Football 2015/16

[LondonTom]

4 hours ago, Celery said:

 

Spurs are gonna win this aren't they 

No, I refuse to believe we could them as Champions. I will still refuse even if they do manage it.

[The Nal]

13 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I think theres a bigger reason that they have only won the league once and that is the existence of a pretty decent team in the same country.

Barca have had their dips over the last 7-8 years though. Real just haven't capitalised. 

[pink_triangle]

29 minutes ago, The Nal said:

Barca have had their dips over the last 7-8 years though. Real just haven't capitalised. 

Well even the greatest have dips in form, but Barcelona have been the best team in the last 20 years.  In my lifetime only Milan in the late 80s early 90s may be better.  If Real Madrid with the exact same team spirit were put in the premiership I have no doubt they would have won multiple titles in that time. I think the players accept Ronaldo is a cock, but one they want on their side.

[ThomThomDrum]

5 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

In my lifetime only Milan in the late 80s early 90s may be better. 

That Liverpool team of the late 70s/early 80s would put up a strong argument, no? 

[ThomThomDrum]

Not that I know how old you are actually! 

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

That Liverpool team of the late 70s/early 80s would put up a strong argument, no? 

They won a lot, but 'better'? Nah.

They'd get badly whipped if the same team of the same player-ages could play today's Barca. There's no comparison.

[TheGayTent]

I don't think you can make statements like that - too many variables to make worthwhile comparisons. 

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

I don't think you can make statements like that - too many variables to make worthwhile comparisons. 

while I get where you're coming from, I'd say the standard of footie has massively improved from the days when footballers were part of the beer and fags gang - and that's one variable that's varied and shouldn't be ignored, I reckon.

[ThomThomDrum]

18 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

They won a lot, but 'better'? Nah.

They'd get badly whipped if the same team of the same player-ages could play today's Barca. There's no comparison.

Players of different times/eras who experienced different approaches to the game and nurturing and training methods etc etc. The game is so much more professional today then back then. The players we see today if born back in the 50s/60s would not be playing like they do today

[TheGayTent]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

while I get where you're coming from, I'd say the standard of footie has massively improved from the days when footballers were part of the beer and fags gang - and that's one variable that's varied and shouldn't be ignored, I reckon.

Then the comparison is a pointless one anyway - as the most recent team will always win out. Health and fitness technology does not go backwards. 

[The Nal]

41 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

In my lifetime only Milan in the late 80s early 90s may be better. 

Indeed. A simply outrageous lineup. Before Bosman so only 3 foreigners too.

 

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, ThomThomDrum said:

Not that I know how old you are actually! 

Well I was alive in the early 80s, but didn't start watching until 87/88.

[pink_triangle]

56 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Then the comparison is a pointless one anyway - as the most recent team will always win out. Health and fitness technology does not go backwards. 

It's difficult to say, I don't think that great Milan team would struggle today. I think the bigger factor is the movement of players from abroad, that Liverpool team were picking from a far smaller pool.

[TheGayTent]

32 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

It's difficult to say, I don't think that great Milan team would struggle today. I think the bigger factor is the movement of players from abroad, that Liverpool team were picking from a far smaller pool.

They would struggle less because the Italians took nutrition seriously a lot earlier than the Brits did but they would still struggle in many other ways. 

One thing is for sure - that Milan team wouldn't be been eating Beef Wellington for lunch before a 3pm game !

[Guest]

The Arsenal team that went undefeated were pretty damn good, Plus the United team that won the champs league in 2008 with Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney would imo beat both the old Liverpool team and that AC Milan team (as much as it pains me to say so)

Edited March 1, 2016 by Guest

[pink_triangle]

14 minutes ago, eastynh said:

The Arsenal team that went undefeated were pretty damn good, Plus the United team that won the champs league in 2008 with Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney would imo beat both the old Liverpool team and that AC Milan team (as much as it pains me to say so)

I disagree. You look at that Milan team and there's a few who I would classify as being amongst the best in their position in the last 25 years, look at the man utd team and there's one.

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I disagree. You look at that Milan team and there's a few who I would classify as being amongst the best in their position in the last 25 years, look at the man utd team and there's one.

I think that United team was a far better all round team team. Scholes was imo better than any player in that Milan midfield. The forward 3 of Uniteds was a better combination that the 2 of Milans. As good as Gullit and Van Basten were, none of them were as good as Ronaldo. Tevez and Rooney in his prime were no mugs either. Vidic and Ferdinand were a fantastic pairing. Plus Hargreaves was a fantastic player, it was injuries that done in him. Van Der Saar was a far better keeper than Milans as well.

There are great names in that Milan team. You could argue that Van Basten, Baersi and Maldini are the greatest ever players in their position respectively. Yet I think overall the United team would have the upper hand. That Milan defence was slow, football especially Italian football in the 80's was far slower than it was in 2008. Ronaldo and Tevez would have imo ran them ragged.

Football is all about opinions and we will never know what the outcome would have been unfortunately.

That squad of Uniteds though is the best United squad I have ever seen.

Edited March 1, 2016 by Guest

[lost]

Barcelona for me are head and shoulders above anything I've seen and Messi is probably the best player. Ajax 95 also deserve a mention though it was split up pretty quickly and didn't reach its full potential. It beat still a very good Milan side 3 times on the way to the trophy that year.

[pink_triangle]

In my view what that man utd team are missing is that dominant champions league final victory .When you look at all the English winners they have been pretty lucky. If your a fan you couldn't care less, but as a neutral it effects my analysis.

[The Nal]

13 hours ago, eastynh said:

I think that United team was a far better all round team team. Scholes was imo better than any player in that Milan midfield. The forward 3 of Uniteds was a better combination that the 2 of Milans. As good as Gullit and Van Basten were, none of them were as good as Ronaldo. Tevez and Rooney in his prime were no mugs either. Vidic and Ferdinand were a fantastic pairing. Plus Hargreaves was a fantastic player, it was injuries that done in him. Van Der Saar was a far better keeper than Milans as well.

There are great names in that Milan team. You could argue that Van Basten, Baersi and Maldini are the greatest ever players in their position respectively. Yet I think overall the United team would have the upper hand. That Milan defence was slow, football especially Italian football in the 80's was far slower than it was in 2008. Ronaldo and Tevez would have imo ran them ragged.

Van Basten and Papin played together briefly too. That would've been unbelievable if it lasted. Van Basten was one of the first to average a goal a game over his entire career, when he was fit obviously. He played injured a lot.

Also, that Milan defence being slow is a myth. Baresi was lightning quick, as was Maldini.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, The Nal said:

Plus Hargreaves was a fantastic player, it was injuries that done in him.

eh? he barely kicked a ball at Utd, you can't count him.

 

[eFestivals]

Spurs to go top tonight?

[The Nal]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

eh? he barely kicked a ball at Utd, you can't count him.

 

I didn't say that! Quote fail!

And yeah I agree with you.

[pink_triangle]

Hargreaves was a solid player in his position, but far from being a fantastic player. He is one of those players that initially is underrated which results in him then becoming overrated.

[eFestivals]

19 minutes ago, The Nal said:

I didn't say that! Quote fail!

whoops, sorry  ... that's what happens when you do the quote thing from within a post of yours where you're quoting someone else.

I';ll try not to make that mistake again (I knew it wasn't you who'd said it).