Second midfielder - shoot-out.

[American]

Lets get real, if Forrest played in modern day football, he would not be able to hack it.

Of course not, he'd be like 140 years old.

He would be able to hack it, as he would have the same modern training techniques and advantages the players of today would have.

5 FRICKIN' FA CUP MEDALS

[philipl]

...and the first professional player to be selected for England.

That must give you an idea how outstanding Forrest must have been to have broken through that particular barrier.

A Great means being better than all your contemporaries. On that basis, Tim would be the first entry into this list who was only a great at Blackburn as opposed to having been a great amongst his peers in the game.

Forrest embodies everything that the proud Rovers tradition stands for. Look in the front of every programme and see the list of major honours won. Half of them are at least as much down to Jimmy Forrest as the 95 Championship was due too Tim.

Having already voted in Crompton, England, Clayton and Douglas whom greggy and his friends almost certainly didn't see either, why change the ground rules now?

[broadsword]

Sorry, I have put my handbag down now, I am calm. Zen.

I was trying to think of an analogy for this "Must vote Sherwood as I have not seen Forrest" syndrome.

Maybe saying who was the most war-like leader, Attila the Hun or Tony Blair. Well, it's got to be Blair hasn't it, I never saw Attila in action. Plus civilization was different then, innit? Whaddya mean, history books? Schmistory books!

[den]

1 Lets get real, if Forrest played in modern day football, he would not be able to hack it.

2 How can people vote for a player they have never seen play??

1 No-one knows that do they.

2 Well hundreds have done.

GreggyK - I've never asked people to vote for the best player. I've asked people to vote for the greatest player. We want to finish this excercise with a team of rovers "greats".

To vote someone in as the greatest player, requires people to look at all the evidence and make a judgement, based on the available facts. At the end of all that, you may come to the opinion that you still must go for the player you have seen, fair enough. That's the way S.A.R. has gone about all this and you can't really argue with that.

What makes it difficult is when the odd person will not look at the facts in front of them, read the testimonials or consider anyone they haven't seen play. They simply say they can't vote for anyone they haven't seen

Unfortunately, the odd squable might make it appear as though this has all been a waste of time and that there is no agreement as to how we should have gone about selecting this side. I don't think that is the case though. The team that has been selected up to now, proves that the majority of people are very open minded about the whole affair. Credit to everyone who has contributed so far. There have been lots of you and all your views will be recorded as best we can.

[SouthAussieRover]

To vote someone in as the greatest player, requires people to look at all the evidence and make a judgement, based on the available facts. At the end of all that, you may come to the opinion that you still must go for the player you have seen, fair enough. That's the way S.A.R. has gone about all this and you can't really argue with that.

What makes it difficult is when the odd person will not look at the facts in front of them, read the testimonials or consider anyone they haven't seen play. They simply say they can't vote for anyone they haven't seen

Unfortunately, the odd squable might make it appear as though this has all been a waste of time and that there is no agreement as to how we should have gone about selecting this side. I don't think that is the case though. The team that has been selected up to now, proves that the majority of people are very open minded about the whole affair. Credit to everyone who has contributed so far. There have been lots of you and all your views will be recorded as best we can.

I must say that Den,FLB,Brownie etc have given me a valuable insight into players I didn't know about.

So hats of to all involved in this exercise.

[den]

They've been brilliant haven't they.

Getting back to the points about Forrest [for example] having been a player from over a hundred years ago and plying his trade when they wore silly hats.

What evidence is there, that the most skilful player from an era long gone, was any less skilful than today's professional? I would say none.

The teams from the sixties would get hammered nowadays, but would the top players still succeed in today's teams? Would George Best get into mn Uniteds side today? Course he would.

Would Bobby Moore get into one of today's top sides? Of course he would.

Because the teams of 1900 would probably lose 20-0, does that mean that Jimmy Forrest was nowhere near as skilful a player as today's pro's?

Forrest was apparently the best footballer in England at his time. Why should he be any less skilful than today's players. Why wouldn't he be in today's England team given today's training methods and tactics?

[M-K]

I guess it's just disappointing when there's any kind of 'greatest ever' poll and few voters had previously heard of half the winners.

It's like all those stuffy 'greatest movie ever' polls, where you just know Citizen Kane and Metropolis are going to be at the top, despite the fact that with each passing year they become less relevant to the average person.

1995 was our glory year, not 1895. Sherwood rose to the top at a time when every kid in every country dreams of being a footballer. Forrest may have been the best of his day, but there wasn't a great deal of competition, what with rugby, cricket and badger-baiting being more popular sports at the time.

[nottsrover]

1995 was our glory year, not 1895.

I have to disagree, 1995 may have been your glory year as a Rovers fan but it certainly is not necessarily the clubs. In the 1990s we were the best side in the country for one season. In the 1890s, we dominated English football for years and won the premier trophy of the day 5 times.

I guess it's just disappointing when there's any kind of 'greatest ever' poll and few voters had previously heard of half the winners.

What is disapointing is when yove a greatest ever poll which is dominated by the modern era. Witness film polls which are dominated by movies which have come out in the last five years or music polls featuring the likes of Busted.

You would hope that fans of a club with the proud history of Rovers would look beyond the last 10 years and vote someone who was truly great into the 'greatest team ever' rather than someone merely good who happened to be in the right place at the right time.

[samtheozzy]

Thank God Forrest looks like getting the nod. For all his good qualities Sherwood's achievements pale in comparison to those of Forrest. The better man looks like winning this vote.

[M-K]

What is disapointing is when yove a greatest ever poll which is dominated by the modern era. Witness film polls which are dominated by movies which have come out in the last five years or music polls featuring the likes of Busted.

Fair point. What I was trying to say is that to be a Premiership-winning footballer in this era takes a lot more than to be a winner 100-odd years ago, when there was no competition.

Back then, a footballer probably worked down the pit on Saturday morning, spent the afternoon playing soccer against a bunch of unfit old men wearing long trousers, got wasted on beer and opium in the evening, then woke up in time to burn a few witches at church on Sunday.

Maybe Forrest could have cut it in today's world. But would he have got into a Blackburn side with millions to spend on the pick of the country's talent? Heck, there are probably more kids vying to get noticed at the Rovers academy than there were adult footballers back in Forrest's day.

[bob fleming]

a footballer probably worked down the pit on Saturday morning, spent the afternoon playing soccer against a bunch of unfit old men wearing long trousers, got wasted on beer and opium in the evening, then woke up in time to burn a few witches at church on Sunday.

If that's the sort of thing Forrest was up to then that's even more reason to vote for him as far as I'm concerned. I'm happy with my vote. Sherwood's never burnt a witch in his life, never even come close (probably).

[Alan75]

Heck, there are probably more kids vying to get noticed at the Rovers academy than there were adult footballers back in Forrest's day

Sorry to question your post, but in them days playing football was an escape from the dangers of working down the pit or mundane factories, where health and safety was the last thing on the minds of the bosses.

There was a saying, that clubs only had to shout down a pit and a player emerged. That said the clubs could have the pick of the best available footballers. And therefore only the best made the grade to top flight football.

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Don't want to be involved in a bitch-fest-fight.

That's never stopped you before Colin...

For myself, Sherwood's disruptive behaviour under Roy Hodgson during his final season at the club left a bad taste.

It has to be FOREST for me - I can see the wood from the trees...

I'll fetch me coat now, that was a bad one...

[northernrover]

I think too many people are missing the point here.

Yes, unquestionably, the standards of today are way and above the standard being played when Forrest was around but the point that people like Den are trying to make is that Forrest was the very best of his generation and was shrouded in regular and comparitive (to nowadays) glory.

Maybe Forrest did work full time down the pits and then enjoy a few jars after his game on the saturday, but that was the culture back then. Whats to say if he was around now he would be doing the same. No he wouldn't 'cos he simply would not be taken on by any teams whilst living that kind of lifestyle.

He would have adapted to modern regimes. (Well actually he wouldn't have needed to because the professional environment would be one which he was schooled in in the first place)

He himself would have improved as the game improved and modernised itself, regardless of whether it was 20 years, 50 years or 100+ years ago.

The fact of the matter is, he was the best player of his era and if he was still around now, with the technology, diet, facilties, training and methods of modern day football, he would still be the best NOW!!

EDIT: Ooops, forgot to add, just in case you hadn't already gathered -

Forrest everytime over the over-paid and over-rated Sherwood.

Edited November 26, 2004 by northernrover

[jim mk2]

It has to be FOREST for me - ...

What's a chuffin' Nottingham Forest fan doing on our messageboard ??

I note that Forrest is well ahead - keep up the good work chaps.

[M-K]

The fact of the matter is, he was the best player of his era and if he was still around now, with the technology, diet, facilties, training and methods of modern day football, he would still be the best NOW!!

That's not a fact!

If he was the best of his era, maybe it's because the 19th century equivalents of Maradona, Pele, Zidane, Van Basten and, erm, Sherwood were doing more popular, more lucrative things.

ie, back in ye good olde days, the vast majority of people with any natural footballing talent slipped through the net. If you were halfway decent and managed to survive to the ripe old age of 21, you'd stand out among your typhoid-ridden, one-legged team-mates.

Today, you've got to be so phenomenally good just to get a chance, and everyone with natural football talent is playing the game at some level. Old Forresty might barely be good enough for Darwen.

ergo, olde association soccerball was rubbish. Look at the size of the doorways in old pubs - olde folks were malnourished midgets who would get muscled off the ball by Tugay.

Edited November 26, 2004 by M-K

[American]

How do you know the best natural soccer players of today aren't Americans who are playing "Gridiron" and basketball instead?

[Al]

The fact of the matter is, he was the best player of his era and if he was still around now, with the technology, diet, facilties, training and methods of modern day football, he would still be the best NOW!!

That's not a fact!

If he was the best of his era, maybe it's because the 19th century equivalents of Maradona, Pele, Zidane, Van Basten and, erm, Sherwood were doing more popular, more lucrative things.

ie, back in ye good olde days, the vast majority of people with any natural footballing talent slipped through the net. If you were halfway decent and managed to survive to the ripe old age of 21, you'd stand out among your typhoid-ridden, one-legged team-mates.

Today, you've got to be so phenomenally good just to get a chance, and everyone with natural football talent is playing the game at some level. Old Forresty might barely be good enough for Darwen.

ergo, olde association soccerball was rubbish. Look at the size of the doorways in old pubs - olde folks were malnourished midgets who would get muscled off the ball by Tugay.

It's probably more factual than your blue sky assumptions.

What gives you the authority to make such judgements.

Can your time machine give me tomorrows racing results?

[M-K]

It's probably more factual than your blue sky assumptions.

What gives you the authority to make such judgements.

Can your time machine give me tomorrows racing results?

My time machine only goes backwards - I can get you some lottery results from 1996, if that's any use.

[M-K]

How do you know the best natural soccer players of today aren't Americans who are playing "Gridiron" and basketball instead?

Well, my theory still needs a little work...

[American]

Also, add in that Sherwood could actually be substituted for, and wasn't wearing 50 pound uniforms when it got wet....

[92er]

People in this area didn't work down the pit.

Burnley,on the other hand, was a different kettle of fish.

[billy]

I keep reading about Forrest not being any good today, why not reverse it, Sherwood playing in forrest's era? big boots, heavy ball, mud pitches, knocked down every tackle, all centre halves with one intent, stop the man any way you can, no fancy pasta, or rice, just the usual tripe, trotters and cow heel bits, washed down with stong ale, no I can't see sherwood lasting ninety minutes at all.

[Brownie]

OK Den, I give up.

Looks like Forrest has won.

Well done to FLB and his supporters, though I hope this hasn't detracted from or undermined Sherwood's priceless contribution to the gretaest moment we will ever witness as Rovers fans.

Let's move on to left wing.

Scotty Scotty beam us up !!

[den]

OK Den, I give up.

Looks like Forrest has won.

Well done to FLB and his supporters, though I hope this hasn't detracted from or undermined Sherwood's priceless contribution to the gretaest moment we will ever witness as Rovers fans.

Let's move on to left wing.

Scotty Scotty beam us up !!

I actually feel a little sad, Brownie. Even though I didn't vote for Sherwood myself, I reckon yourself and FLB have done a great job and neither deserve to lose. it's also been a bit of a special subject for you, as your lads middle name is Sherwood.

Every credit Brownie, you've done well.

I'll give it a couple more days and if there's no real movement, we'll move on.