Paul Gascoigne | Still living

[2Bullish]

Not at all garbage. Gasgoigne was nowhere near as good as Laudrup.

 

[JPRouve]

I remember an old interview (I don't remember by whom) who said that pacey strikers like Lineker wouldn't be considered pacey in today's football because nowadays that speed is the norm rather then the exception of the case and guess what he's right. Football was played at much lower tempo and players had more developed muscles at the legs that was meant to protect them more against rough tackles. Because of it they had to work hard on other aspects of the game such as creativity, technique etc.

Kindly also note that you mentioned a list of players who are now retired. They were the players who played in the transition period between the 80-90s and today's football. These days you can count the truly talented players on two hands, Messi, Ronaldo, Ribery, Ibra and most of them are at the wrong end of their 30s. Soon enough we will see a drought in truly talented and creative midfielders/forwards in the same way we're seeing a drought in defenders. To think that some rate Smalling as a quality defender. He is for today's football but he wouldn't be able to clean the boots of the top quality defenders in the 90s. He wouldn't even make it as a first teamer in the third CL run team with United either

Two things, today's players are better athletes and that's true for all the sports, today's players are as able as their predecessors to deal with rough tackles. The second point concerning the technical abilities, I don't think that the 80s players were better technicians like you said the game was played at lower tempo which means that today players need to be sharper and have less room for mistakes, I will even say that today's elite players are technically better because they have to execute at a higher speed.

 

[Stacks]

thats a bit restrictive because 25-27 yeah old's of today is such a limited quota. you are basically choking me whilst asking me to take a deep breath. How bout players of that level since the yeah 2000? that would be fairer don't you think. You've named players who played over a 15 odd yeah period so you have to give me the same courtesy and from the yeah 2000, players were already athletic as the sports science and technology had hit a solid level

 

[Stacks]

Two things, today's players are better athletes and that's true for all the sports, today's players are as able as their predecessors to deal with rough tackles. The second point concerning the technical abilities, I don't think that the 80s players were better technicians like you said the game was played at lower tempo which means that today players need to be sharper and have less room for mistakes, I will even say that today's elite players are technically better because they have to execute at a higher speed.

Sounds about right to me. Why would someone be able to deal with rougher tackles more in the 80's than now? Back then they were actually in worse shape so injuries and stuff would take more of a toll. The former players often had unusual body shapes like Rooneys also which could help explain some of those short careers.

 

[ghagua]

He was brilliant, but he did not fulfill his potential because of his injury and lifestyle. Not sure who to compare him to today, but I would say a more skilled version of Ross Barkley.

 

[RooneyLegend]

You can romance all you want about Gascoigne but he's simply never performed at the highest level and all your wanting won't change that. Are we supposed to say Ravel is better than Pogba because SAF claimed he was the most talented player to ever come through our academy? One is a scrub the other is now among the best players in the world. Actually achieving something in the game is worth more than someones opinion on what could have been or a players "potential".



If you can seriously believe he was a better player than any of the players I mentioned you're deluded.

Are you really comparing a player that won 57 caps in 10 years to someone who hasn't even been called up to an England camp
When the injury came Gascoigne was 24 and had 180+ games of top level football under his belt. How did he not perform at the highest level when he was in two teams of the tournaments(90, and 96) while probably being the best player in 90. You think a player that doesn't play at the top level gets voted 4th in a ballon do'r ahead of the likes of Laudrup, Baggio, Klinsman and Rijkaard?

Seems like you think that Gazza's reputation is all about potential rather than what he did on the pitch. Fact is its different, all these players that you think its delusional to think were inferior players than him played against him at one point or another and he played better than them in those matches. Don't believe me? find yourself a copy of the semi final in 90italia and see him tear the German midfield apart and keep Matthaus out of the match.

 

[devilish]

Two things, today's players are better athletes and that's true for all the sports, today's players are as able as their predecessors to deal with rough tackles. The second point concerning the technical abilities, I don't think that the 80s players were better technicians like you said the game was played at lower tempo which means that today players need to be sharper and have less room for mistakes, I will even say that today's elite players are technically better because they have to execute at a higher speed.

Not really. Most of the challenges players had to endure in the past would translate into a straight red card by today's standards. Its not me saying but the likes of Dennis Irwin who knows a thing or two about football. Anyway don't rely on my word, just watch the classic Gentile vs Maradona duel and ask yourself. Would Gentile be able to do commit such fouls in today's football? I bet you will end up with my same conclusions.

Players need to be better athletes this days as football is faster. However that doesn't translate in a more technical football. You don't see the incredible sniper like passes the likes of Scholes or Pirlo had entertained us with for many many years or the football intelligence of the likes of Baresi, Baggio and co had. The breathtaking talent is getting more rare at each passing day and once Ronaldo and Messi whose been contending the ballon d'or for the past decade are gone, I really cant find anyone who can step up and be counted as a football great.

 

[RedTiger]

Firstly, his tackle on Charles was horrendous in that cup final and he should have seen red for that.

1st world cup memory was Italia 90 and Gazza, thought he was incredible.

Fast foward 20 years and I saw him in London walking down the street, with who I presumed was that 5 bellies chap - it couldn't have been such a contrasting image from my memory of Italia 90... got to be honest, left me a little fecking sad, didn't even bother asking for an autograph.

I've seen him a number of times round my way and I'm the same mate, I've never approached him because frankly, I don't want my memory of him to get revised.

Even now Nessun Dorma makes me cry.

 

[goin4glory]

That's if you don't count Italia 90 which turned him into a superstar unrivaled on these shores until Beckham came along. Then there's also Euro 96 when he was clearly past his best due to injuries/alcohol, yet still produced moments of magic.

Firstly I'll state that I don't believe world cups or international football to be the highest level. European club football teams would wipe the floor with most international sides, being able to hand pick the very best players in the world from any country and have them training together every day is obviously a huge advantage over a limited selection of players who only meet up a few times a year if even. International tournaments aren't a great indicator of someone being capable to play at the elite level, I could list 10 players who performed exceptionally well at these that went on to be complete flops, Djemba Djemba and Poborsky anyone? How about El Hadji Diouf in 02 getting onto team of the tournament and getting a big move to Liverpool?

Italia 90 says hello

See above

No he wasn't as depicted by the top 3 Balon D'or and World Player of the year candidates, there simply were better players around like Baggio, Romario, Stoichkov, Van Basten, Bergkamp. Gazza has done nothing to justify being a top 3 world player. That is absurd. I swear he didn't even win PFA player of the year once when Players like Henry won it 4 or 5 times. He has made the 1st division team of the year twice. Gazza has the most revionist fanbase in english football history. I remember a reporter was talking about the lack of quality of English players and how GAzza is celebrated as some great with just an F.A. cup to his name, when if the was Italian or French, he would just be another good player they have produced. Ginola for example accomplished more individual accolades than Gazza, including in English football. Let that sit for a while

This is correct

Not at all garbage. Gasgoigne was nowhere near as good as Laudrup.

This as well, people forgetting that Laudrup was seen as one of the best players in the history of Barca.

Are you really comparing a player that won 57 caps in 10 years to someone who hasn't even been called up to an England camp
When the injury came Gascoigne was 24 and had 180+ games of top level football under his belt. How did he not perform at the highest level when he was in two teams of the tournaments(90, and 96) while probably being the best player in 90. You think a player that doesn't play at the top level gets voted 4th in a ballon do'r ahead of the likes of Laudrup, Baggio, Klinsman and Rijkaard?

Seems like you think that Gazza's reputation is all about potential rather than what he did on the pitch. Fact is its different, all these players that you think its delusional to think were inferior players than him played against him at one point or another and he played better than them in those matches. Don't believe me? find yourself a copy of the semi final in 90italia and see him tear the German midfield apart and keep Matthaus out of the match.

I'm comparing the logic that someone uses to somehow claim Gascoigne was better than Laudrup which is perfectly applicable.

I've stated above how I feel about International tournaments so I'll not go over it again but the rest of your post is more revisionist nonsense. Yes I do in fact think that finishing 4th in the Balon D'or doesn't mean you have been successful at the highest level since those nominations in world cup years almost always exclude the entire year of football and are based on having a good tournament. Cannavaro won the thing in 06 despite Juventus being found guilty of match fixing and relegated to the 2nd division, but he was captain of the side who won the tournament.

I have to laugh at the backwards logic here, sure Gazza tore the German midfield apart so badly that Matthaus got player of the tournament and was awarded the Ballon D'or later that year. If he had actually tore them apart England would have won the game but clearly we have very different definitions of someone "tearing a team apart".

 

[RooneyLegend]

He wasn't Iniesta that could drive the ball through midfield. That gives the impression that he was better than Iniesta. Feck that! Gascoigne's powers are massively overrated. Its just that England aren't used to skillful midfielder like Le Tissier and Gazza so were place them higher than their European counterparts. Iniesta dribbling is emaculate and can skip past players at will from anywhere on the pitch. Gazza never won many team nor individual accolades so he is perhaps the most celebrated, highly rated, non achiever in football which I find strange. Iniesta can potentially be mentioned in the same light as the likes of Zidane since but for two Aliens, he would've won a couple Balon D'ors by now.

He was better than Iniesta. Iniesta doesn't have anything that Gazza didn't have, while there's a fair bit that Gazza could do that iniesta couldn't. Honestly, I find Iniesta more in the Ribery, Sneijder class rather than anything supernatural. Gazza could pierce through midfields in a way Iniesta doesn't do on a consistent basis anyways. That run vs PSG last season is the sort stuff gazza did on a regular basis. Gazza like Iniesta could get out of all sorts of tight situations.

 

[Nogbadthebad]

Gascoigne was I think the finest footballer this country had produced since Shilton, and the best outfield player since Sir Bobby.

 

[RooneyLegend]

Firstly I'll state that I don't believe world cups or international football to be the highest level. European club football teams would wipe the floor with most international sides, being able to hand pick the very best players in the world from any country and have them training together every day is obviously a huge advantage over a limited selection of players who only meet up a few times a year if even. International tournaments aren't a great indicator of someone being capable to play at the elite level, I could list 10 players who performed exceptionally well at these that went on to be complete flops, Djemba Djemba and Poborsky anyone? How about El Hadji Diouf in 02 getting onto team of the tournament and getting a big move to Liverpool?

This handpicking of the best players in the same teams is a recent phenomenon in football cause of the sheer amount of money clubs tend to have today. In the past teams wouldn't have all star teams, and definitely wouldn't be able to wipe the floor with the best international sides of those times. International football not only meant more, but was better than club football until the recent years. Many more players have had great seasons in club football only to disappear into the abyss the next season so that doesn't say much, also why players fail when they make moves is determined by lots of factors.

Matthaus won the player of the tournament because Germany won the world cup. Had England won the shoot out and the final against a not so great Argentina with a crippled captain, Gascoigne would've won the player of the tournament. Fine margins and all that but Gazza was better than Matthaus in the semi final. England was better than Germany in the match too. This is the very highest level of the sport, midfielders can rag-doll opposition midfields and still end up on the losing end As you probably know, playing well doesn't mean you win the match.

 

[JohnnyKills]

He was brilliant, but he did not fulfill his potential because of his injury and lifestyle. Not sure who to compare him to today, but I would say a more skilled version of Ross Barkley.

Think we need to give Barkley a bit more time before concluding that he's less skilled than Gascoigne, but yeah they are very similar players.

Gascoigne was class - he and Scholes are the best English players I've seen since I started following football, back in 1990. Shame he was so psychologically fragile though. If he hadn't been a footballer, God knows what he'd have ended up doing.

As Ferguson suggested in his book, whoever thought it was a good idea to send someone like Gascoigne to London is an absolute cretin.

 

[goin4glory]

This handpicking of the best players in the same teams is a recent phenomenon in football cause of the sheer amount of money clubs tend to have today. In the past teams wouldn't have all star teams, and definitely wouldn't be able to wipe the floor with the best international sides of those times. International football not only meant more, but was better than club football until the recent years. Many more players have had great seasons in club football only to disappear into the abyss the next season so that doesn't say much, also why players fail when they make moves is determined by lots of factors.

Matthaus won the player of the tournament because Germany won the world cup. Had England won the shoot out and the final against a not so great Argentina with a crippled captain, Gascoigne would've won the player of the tournament. Fine margins and all that but Gazza was better than Matthaus in the semi final. England was better than Germany in the match too. This is the very highest level of the sport, midfielders can rag-doll opposition midfields and still end up on the losing end As you probably know, playing well doesn't mean you win the match.

Total garbage once again. The best players have always went to the a select few of the biggest and more important highest wage offering teams. The Barca team in the 90's had Romario/Laudrup/Stoichkov/Koeman and the Milan side had Van Basten/Gullit/Rijkaard/Maldini/Barsei all the way back to the Madrid side which won 5 European cups on the bounce and signing players like Di Stefano. Are you just going to rewrite all of football history how you see it?

International football may be more important to some fans but it's not at the same level as elite European club football and it really isn't even an argument it's just common sense.

 

[Stacks]

Not really. Most of the challenges players had to endure in the past would translate into a straight red card by today's standards. Its not me saying but the likes of Dennis Irwin who knows a thing or two about football. Anyway don't rely on my word, just watch the classic Gentile vs Maradona duel and ask yourself. Would Gentile be able to do commit such fouls in today's football? I bet you will end up with my same conclusions.

Players need to be better athletes this days as football is faster. However that doesn't translate in a more technical football. You don't see the incredible sniper like passes the likes of Scholes or Pirlo had entertained us with for many many years or the football intelligence of the likes of Baresi, Baggio and co had. The breathtaking talent is getting more rare at each passing day and once Ronaldo and Messi whose been contending the ballon d'or for the past decade are gone, I really cant find anyone who can step up and be counted as a football great.

you are missing out a whole chunk of legends my man. Zidane, Iniesta, Xavi, Ronaldinho, all have football intelligence and played their trade in the noughties. Kaka was a top top player, Totti. Pirlo isn't a 90's player by the way. different era to the Gazza's. When Ronaldo, Messi and Suarez go then it'll be Neymar and some next genius from Europe or south America. Neymar is one of the most skilful players I have ever seen period.

 

[thepolice123]

In terms of pure talent, Gazza was way way ahead of Laudrup. At his peak he was a top 3 in the world player, in a time when the best player I've ever seen was playing. Had it not been for that injury & some very poor career decisions, he would have been an all time great.

Laudrup was an ATG and one of the most naturally gifted player to ever kick a ball. If Gazza was way way ahead of Laudrup in terms of pure talent he must be an alien or something.

Some of the posts here about Gazza are beyond ridiculous.

 

[Stacks]

He was better than Iniesta. Iniesta doesn't have anything that Gazza didn't have, while there's a fair bit that Gazza could do that iniesta couldn't. Honestly, I find Iniesta more in the Ribery, Sneijder class rather than anything supernatural. Gazza could pierce through midfields in a way Iniesta doesn't do on a consistent basis anyways. That run vs PSG last season is the sort stuff gazza did on a regular basis. Gazza like Iniesta could get out of all sorts of tight situations.

I will firmly disagree. To me Gazza does not have the eye of the needle pass, deft of touch or the eye for a pass of an Iniesta. To me no player in England has had that. Iniesta is much better than Ribery and co. You are forgetting that if not for Ronaldo and Messi he would be the best player in the world on multiple occasions.

 

[adexkola]

I will firmly disagree. To me Gazza does not have the eye of the needle pass, deft of touch or the eye for a pass of an Iniesta. To me no player in England has had that. Iniesta is much better than Ribery and co. You are forgetting that if not for Ronaldo and Messi he would be the best player in the world on multiple occasions.

No he (Iniesta) wouldn't. But that's another debate for another thread.

 

[Darwin09]

Im outside the UK. You are talking utter rubbish.

Seconded. I was in South America during Italia 90 and he was one of the stars of the tournament and considered to be an English player that was South American in terms of style.

That's garbage. He was brilliant.

 

[Sandikan]

He was at his best just as I was getting into football, but you only have to see the highlight reels to see he was pure star quality.

Such a shame the ref didn't book him in that FA cup final for basically smashing his studs into someone's chest. If he had, then Gazza probably wouldn't have recklessly smashed himself up in the Charles tackle.

Even by Euro 96 when his powers had been reduced he was still capable of real brilliance, see that goal v Scotland. Who else would have attempted that, let alone pulled it off.
It was a real shock Hoddle didn't take him to the World cup in 98 too. But then Hoddle was full of stuff the nation couldn't believe, see Anderton/Beckham/Owen.

Gazza's signature move though, which wouldn't be allowed now, was the "shove away".

 

[Darwin09]

Total garbage once again. The best players have always went to the a select few of the biggest and more important highest wage offering teams. The Barca team in the 90's had Romario/Laudrup/Stoichkov/Koeman and the Milan side had Van Basten/Gullit/Rijkaard/Maldini/Barsei all the way back to the Madrid side which won 5 European cups on the bounce and signing players like Di Stefano. Are you just going to rewrite all of football history how you see it?

International football may be more important to some fans but it's not at the same level as elite European club football and it really isn't even an argument it's just common sense.

Gotta jump in on this one. RooneyLegend is right and you are wrong my friend.

You have to be delusional to believe that the top club teams today bear any resemblance to how things were in 1990. Today you could not realistically argue that the top international teams are as good as the top club teams. Simply because the top club teams today are more or less a compilation of handpicked players from the top international teams.

In 1990, depending on the country, clubs were limited to 3-4 foreign players on the field at a time. And by "foreign", that meant from outside of the country, not outside the EU of today. The rest of the squads were forcibly domestic and therefore the talent levels diluted rapidly, of course similar to today the Barca's and Milans of the world tended to attract the top domestic players, but regardless you couldn't even compare them to today's squads that boast a selection of top players from around the globe.

There's so many false arguments comparing retired players to today's players that are based on an assumption that somehow "things have always been as they are now". Starting with the whole Maradona vs. Messi debate (my favorite being "Messi won more Ballon D'ors than Maradona!). You really have to compare each player within their own era. Back to the topic of Gascoigne, the fact that he even went outside of England and was one of the foreign players in an Italian club in the 1990's tells you all you need to know - that he was one of the elite players of his time.

 

[Moriarty]

Gascoigne was I think the finest footballer this country had produced since Shilton, and the best outfield player since Sir Bobby.

I think Rooney is in with a shout too

 

[Stacks]

Gotta jump in on this one. RooneyLegend is right and you are wrong my friend.

You have to be delusional to believe that the top club teams today bear any resemblance to how things were in 1990. Today you could not realistically argue that the top international teams are as good as the top club teams. Simply because the top club teams today are more or less a compilation of handpicked players from the top international teams.

In 1990, depending on the country, clubs were limited to 3-4 foreign players on the field at a time. And by "foreign", that meant from outside of the country, not outside the EU of today. The rest of the squads were forcibly domestic and therefore the talent levels diluted rapidly, of course similar to today the Barca's and Milans of the world tended to attract the top domestic players, but regardless you couldn't even compare them to today's squads that boast a selection of top players from around the globe.

There's so many false arguments comparing retired players to today's players that are based on an assumption that somehow "things have always been as they are now". Starting with the whole Maradona vs. Messi debate (my favorite being "Messi won more Ballon D'ors than Maradona!). You really have to compare each player within their own era. Back to the topic of Gascoigne, the fact that he even went outside of England and was one of the foreign players in an Italian club in the 1990's tells you all you need to know - that he was one of the elite players of his time.

Despite the fact that Lazio finished 10th in Serie A when they signed him? not as if he was bought by AC Milan now is it? being a foreign player in an Italian team doesn't necessarily make you elite, depends on who signs you. I am not saying he wasn't elite by the way. And just as a thought, if Signori was the saviour for Lazio in that era with his 20 odd Serie A goals, whilst Gazza was there mind, would you say Gazza is more elite than Signori who also enjoyed a WC Final? Again I'm just pointing to the fact that Gazza had a lot of competition

 

[RooneyLegend]

Total garbage once again. The best players have always went to the a select few of the biggest and more important highest wage offering teams. The Barca team in the 90's had Romario/Laudrup/Stoichkov/Koeman and the Milan side had Van Basten/Gullit/Rijkaard/Maldini/Barsei all the way back to the Madrid side which won 5 European cups on the bounce and signing players like Di Stefano. Are you just going to rewrite all of football history how you see it?

International football may be more important to some fans but it's not at the same level as elite European club football and it really isn't even an argument it's just common sense.

What you don't understand is that there was a limitation on the amount of foreigners you can sign so every team had to carry some mediocrity here and there, a mediocrity that didn't exist in international football in the very large nations. Galli, Evani, ancelotti, and Colombo were also in that Milan side and they were nothing to write home about. Similarly the barca side had Nadal, Sacristan and Ferrer. These players wouldn't get anywhere near the sides that have been assembled more recently cause of just how many world class players a side like barca and Madrid can acquire.

International football sides had a bigger pool of talent than that of the club sides due to the restrictions and for anyone to believe that a side with the likes of Brehme, Mattaus, Klinsman, Kohler and Voller would get the floor wiped with by anyone is ridiculous. How can you say the best European sides would wipe the floor with international sides when they couldn't wipe the floor with the best south american club sides?

 

[goin4glory]

What you don't understand is that there was a limitation on the amount of foreigners you can sign so every team had to carry some mediocrity here and there, a mediocrity that didn't exist in international football in the very large nations. Galli, Evani, ancelotti, and Colombo were also in that Milan side and they were nothing to write home about. Similarly the barca side had Nadal, Sacristan and Ferrer. These players wouldn't get anywhere near the sides that have been assembled more recently cause of just how many world class players a side like barca and Madrid can acquire.

International football sides had a bigger pool of talent than that of the club sides due to the restrictions and for anyone to believe that a side with the likes of Brehme, Mattaus, Klinsman, Kohler and Voller would get the floor wiped with by anyone is ridiculous. How can you say the best European sides would wipe the floor with international sides when they couldn't wipe the floor with the best south american club sides?

I was going to continue but then I read that you genuinely believe Gascoigne was a better player than Iniesta which is the biggest red flag of you being a WUM or so bad at football it's not worth even reading anymore. Either way I'm out. Adios.

 

[Stacks]

Total garbage once again. The best players have always went to the a select few of the biggest and more important highest wage offering teams. The Barca team in the 90's had Romario/Laudrup/Stoichkov/Koeman and the Milan side had Van Basten/Gullit/Rijkaard/Maldini/Barsei all the way back to the Madrid side which won 5 European cups on the bounce and signing players like Di Stefano. Are you just going to rewrite all of football history how you see it?

International football may be more important to some fans but it's not at the same level as elite European club football and it really isn't even an argument it's just common sense.

What you don't understand is that there was a limitation on the amount of foreigners you can sign so every team had to carry some mediocrity here and there, a mediocrity that didn't exist in international football in the very large nations. Galli, Evani, ancelotti, and Colombo were also in that Milan side and they were nothing to write home about. Similarly the barca side had Nadal, Sacristan and Ferrer. These players wouldn't get anywhere near the sides that have been assembled more recently cause of just how many world class players a side like barca and Madrid can acquire.

International football sides had a bigger pool of talent than that of the club sides due to the restrictions and for anyone to believe that a side with the likes of Brehme, Mattaus, Klinsman, Kohler and Voller would get the floor wiped with by anyone is ridiculous. How can you say the best European sides would wipe the floor with international sides when they couldn't wipe the floor with the best south american club sides?

Basically what he is saying is that in some countries in the early 90's the club teams were made up of inferior players to the national teams because they didn't have the pick of the entire Nation, yet still had to have a squad of 75% their nations players, hence they were worser off which is a fair point. Yet citing Ferrer and Nadal are bad examples as from my memory they were actually good defenders, Nadal in particular and were regular Spanish Internationals. Its like Saying Arsenal had Adams and Bould as they needed Engish players ignoring the fact that they were some of the best their country produced. E.g. in the 1990's I maintained that United were better than England, despite our team being made up of mostly English players. So theoretically someone like Barcelona could very well compete with national teams if they hoarded the best Spanish players and supplemented them with the likes of Laurdup, Koeman, Romario and Stoichkov. Same with Juve and Milan. In fact looking at Milans 1993 squad, it was fricken insane. In addition, in a major tourney, how many tough nations are you even going to come up against? Egypt, Ireland, Cameroon. Netherlands, Germany and Belgium were Englands opponents


I wonder if going back to that system would be better now mind you?

 

[Billy Blaggs]

I was going to continue but then I read that you genuinely believe Gascoigne was a better player than Iniesta which is the biggest red flag of you being a WUM or so bad at football it's not worth even reading anymore. Either way I'm out. Adios.

He was certainly more as explosive and just as lethal.
He imo was better to watch than Iniesta.

 

[Darwin09]

In fact looking at Milans 1993 squad, it was fricken insane.

Yeah, in those days Milan was owned by Silvio Berlusconi and they were the Man City or Madrid of the time, spending silly money on players like Gianluca Lentini. But they did assemble a fantastic side that basically dominated European football for several years (to the extent such a thing could occur back then given the level of parity). But they were certainly an outlier, not the norm, so you can't generalize to say that because of Milan that club teams in general were better than national teams.

Despite the fact that Lazio finished 10th in Serie A when they signed him? not as if he was bought by AC Milan now is it? being a foreign player in an Italian team doesn't necessarily make you elite, depends on who signs you.

Nahhh...take a look at the list of foreign players in the Serie A that year. They were the top players of that time. I think the whole argument happening in this thread is whether Gascoigne was considered a great player outside of England, and it's abundantly obvious that he was.

 

[matherto]

I think Rooney is in with a shout too

I think I'll speak for a few when I say not a chance. Never, ever got close to what he could've been and look at what he is now.

 

[Moriarty]

I think I'll speak for a few when I say not a chance. Never, ever got close to what he could've been and look at what he is now.

You mean England's leading goalscorer and soon to be ours? Say what you like about the last 2-3 years - and I agree there's been a decline, but young Rooney from 2004 to 2009 was a superb footballer.

 

[Enigma_87]

He had a better career but he wasn't the better player.

Gascoigne better than Laudrup? Not on this planet. Not on talent, not on ability or whatever criteria you put in.

 

[Nogbadthebad]

I think Rooney is in with a shout too

Probably the best Englishman since Gascoigne I think yes, although Paul Scholes runs it close, and Shearer.

I do think Gascoigne around Italia 90 was better than all of them though.

 

[Gio]

I'm not buying this highest level stuff. Gascoigne was the sort of player who stepped up to the mark when the going got tough. He had the impudence and audacity to raise his game against the best opposition. He was electric for England at a time when international football was clearly the highest level of the game. Any footballer going from club to international football will agree with that and countless autobiographies testify to that fact. Obviously Milan were an incredible team in any era, but there was very little stockpiling of the top talent in the way that the best clubs routinely do nowadays. Clearly that West German side - with Lothar Matthaus, Andreas Brehme, Jurgen Kohler, Pierre Littbarski, Jurgen Klinsmann and many others from the top drawer - would have wiped the floor with just about every club side from the time.

 

[Enigma_87]

I'm not buying this highest level stuff. Gascoigne was the sort of player who stepped up to the mark when the going got tough. He had the impudence and audacity to raise his game against the best opposition. He was electric for England at a time when international football was clearly the highest level of the game. Any footballer going from club to international football will agree with that and countless autobiographies testify to that fact. Obviously Milan were an incredible team in any era, but there was very little stockpiling of the top talent in the way that the best clubs routinely do nowadays. Clearly that West German side - with Lothar Matthaus, Andreas Brehme, Jurgen Kohler, Pierre Littbarski, Jurgen Klinsmann and many others from the top drawer - would have wiped the floor with just about every club side from the time.

In 90WC England didn't have a bad side either - Robson, Lineker, Barnes, Waddle. Obviously not as good as the German or Dutch or even the Yugoslav sides but still no pushovers.

 

[markorm]

I don't think you could cite many people in the modern game as a comparison, just because he wouldn't have been the same player in todays game.

He had a lot of talent, but many problems off the pitch.

He could have been the greatest English footballer of modern times if his head was right.

 

[matherto]

You mean England's leading goalscorer and soon to be ours? Say what you like about the last 2-3 years - and I agree there's been a decline, but young Rooney from 2004 to 2009 was a superb footballer.

Young Rooney was indeed. Injury and other things robbed up of what young Rooney could've been. He was superb, he could've been even better.

Original Ronaldo was probably on track to become the greatest player ever until injuries robbed him of that. He was still superb but he could've been the best.

It happens.

And stats mean feck all when you're becoming leading goalscorer through penalties versus San Marino and so on.

 

[royboy16]

Fallen off the wagon again.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...gering-taxi-clutching-bottle-gin-relapse.html

 

[VivaObertan]

Every time I see a 'Paul Gascoigne' thread bumped I instantly assume he's died. Sad really!

 

[Tarrou]

Didn't realize he was ever on the wagon

 

[Marching]

All part and parcel of being an alcoholic....and don't the media love it!