Thanks. To come back to Alan Shearer (just to complete that part), I saw he gave his top 10 once (in no particular order I think per 2nd link). http://www.dailystar.co.uk/pics/spo...time-best-Premier-League-stars-sportgalleries http://www.tribalfootball.com/articles/alan-shearer-my-all-time-premier-league-top-10-4153091 Notable is that he does say about Scholes: "Probably more recognition now of his ability than when playing." One can discern a bias for players from his own generation (born 1970).
Yeah, maybe I'd end up even more skewed towards an earlier time on average lol (but things can depend on how much longevity is factored in definitely). Going back to your choices, since you touched on Garrincha already (you prefer to be sure about Didi and Kopa I see for examples), maybe the interesting call is actually indeed putting Law in the certainty list but not Bobby Charlton. Could be good to get your thoughts on that if you liked or felt it'd help the discussion, but yeah I'd know what you mean about possibly regretting it lol if dragged into too much 'justification' and analysis so this is not a request but just an observation that I think is interesting (as they were club team-mates and both British of course too; although perhaps there's a consideration about splitting the British choices up between the different nations a bit which initially also had me leaning towards Law rather than Greaves I would think too).
No problem mate. Charlton was one of those where I got thinking I made a mistake and he would rank ahead of many certainties anyway. Peter his recent comment on that Law was seen as 'the king' started me thinking on this. I will get to this later.
I'm not intending to say this heavily swayed me in one way or another but here are three decent pieces. 8 May 1971 24 March 1973 1 December 1973
Ok cool, that'll be interesting to see. Yes, that is in effect the nickname Brazilians gave Pele, or the French gave Platini, and surely for a time at least the Man United fans and I guess pundits too did see him as the top star for them as it would suggest. Maybe also a popular type of nickname in that era - I believe some Forest fans might've called Joe Baker King Joe if I'm not mistaken; although possibly the majority saw or eventually saw Ian Storey-Moore as the better star (he actually had comparisons made with Best intetestingly, although for on pitch play and style as they were, I suppose they'd be on the complimentary/exaggerated side maybe!). Trying to name 46 I'd be pretty certain about I had 35 the same as you (and your other 11 I see the ideas for definitely and they all are and/or were within my 100 player selection or at least the second 100). I was leaning towards these 11 too: Zamora Zizinho Moreno (Hard to be sure on those 3 but they felt pretty 'safe' according to what I know of them, in this format) Garrincha Suarez Miramontes Rivera Charlton (I can indeed see why you hestitate to be sure yourself on those though, when they were not standing above all others in their era for long or arguably ever) Figueroa Krol Scirea Figo (So that is 3 defenders who I felt pretty sure about making it with the criteria and Figo who for the 100 I'd feel certain about in my own view at least I think) The 11 you have instead are: Nordahl, Law, Netzer, Cubillas, Dalglish, Falcao, Hagi, Romario, Nedved, Giggs, Buffon. Although when I did a sketch of an attempt at ordering a top 50 I did include these within the first 46: Sarosi, Finney, GO Smith (or someone from his time at least), Friedenreich (ditto, although as discussed maybe Scarone is an option instead), Schmeichel, V.Mazzola, Iniesta, Bergkamp, Cafu. So these provisionally were placing below that theoretically: Suarez and Figueroa from the above list of alternative 11 'certainties' plus Scarone(?), Schiaffino (maybe surprisingly since I had him in my estimated 'best' 50 most recent edition), Didi, Kopa, Gullit, Henry, Ronaldinho.
It would maybe help to see the FWA player of the year vote results, which would give another data point next to this. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/en...n-selections-1969-2012.1985741/#post-28133529 It was able to find that in May 1963, his first season back, Law finished 6th. Behind Matthews, Mackay, Banks, Langley and Lowe. Cannot see where the other ManUnited players ended. In May 1964 he finished 3rd, behind Moore and Hurley. In 1965 and 1966 he finished however behind Bobby Charlton (4th and 1st). In 1965 Law was 5th but cannot see for 1966 (in terms of goals a down year). Then in 1966-67 he had his last fully fit season and again ended ahead of Charlton and his team mates (ManUnited won the league). He was 3rd, behind Jackie Charlton and Geoff Hurst.
As Peter noted Denis Law was perceived as 'the king' and was probably seen as the better, at least more consistent, one of the two. When both were fit and in their prime age I noticed a general preference for Law. Bobby Charlton had the reputation of being and on and off player, as noted in Hopcraft's classic Football Man work. When watching the games and highlights, Law indeed struck me as more consistent with equally high peaks. When fit he was quite possibly the most consistent attacker in the First Division over a stretch of five or six years, and he scored goals. In his best year he scored 60 goals in a calendar year IIRC. Later on, after injuries and with Charlton ageing better, and being intrinsically linked to the world cup and the club itself, as well as his sportsmanship, the tables turned. Denis Law also made some anti-English comments in the 1960s. The flipside of this is: although Law is younger he probably hit his prime also earlier and was rated well in Italy for Torino (Charlton ofc suffering from the effects of the airplane crash). Just as Englishman tend to have a soft spot for Puskas and Garrincha, it is inevitable to be aware of the impact Law made here. As you had previously noticed by yourself, Rinus Michels named Law in 1979 as one of the five most valuable players he had seen and there are more of those examples (you yourself mentioned this so I don't have to repeat). Law was probably pretty unique in his time in that he could score goals as well as being highly rated as a general footballer. In fact, he was occasionally deployed as a playmaker or quasi-playmaker, and was also seen who made the transition successfully after his injuries/age. Charlton was more or less in a group of Albert, Mazzola jr, Rivera, Suarez and some others. I'm not sure whether he was seen as the best of them all. Law had possibly only competition from Eusebio near the mid 1960s. Shoot! maybe exaggerates in some articles that he was "best in the world/Europe". With Charlton there is of course the World Cup, and how to look at those three games he is famous for, but Law was a pretty good international footballer too - I do think he tended to place at positions he received naturally more of a kicking and less protection. At club continental level he scored 28 goals in 34 games (dunno how many penalties, he sometimes took them yes, but so did Charlton). Again, I might have made a mistake here and would like to see @peterhrt his ideas or yours.
Excellent post and thoughts Puck, thanks. Indeed he was both a quality goalscorer (attribute and numbers wise) as well as a quality footballer. Probably more skilled than Nordahl or more expansive than Kocsis for example I'd think, but those were not his contemporaries. Probably in terms of role, although it varied at times, he would be akin to Pele, or later maybe someone like Butragueno (and even accounting for era it would seem Law was more prolific than him in general and could also be deemed his teams main scorer). There is a good video too for his performance vs Leicester in the FA Cup Final - I guess you saw it but let me know if not or you can't find it (not only Puck - if anyone else wants it posted or a link provided let me know and I should be able to find it although I'm guessing anyone probably can by searching 'Denis Law Leicester'). I'll also be interested in Peter's further thoughts about him and Charlton, and others might like to chime in too. Yes, I remember remarking on his popularity and rating in the Netherlands indeed, and specifically that Michels comment yes (which I discovered was not so much faint praise of Cruyff, but confirmation he really saw Law in the top echelon).
Thanks. If I search in the newspaper database here on "Denis Law best" then I receive many more hits than "Charlton best". For Charlton they are actually very scarce. For Law there are quite a few in the range of "best/one of the best" in "Europe/world" (often with reference to his position). Something like "one of the two best inside forwards in Europe". So while I made maybe a mistake and it is very well possible many end up higher than Law, I was thinking those type of things act as a 'parachute' so to speak. It narrows the lower bounds considerably imho.
Yes, I can see the logic and thought process. Interesting that it seems Charlton's standing survived longer perhaps - Law not receiving a vote in World Soccer's end of the century poll despite being in the shortlist is surprising, while on your El Grafico thread we can see that some international magazines did select Charlton as one of the 10 best of the century. But it definitely does seem that in real time in the early to mid 60s Law was thought as being on a par or even better often (and perhaps close around 1967 too).
This is a good assessment. At the time there was little to choose between Law and Charlton. Eventually Charlton's international career swung it his way. Like Moore, he was at his best for England. Scotland had just as good players as England in the 1960s, but selection was haphazard and English clubs were less cooperative with releasing Scottish players for international duty. When we looked at British polls at the turn of the twenty-first century, the same nine British players kept appearing above the rest: Matthews, Finney, Edwards, Charles, Moore, Charlton, Banks, Best and Dalglish. Although some of the lists were labelled all-time, most were concentrating on the second half of the twentieth century. Law should have been in this group but was generally ranked just outside it. From the past twenty years there is no consensus on the leading British players. The English ones are tainted with failing to live up to expectations in international tournaments. Giggs enjoys as much support on this forum as anyone from this time. More than Bale. But neither has ever made the Ballon d'Or top five. The comprehensive ESM voting data recently provided by @arriaga reveals that Giggs does not make the Top 6 among British players since 1995, and is only third among those from Manchester United. He may have been underrated as well.
Sorry, I think you meant Placar? Or did I forget something? Indeed, A Bola (Portugal), Onze Mondial (France), Don Balon (Spain), Sport Bild (Germany), El Grafico (Argentina) placed Charlton in the top ten. In all of those instances as only British player. Voetbal International (Netherlands) went for George Best instead, World Soccer (England) for Stanley Matthews. Placar (Brazil), Guerin Sportivo (Italy) and El Pais (Uruguay) went without a British player selected. El Pais had a very biased selection anyway. I can understand that they felt they had to pick a British player, even if on the lower end of the top ten. Also interesting remains that Don Balon and Sport Bild came to the judgement that Cruijff had to be placed over Maradona.
Yes, I do mean Placar sorry! Whether I had in mind El Grafico voted for Charlton I'm not sure; probably I just gave the wrong name but I would've known it was Placar the thread was based on if I had multiple choice options...or just spent a moment thinking about it! Hard to say (they could've been more persuaded overall by what he did for the Dutch NT and also for Ajax in the EC winning teams and before even) but perhaps Don Balon putting Cruyff in that place speaks well for their impression/observation of how he did in Spanish football. Although for the 25 years period 1974-1999 that magazine did pick out his protégé Laudrup as the best player of that league of course (theoretically what Cruyff did at the end of 1973 wouldn't be considered there but not sure they'd have looked at it like that).
Bizarrely the EPL team voted by the public was almost the same as the one of the BBC panel (Wright, Murphy, Lineker, Shearer). Only difference was Scholes swapped for Lampard.
Yes, Lineker was only the host and didn't vote so it was a 3 man panel, and they ended up with Gerrard and Lampard together as Wright didn't want to leave out either and they each already had a vote (Shearer went Vieira/Lampard, and Murphy went Gerrard with maybe Scholes although I forget). The Sky panel of 4 had a few differences, but was 50% made up of ex-Arsenal players and Adams was in for Ferdinand (Phil Thompson was given final call on that as defender himself - can't be sure now if it was Adams or Terry that needed his final nod), Vieira for Lampard/Scholes, and Bergkamp for Shearer (Paul Merson had the final call on that and Charlie Nicholas had agreed while Matt Le Tissier said Bergkamp was his favourite to watch but he felt Shearer had to be in instead with his goal record): https://www.joe.ie/sport/there-was-...-sky-sports-all-time-premier-league-xi-479861 Wheras maybe surprisingly Wright seemed almost the opposite of biased to Arsenal when it came to his votes, as opposed to words. Lineker had to prompt him on Bergkamp even when Wright said two of the forwards were his favourites (Sheringham and Fowler - he voted for Shearer and Henry as did Murphy though) and Lineker said "I guess Bergkamp is one" and then Wright joked three of them were his favourites in response! It's well known what he's said in praise of Bergkamp of course, although also his admiration for Henry similarly although he didn't play alongside him. When Shearer was asked who he felt would be ideal to play alongside, he didn't say Bergkamp or Henry, or Cantona (his previous choice as best PL player from the Football Focus programme Puck found, where he did also praise Bergkamp at length), or Sheringham who actually did play great with him for England, but instead Rooney. He didn't actually need to cast his vote for forwards as it was decided anyway though.
Yes, I watched it during the break now and Wright/Lineker did return briefly to him at 10:00 wasn't it. If you need a support player or assist man then I do think he's a good pick, with him 6 or 7 times among the top assisters of the league (all but two assists from open play), which was/is twice as often than anyone else did. There were in fact many comments on twitter about "where is Keane" and "two out-and-out strikers is old-fashioned, we need [player X] in". Also many comments on that they end up with 7 English players in the side, and with Giggs 8 British players. But OK, in 10 places they picked the same as the public did (only one Arsenal player in! or one-and-a-half including Ashley Cole). Only difference was Scholes swapped for Lampard. If you need to pick a defensive orientated midfielder, especially in a two men midfield, then most probably Keane needs to get in. Even Vieira is already someone who came into his own with either of Petit or Gilberto Silva.
Yes, Lineker said "and maybe he doesn't even get in it seems" or words to that effect and Wright might've said something in exclamation at that (while still not picking him). But anyway, yes you found the video and saw it now anyway.
On 2nd thoughts I could see the idea that on best form (both for Milan and Red Star Belgrade before), and being a bit generous to injuries etc. when appropriate (outside own direct fault), you placed Savicevic in a top 100. In a handful big matches as well as certain stretches he reached probably peaks that compare well to anyone in the 1990s decade (also if you look at the quality of the goals at the moments it mattered). But I also get the idea that for this purpose he doesn't fit the bill.
Yes, looking at it objectively those are similar to my thoughts. Definitely a notable player of his time, with quality to match most contemporaries and displaying it effectively at high level stages in the European Cup and Serie A, but with not such a prolonged impact and with quite a few defensive players in the equation for that time period, it might seem more appropriate for him to be in a second 100 than 1st (especially now that I have Romario/Nedved/Klinsmann there too, albeit the consensus list retains the first two in the main 100; and especially given the Eastern European options from earlier times including Yugoslav Dzajic - his 'advantage' over Savicevic as International player is based on not such a fair comparison for obvious reasons though I suppose).
Sorry, I don't mean to annoy you but I just came across an intriguing article/series from L'Equipe magazine (monthly publication) from 1969 on Ebay. It is actually readable. In the first paragraphs or so his measurable impact is illustrated (qualitatively and quantitatively) and the words "miracle" and "phenomenon" are used - which are big words. Certainly at this point he hadn't publicity or PR machine of note behind him; the publicity came towards him.
No problem and good find again. Sorry that my French is not good enough to really engage, but thanks for the excerpts too and I'm sure others will be able to digest fully (the French posters for example obviously). I know you like me to see these things personally and I appreciate that though.
That meeting with Eusébio's Benfica in the quarter-finals of the European Cup with that decisive match played in Stade de Colombes certainly has to be the first great chapter of his legend (as far as the pitch is concerned). (for the record : 3-1 for Benfica in Amsterdam then 3-1 for Ajax in Lisbon with two goals by Cruijff and 3-0 in Paris/ in Colombes with another one by Cruyff, to talk about scenario and quantifiable only...then maybe that he had assists too and there's the quality and caracteristics of his game and Ajax game of course, about ''quality'' as PvH already talked about). There's already Ajax - Liverpool '66 also maybe but especially Benfica, for plenty of reasons.
The BBC website was a bit of a joke. Pires wasn't even an option for picking. As far as individual best 11, it's easy to argue for and against it. Most of the best EPL players were very close in terms of quality. Personally, I would have likes them to do a best 11 of individuals, and an actual best 11 team.
Yeah, agreed about the options (especially Pires, but in general they had a lot of strikers but not many options elsewhere). I also wonder about a 'short term' team and a 'longer term' team to get rid of having to decide how much to weigh longevity and any confusion about that. I'd have 4 differences between those probably myself (Carvalho, Desailly, CR7 and Pires for shorter term, but Ferdinand, Hyypia, Beckham and Giggs factoring in significant longevity; compromising although part of me might be tempted to go with Pires and Carvalho, probably it'd be Desailly and CR7 I'd settle on to include from the shorter term options although 4-2-3-1 suits CR7 better in comparison to Beckham I'd say). In the end I had to vote for Irwin as right back as 'protest' in a way lol as Petrescu wasn't an option either (tbf very arguably wing-back is better for him too, but he was named in a previous best foreign XI but now the BBC don't have him as an option). So I included Pearce as left-back, although with a free vote for PL era only I don't feel I'd justify that over Irwin in his best/most frequent role (I'm pretty sure you'd pick Cole there actually though IIRC!).