when picking a "Greatest XI" for their respective countries?

Nonsense.

I don’t know anything about Cricket so can’t comment. 

I know that football has moved on greatly since the early 20th century. If you put the likes of Wedlock and Billy Wright in a time machine and stuck them in the England’s squad today they’d probably look slow, weak and technically inferior. Training and athletic development in football has been huge.

No idea about cricket though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RedDave said:

Ashley Cole much better than Stuart Pearce.  

Think Ashley Cole’s international career had three phases:

  1. the young, inexperienced, attack minded LB, who was lacking defensively
  2. the accomplished LB who become a very good defender and gave an extra dimension in the attacking third
  3. the very good defender who never got forward 

It was a tough call for me, and Pearce shaded it over Cole, probably because of his blood and thunder and his intimidation of his opponent.  Considered Kenny Sansom too, and even TC, but it was Pearce or Cole for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RedDave said:

Ashley Cole much better than Stuart Pearce.  

Hell of a lot better, but Pearce had some attributes better than Cole.

 

Cole for me is the one of the few English true world class players we have had in the last  15-20 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ZiderEyed said:

Footballs changed more than cricket, to echo @formerly known as ivan.

Football is essentially a different game to the one it was 50 years ago. Pitches, conditioning, training, diet, footballs, more double barrelled names. Footballers of today are unquestionably better athletes but it's so hard to compare, for example, Lionel Messi and Pele, because they played different games.

For anyone pre-historic enough to have watched Pele, Maradona, Matthews, Best, Charlton and even big John - could they have cut it today, if they were given the same pitches, conditioning, training, diet, footballs, and double barrelled names of the current crop?

Without doubt, talent is talent, if they had the same training and diet they would still be greats, whether  some could have got away with the physicality they used then, I don't know, but potentially the likes of Maradona, Pele, Matthews Best Charlton would have been even better than the current crop, as they had to deal with hatchet men, they would love the protection they would get in today's game.  It would be interesting to see if Ronaldo Messi et al could adapt to being cut in half every single match.

 

Like you say a very different game, but I believe the old stars would adapt to the training  pace  and diet.  Class and technique is always there 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TRL said:

Hell of a lot better, but Pearce had some attributes better than Cole.

 

Cole for me is the one of the few English true world class players we have had in the last  15-20 years

Always say this, Ashley Cole is the one elite/world class player England have had in my years of watching football 1998-onwards, only English player that for a period could we actually say was the best in the world In his position 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Think Ashley Cole’s international career had three phases:

  1. the young, inexperienced, attack minded LB, who was lacking defensively
  2. the accomplished LB who become a very good defender and gave an extra dimension in the attacking third
  3. the very good defender who never got forward 

It was a tough call for me, and Pearce shaded it over Cole, probably because of his blood and thunder and his intimidation of his opponent.  Considered Kenny Sansom too, and even TC, but it was Pearce or Cole for me. 

Cole for me. Cristian Ronaldo, without any hesitation, listed Cole as the toughest defender he’s ever faced. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...