It's so easy to rile up these guys.
Brentan Rodgers
- Thread starter The Neviller
- Start date
- Status
It's so easy to rile up these guys.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/footb...tobiography-torn-2528237#.UmmbQyEqmOQ.twitter
fecks sake! "torn to shreds"
fecks sake! "torn to shreds"
It's so easy to rile up these guys.
I'm going have to read Fergie's book. Had no idea he went into comment on Brenton and the current LFC side. The comments on Henderson are slightly odd. I do find it amusing that it sounds like Rodgers has read it from cover to cover.
Delusional twats.. 'Bitterness at Liverpool's success', it's not like he didn't have any of his own. Perhaps these are his genuine opinions, you know..
maybe he thinks Gerrard was not positionally disciplined enough to play in a midfield two, and therefore not a 'top top player' like Scholes- a bit like Rafa, who didn't trust him there.
maybe he thinks Gerrard was not positionally disciplined enough to play in a midfield two, and therefore not a 'top top player' like Scholes- a bit like Rafa, who didn't trust him there.
I don't agree with the majority in that the answer is : They are very different players, and there worse player.
Rubbish, they had abilities or skills that may have have exceeded the other, for example Scholes passing or agility in the way he turned on the spot was unique, but the aura that Gerrard brought and his timely goals are equally as great but different, I understand that.
What I don't understand is that one set of skills can't be more valuable than the other, or that they both happened to be at the dead same level for the skills sets they had, despite the fact people realise they are different, it seems to be a cop out and decide they are 'on par', when for it's the original question that's wrong.
Who is the better/more talented footballer? Obviously everything is opinionated, and for me its Scholes
BUT, as a Manchester United fan, I would have to concede that if I was a fan of say West Ham or Fulham etc then Stevie would probably do a lot more the club than Scholes in my opinion.
My summary is that Scholes is the superior player albeit he needs to be a cog in a team of players, he can make a lot of 'very good players' play amazingly, and still manage to shine, for me Gerrard goes missing when you put him with other big names (See England), but if you are surrounded by lesser players (Or head and shoulders above your teammates) then Gerrard was able to get more out of them in terms of making them feed him, the team worked for Gerrard and he produced, Scholes worked for Manchester United, and made us produce, for me, the latter is the greater player, but the former is by no means not a 'top top player' in my opinion, as he was...
Rubbish, they had abilities or skills that may have have exceeded the other, for example Scholes passing or agility in the way he turned on the spot was unique, but the aura that Gerrard brought and his timely goals are equally as great but different, I understand that.
What I don't understand is that one set of skills can't be more valuable than the other, or that they both happened to be at the dead same level for the skills sets they had, despite the fact people realise they are different, it seems to be a cop out and decide they are 'on par', when for it's the original question that's wrong.
Who is the better/more talented footballer? Obviously everything is opinionated, and for me its Scholes
BUT, as a Manchester United fan, I would have to concede that if I was a fan of say West Ham or Fulham etc then Stevie would probably do a lot more the club than Scholes in my opinion.
My summary is that Scholes is the superior player albeit he needs to be a cog in a team of players, he can make a lot of 'very good players' play amazingly, and still manage to shine, for me Gerrard goes missing when you put him with other big names (See England), but if you are surrounded by lesser players (Or head and shoulders above your teammates) then Gerrard was able to get more out of them in terms of making them feed him, the team worked for Gerrard and he produced, Scholes worked for Manchester United, and made us produce, for me, the latter is the greater player, but the former is by no means not a 'top top player' in my opinion, as he was...
Difference between Liverpool and all the other clubs:
Liverpool. Laughing stock of the the PL.
Liverpool. Laughing stock of the the PL.
Point is, Wenger and Mourinho refused to get sucked into thise whole media circus. Rodgers should have done the same but always with Liverpool they have to give a reaction, and the reaction is always the same, outrage. They get offended by everything and it's pathetic.
I'd be quite surprised if he hasn't been up late the last couple of nights, highlighter in hand.
I do find it amusing some of the comments that Rodgers has made on Fergie's legacy and being jealous of Liverpool's success(FFS it's not 1990 anymore) but a lot depends on what Fergie has said about them and Rodgers in the book. I had no idea he had said anything about Rodgers or the current side beyond the Gerrard comments.
Some of his press conference is on the Beeb website today. The phrase top, top has obviously creeped into his conscience because he is using it every other sentence.
The Gerrard comment isn't offensive. It's just his opinion. Arrigo Sacchi said the same about Gerrard years ago. But just because it's Sir Alex, a huge fuss is being made of it. Rodgers is out of line here. He's just added to the long list of things Liverpool have over-reacted to.
'Liverpool - A Great Bunch of Lads'.
Liverpool Comedy Club.
I've read the chapter in question. Like Mitten said, SAF is very complimentary towards Liverpool throughout. It's unfortunate that the press is nitpicking about some of his opinions, which only play a very minor part in the chapter.
And that's it. Rodgers is a twat.
Fergie's comments may have been taken out of context - but to suggest Gerrard isn't "world class" is a provocative comment designed to end up in the papers and hype the book. I dont believe that's Fergie's honest opinion about him at all, and given that Gerrard, irrespective of who he plays for, is a top drawer professional who's shown great loyalty (a trait Fergie surely admires in the likes of Giggs. Scholes and Neville) I think his comments are a bit of a cheap shot and a bit classless.
Rodgers is right to defend his players - Fergie would do exactly teh same. Although, he needs to watch what he says though - talking about keeping things in the dressing room after the channel 5 debacle last year is a bit rich.
Does he say Rodgers is to young to manage LFC and could you give the context of the Gerrard comments. Saying he is not a top, top player could mean a number of different things.
Rodgers should have done what Wenger and Mourinho just did and refuse to respond. It's Fergie's bloody autobiography. He'll put in it what he likes. If he doesn't think Gerrard is top top class then that's his opinion. Maybe he only see's Messi & Ronaldo as top top class? There's plenty of others who agree with him about Gerrard.
Why some are trying to make Fergie appear classless out of this, when he's dedicated a whole chapter to Liverpool - A great tradition, is franky a bit disturbing.
Exactly. When it first appeared I took his comment about Stevie G and Lampard to mean he didn't consider them among the Zidanes of the world - which is hardly an outrageous view.
On a side note, could this new phrase be used on Top Reds? "Yeah, he's a top red, but he really isn't a top, top red..."
Does Fergie define "top, top player" in his example, or give his opinion of who is? Otherwise it is completely meaningless getting outraged about it. Fergie's "top top" could be just Messi, Ronaldo, C.Ronaldo.
From what journo's are saying, Fergie only see's Messi & Ronaldo as top, top players. But none of us will actually know until it's out on the shelves to buy. He apparently also praises Liverpool plenty of times for various achievements, mainly the CL win in 2005. Nothing mentioned about that though from the media or Rodgers.
Also:
So according to Rodgers, this comment is an attempt to damage Jordan Henderson's career? Yeah, ok Brent.
Also:
So according to Rodgers, this comment is an attempt to damage Jordan Henderson's career? Yeah, ok Brent.
You just have compared them. Nice way of dodging a question.
Did he even suggest that ?
I love how that quote is dismissed as 'bizarre', what? How is it bizarre to have an opinion that doing something in a certain way increases your risk of injury its bloody common sense.
Nothing like a bit of outrage though, is there?
Sounds like you are only allowed to do an autobiography where you say everyone is brilliant and amazing all the time. Soft victim mentality pricks.
Would Fergie have done the same and made "no comment"? It's up to him - he's entitled to his opinion as much as Sir Alex is able to write ehat he likes in his book.
And if you read what I actually posted - that's not what I said. I said it was a classless comment, which I personally think is a bit unneccessary and designed purely to whip the press into a frenzy.
I've not read the book yet so maybe I'm doing him a disservice. Perhaps someone can enlighten us.
If he hasnt said that then I take back my comments, obviously.
As Kouroux pointed out, Fergie hasn't said Gerrard isn't world class. Just that he's not a top, top player. Apparently he only rates Messi and Ronaldo in that bracket but we'll have to wait and see when the book is out. Rodgers has definitely reacted OTT. Not just on Stevie G but Henderson and everything else.
Henderson might now try to run properly and end up going face first into a goalpost!
I fail to see a downside.
What an absolute joke Rodgers is. He simply doesn't have the intelligence to ever be a top manager.
That tends to happen to normal, rational people when they move to Merseyside.
OK, let me put it this way. If I asked United fans, who were around during Bryan Robson's era, who they thought was the better player out of Scholes & Robson, chances are a lot of them would echo my sentiments in that both were great players, but in a totally different way. Steven Gerrard's style bears a striking similarity to that of Robson insofar that both were a driving force that quite often carried their side over the finishing line. So just asking the question who I think is the better player out of the two is liking asking who I think is the superior player out of a goalkeeper & an attacker. Scholes was a creative midfielder who excelled at bringing other players into the game. Gerrard was, in his prime, an explosive player, who could, & quite often did, win matches pretty much on his own.
Anyway, this debate isn't about who is the better player. These sort of things get done to death on here & are boring as feck. I'm pretty sure that if Bob Paisley had come out with similar comments about Bryan Robson when the ex-United player was around the age of 33, the footballing world in general might have disagreed with Liverpool's most successful manager of all time. So as it is, I don't think it's just Liverpool fans who are questioning the validity of Fergie's comments in relation to Steven Gerrard.
So what exactly is Fergie's grading system then ? If Messi & Ronaldo are 'top, top players', where would that put the likes of Maradona & Pele ? Who for most people are the 2 greatest players of all time. How many 'tops' would Sir Alex put before those 2 ? Is Gerrard only good enough for one 'top' ? & if so can we appeal the decision ?
It's very, very confusing. I hope all is explained in the book
The impression I got is that SAF considers Gerrard (and Lampard) to be a level below Keane and Scholes.
Not surprised, but its hard not to. As a pairing they trump Lampard and Gerard, and as individuals they can arguably (Scholes definitely) be considered better.
- Status