That isn't a touch of club bias coming through is it? Personally, I would have Byrne a few places lower. As good as he was, he only played 250 league games. You could certainly justify more ahead of him on longevity. I also think Irwin is too low - he epitimised consistancy for me.
Agreed on Irwin. Maybe it is because Ferguson has been at the helm of Man United since I was a few months old and so my logic of how certain players suit positions fit in with that, but Irwin is arguably the best fullback I have seen in my lifetime. For me, consistency is far and away the #1 attribute for a fullback.
http://photobucket.com/register.php Open an account here for free, Save the photo then upload it to photobucket. You'll get a link to post then.
Bert was one of the greats. He was a POW in England during WWII and stayed on to play for Man City. Never got a cap because in those days you correctly, only played for the country of your birth. Germany never called on him. For much of his career he was regarded as the world's greatest goalkeeper. Bert was inducted into the Hall of Fame at England’s National Football Museum in November 2005.
He could have played for England, just as long as he had a work permit or got English citizenship. Italy used to get a lot of Argentines and Uruguyans until the 60s and Spain used to even get some of Hungary's stars, not just the South American ones. That fact that a player should have been born in one nation must have been a preference made by the English. They must have preferred English players only in the NT.
Not bias, I don't think. More to do with the superior opponents Byrne faced and the style of his game being aggressive on the front foot and solid on the back. Being credited and distinguished as of few to do very well against both Matthews and Finney would rank higher for me than longevity in the position. Besides which, he played enough games to have a solid standing in history. I mean, look at Cantona and Edwards (if I use my own club's players) their impact isn't measured in terms of outstanding longevity, but in how they shook up the league during their tenure. I'd put Byrne at #1, personally, and would always have him as England's LB in an All-Time team. I don't think Pearce should be ranked higher than Irwin either.
There's no doubt that Byrne was an excellent player and you can probably make a claim that at his peak he was the best, but comme said at the outset: Byrne only played 245 league games, which is less than 6 full seasons, and under the criteria above I don't see how he can be ranked ahead of players who played 400+ games at a very high level.
I just wonder how that will eschew the results then. I mean, some players did a lot in short time, should they be discredited for not playing a longer, but less dynamic career?
Great thread Comme. It's been interesting so far to gain insight to how rich the English league's history is. Just learnt a lot of new names today and maybe eventually i'll know more about them and understand why they're so highly rated. Can't wait for the centrebacks ! Plus it's pleasing to know I've had glimpses of top 10 quality in my lifetime.
This could get out of hand here Comme. You might want to think about a separate thread for each position. That would leave room for discussion also. Yeh, I know some players overlap positions, just keep that position for that thread.
To be honest I don't think it would be worthwhile to do so many threads as it would just clog up this forum, and the level of interest so far doesn't really merit it. We're only at 86 replies so far and we're 3/11 through so I don't think there it should top 500 posts.. What I'll do is set up a recap thread with just the lists, no pictures or details, and update it every time I do a new position.
It's going to depend on the individuals. If 2 players were at broadly the same level but one did it longer, then it will help him. Witness the positioning of Jennings, Southall and Shilton over Banks and Schmeichel in the goalkeeper section. Some players are going to suffer in these lists for their brief spell of greatness and that includes a number of the Babes.
We're not talking about vast differences in ability though, we're talking about a group of players who are pretty close in that respect, and in that sense longevity (as long as it's at a high level) has to play a large factor. Would you rather have 200 games from a player performing at 9/10 or 450 games from a player performing at 8/10? My understanding is that we're not simply looking for the best players, but the players that contributed the most to the league in terms of performance. Ronaldo was absolutely superb for one year at Barcelona, but if you were looking for Barcelona's greatest players he would come substantially behind someone like Kubala who performed at slightly lower level but for much longer.
I understand, but it's going to make for some curious rankings along the way. I don't disagree with the premise, but what will make that difficult is that certain eras had players who will vye for the rankings in their position having played against superior opposition who are more duly noted in their right through history. A 9 against such a sort isn't going to be equal to a 9 against inferior oppo, right?
Although I didn't include international performances in my decisions I think it does show that Hapgood was more than capable of playing against the best. He was probably the greatest left-back in the world in the pre-war era. Determining the level of opposition is also a very difficult thing. Relative to the rest of the world the football league was probably at its strongest in the pre-war era, should that therefore be counted in Hapgood's fsvour?
Well, what I'm saying here is that each position is going to have had a probable golden era for players of certain positions Take, the GK's for example. It's understandable that not only longevity is taken into account here but the quality of keepers in the 70's and 80's, which was far superior to the 90's or 00's. Also, the case with Byrne is that he's rated as a player who could go up against both Matthews and Finney, who I'm pretty sure you'll have at #1 for RW and LW respectively when their time comes, which makes his achievement the most outstanding in relative terms given that Hapgood had no elite rivals to speak of in the same sense. It's a quibble, but still, it sets a trend and makes this exercise a little more intriguing and a tad more problematic for you, if you let it.
Hapgood also faced Matthews on numerous occassions (probably more times than Byrne if you include war-time games) and was renowned for often coming out on top. Also, it's not as if the 30s were without any other decent right wingers - Sammy Crooks, Fred Worrall and Albert Geldard might not have been at Matthews or Finney's level, but they were excellent players in their own right. As comme pointed out, the golden age of English football is often considered to be the 1930s and Hapgood was arguably the finest defender of any position in that time.
I know Matthews matched up against Hapgood, but I've never read anything about Hapgood faired in those contests in the way it's mentioned with Byrne vis a vis both Matthews and Finney. Byrne's actual game is noted in both directions as well. A pioneering flank attacker as well as solid match defensively, plus his pace was celebrated. I suppose me carrying on will certainly appear to be bias. I'm aware of that, so I'll not make a fuss. The thing about English football's golden era. I find that very difficult to agree with for a few reasons, but I suppose that's neither here nor there.
I don't mean to drift too much off topic but in terms of prestige and quality of players within the English League, how does the 30s compare with the 70s or 80s?
For players you had the likes of James, Bastin, Gallacher, Dean, Matthews, Jack, Hulme, Crooks, Copping, Carter, Lawton, Swift, Brook, Drake. I'm not sure you could really compare the players with the 70s, but it was the era when footballers first really started to become stars in England. It was an attacking players era, so for defenders to stand out really took something. You also had the recent change in the offside rule prompting an explosion in goalscoring (with 4 of the top 8 all time leading scorers playing the bulk of their football in the 30s), the tactical changes into W-M and the start of televised football.