Yeah, I understand what you mean. The respective journalists were not going to be able to watch all the minutes played of every possible candidate in any given month of course (certainly back then, as closely as they could try to follow and as engaged with it as they could be and with whatever perks they had as journalists it would be impossible, and even now it's probably unrealistic that many would get very close to it). Not to say the selections don't indicate anything at all (albeit they are only selections of one publication per country, not a straw-poll among all journalists in that country anyway), but yeah players with major focus on them would be in a stronger position. Evidently it was possible that Premier League players could catch the eye/ear enough to get inclusions though, including Bergkamp in those 97/98 months. I think the De Bruyne point (though there can be the case that he might have merited awards and missed out: I tried to see how many Man City player of the month awards he may have had out of interest but for the 'Etihad' Player of the Month award I don't see a proper summary of the history anywhere right now or know how long it's been going on for - the link below shows an example of him getting one, as well as reference to him being 3 time Etihad/Man City Player of the Season which I assume is based on separate votes at the end rather than counting monthly awards - I suppose that's a route ESM could have followed too, resulting in continuation of the end of season method used for 1994/95 albeit I don't necessarily say that'd be better or worse and there could be pros and cons I guess to that approach - traditionally that's how awards are given and XIs of seasons selected domestically too albeit some publications also do it based on average ratings of course) can apply to Bergkamp, and others, too yeah. De Bruyne voted Etihad Player of the Month | OneFootball It will be the case for De Bruyne that cumulatively in various seasons he will have been persuading people he was having a very productive and high level season and run of form in particular periods, but yeah judging on one calendar month specifically (from the 1st day until the last day of that month) is a different concept and he hasn't shown up so well. That can apply to Bergkamp too, albeit I would suspect 97/98 would certainly be his most likely season for getting continental recognition in an end of season XI anyway (ESM doesn't consider World Cup of course, and however highly anyone rates his 1998 World Cup it's obviously a plus next to Del Piero's for example, so judging the full 'season' including with International games included would have various people leaning to different verdicts to an extent too). PS I realise that even end of season verdicts by journalists are not free from issues you point to as well: I'm just talking specifically about different verdicts based on single specific months compared to over the season (or half-seasons or whatever too).
Whether Rijkaard is typically not on the radar for top 100 I don't know - he sometimes is and sometimes isn't I suppose (but Baresi normally is yeah, even though sometimes towards the lower end). I always had Rijkaard in there, but never higher than I would do now (where he possibly/probably enters top 50 - it's very hard to really try to make definitive calls though I think), although I admit I'm one who still places Baresi high up myself. I know you're feeling if Baresi or 'a Baresi' was Dutch and Rijkaard or 'a Rijkaard' was Italian it might well be switched around. I couldn't really say for sure how accurate that idea could be. I suppose one interesting aspect is Rijkaard's versatility (midfielder and defender, albeit at AC Milan he did shine more as midfielder and became a regular fixture in midfield after the initial period which had followed Euro 88 where he was indeed very assured and impressive as defender in the Dutch team) vs Baresi's specialism as defender (albeit he could be a true libero or as became more common a ball playing centre back in a back 4, and he was certainly good in the defensive aspects). It can be that people think the top-rated defenders shouldn't be too far away from the top of their all-time lists (although some reason otherwise - I remember wm442433 felt that all the top placings can go to players playing further forwards, beyond the top 100 even, for example). Considering that Beckenbauer wasn't a traditional type of defender too, and that Bobby Moore was also somewhat of a playmaker (and a 'second centre back' converted from being a wing half).
Thanks. I remember there used to be a channel 'Madrid & Roses' or something like that on Youtube, that had Laudrup and Redondo videos IIRC. I don't know if it was the same channel (re-named) or same person though.
yes... it might be .right ...for sure ... To this day, I still don't understand why Daniel Passarella didn't call up Fernando Redondo for the 1998 World Cup He was a Total player or a Total Footballer ...certainly at his peak.. Reminds me a little about Ruud Gullit...at his peak too .. and Bobby Charlton Di Stefano too.. Don't rush to do all the dirty work no excuses .Always ... Fernando Redondo puts Zidane in his pocket in 1998 Uefa Champions League Final ..
with Fernando Redondo ...Argentina winning from Netherlands ...easily.... Dennis Bergkamp ... don't getting the Goal and an Assist there ,,,.hahahaha !!! on my view ...
It was said he thought his hair was too long (strange maybe since Passarella was a 70s player, and alongside the star Kempes for example with long hair)! Maybe by 2000 it would have been considered short/neat enough by Passarella...I don't know.... But I'm not sure that's the full reason. Didn't he also think Redondo should play on the left side and Redondo wanted to be played more centrally or something too?
I'm not sure about that! I think Bergkamp had moved into the Argentina central defender zone at those moments to be honest (and Redondo was not really a man marking player who would follow somebody all over the pitch..and mobilty/speed wasn't a big asset of his). Redondo (for defensive and creative actions) in the same XI with Veron and Ortega for example though, potentially, could have helped game control and also enhanced chance creation too, so that Argentina team would seem an even better prospect with him in there (albeit somebody would have to drop out from midfield and if it was Almeyda then perhaps in some defensive aspects and work-rate it could even be disadvantageous on that side of the game?). But I wouldn't take it for granted (not that we can know anyway) that with a good-playing Redondo they would stop the Netherlands progressing (or even necessarily avoid penalties vs England - it's possible maybe he could have intercepted the pass to Michael Owen or robbed him of the ball though I guess in that game in theory....stopping the opportunity to run towards and past Ayala!).
Good Question ...! When Daniel Passarella worked in Brazil as a Football HeadCoach... in São Paulo city .... He said it wasn't because of Haircuts... Long or Short.. He didn't like that Fernando Redondo..questioned his tactics..from him Wanting to send and give tips...like Ruud Gullit did with Dick Advocaat..in the Netherlands 1994 Tactical Discussions.. But Passarella himself said that he was very strict with Fernando Redondo.. and he himself condemns himself as mainly responsible for Argentina's defeat in this World Cup..in 1998 he had phenomenal players available and didn't know how to use them correctly..
yes ..Daniel Passarella .... could be losing ..the game for himSelf Errors..Mistakes .. as a HeadCoach ..
Passarella .. .... he said it here..Fernando Redondo was a phenomenal player... Whether you want it or not Arouses a lot of envy
Redondo ... Putting ... Rivaldo ... Ronaldo Nazario ... and Ronaldinho Gaucho ... on His pocket in 1999... Coca-Cola Belo Horizon Cup ...1999 Final ... Argentina ..won on BRazil .... on away Goals ...from this competition ....
... in Football Manager in general ...But it depends from the version...etc. Of course ... the Potentials ... Of Frank Rijkaard and Gullit are pretty greater ... !
For me ... is harder to choose between Paulo Roberto Falcão and Fernando Redondo is harder to choose between JOhan Cruyff and AlFredo Di Stefano... is harder to choose between Messi and Ferenc Puskas ... etc etc ,etc ...
Understandable. I would say Redondo was probably better in deep areas, and Falcao better in the final third of the pitch. Cruyff was more mobile and agile, while Di Stefano perhaps more decisive and efficient in shooting and a bit more robust. Messi quicker and a better soloist but Puskas with better shooting range and perhaps imagination. I would maybe pick Redondo as better than Falcao, but I could doubt myself for sure. I would lean to Cruyff at peak over Di Stefano, but that wouldn't be a unanimous viewpoint I know. To some people's surprise lol, I would now think Messi was better than Puskas in real terms at least (but more significant in own era is a slightly different question). The Football Manager templates were interesting, that you showed. In some things I would have rated Bergkamp higher. The Puskas one was interesting - arguably too many 20 out of 20s I guess, but understandable that he is intended to be one of the top players available on the game (and with some physical aspects he can't be extremely high so where he can be maybe it is tempting to be over-generous even) - maybe he can have more/different special moves added I'd think....
yes ... is harder to choose ...between ...them;;; for sure .. For me .. Continues Drawned All them ... because i like them ... too much .. is harder to broke my own BraveHeart ... hahahahaha Dennis Bergkamp ... at Football Manager ... has versions ... fromhim .. already older ... 2003/04 ... yes Physical Attributes Points ... for sure ... would be more higher ... in 1992 ...in 1993 ... 1996... 1998 ..
.... Alfredo Di Stefano..was more of a ball juggler than Johan Cruyff... He had a much wider repertoire of dribbles... School of the Art .. Of Di Stefano ... was better than Johan Cruyff's School.... in question ...Of Dribbles ....
... But Cruyff was more technical and ambidextrous than Di Stefano... Had more+++ Vision and Passing Qualities and Passing repertoire . The Art Of the Master Passing Skills !
Hmm, I don't think so on this one mate to be honest. From what I saw and know Cruyff was a more capable dribbler. Specifically juggling? - I'm not totally sure on that (and of course the Di Stefano available footage is limited - Cruyff sometimes teed himself up with juggling and played accurate volleyed crosses of course though, even leading to some goals by his team). Backheeling etc, both were very good.
Yes, Di Stefano was surely a very good passer too (and slick in combining with team-mates) but for sure Cruyff was exceptional including with the outside of the boot, and I think is probably among the best ever at passing and crossing too, all things considered and/or on peak form.
River La Maquina 1947 ... School ... was better than Dutch School in Dribbling Skills .. for sure ... ...