[Archived] Brentford Away 19.03.2016

[JHRover]

What is this attractive attacking football people talk about? What Burnley do when getting outplayed every week yet keep on scraping wins against the run of play? What Middlesbrough do with a negative manager that refuses to go with more than one striker? Derby have spent £30 million yet are dreadful to watch.

There's no team in this league that plays good football. Infact the most successful teams are those who make a point of not doing and who focus less on passing and possession and more on maintaining their discipline and defensive shape whilst allowing the opposition plenty of the ball.

No coincidence that the top 4 clubs are all managed by old fashioned defenders who base their teams around and pride themselves on defensive strength and giving nothing away. There's nothing attractive about Championship football. So anyone expecting any manager in this league to turn up and develop another Barcelona will be disappointed.

Don't lose many in this league and you'll be in with a chance of promotion. Do what Burnley/Brighton/Middlesbrough do and stifle the opposition and edge games 1-0 every week - that's the recipe for promotion. It might not be edge of your seat stuff or win many admirers, but it gets results. That's why as soon as results dip Karanka and Bruce have faced stick from their own fans despite healthy league positions - because its not good to watch, yet they probably wouldn't be in contention for the top 2 without it.

[ABBEY]

He had a 'flair' for scoring goals. And that's the object of the game

Shhh don't stir the Rhodes hating camp dude .. It's frowned upon . #brown

[Al]

I'd call him technically proficient but my definition of "flair" is not big Al.

Can you remember the times when he lifted the ball over the keeper to score and the way he killed the ball. He had all the flair I need and was always exciting to watch.

We rarely agree so I would not expect us to agree on the definition of flair.

[den]

I'd call him technically proficient but my definition of "flair" is not big Al.

You're joking JB? Shearer didn't have flair? He was the best English striker I've ever seen and probably the most exciting.

"Technically proficient"!

What was Bryan Douglas then - quite good?

[VinjayV4]

Can you remember the times when he lifted the ball over the keeper to score and the way he killed the ball. He had all the flair I need and was always exciting to watch.

We rarely agree so I would not expect us to agree on the definition of flair.

Well OK some of his goals were more skillful than just plain ruthless. The majority of his long range goals were absolute bullets though not so much lobs...and the Norwich goal wasn't that far out. He was certainly an excellent crosser too which requires technique as do volleyed shots. He was never a showboat though and he certainly couldn't dribble round several players. That's why he was never the best striker in Europe (original and best Ronaldo was compared to Pele/Maradona something Shearer certainly wasn't) but he was certainly good enough to play for any club in the World and succeed. His physical side was certainly the "old fashioned" part of his game and he had been referred to as a "classic English centre forward." Heading and pace (moreso when he was younger declined over injuries and age but he still had his other attributes) exceptional as well.

I didn't do him a disservice at all. Thought I was paying him a massive compliment actually. I prefer ruthless players with a powerful shot over "flicks and tricks" like I said. Shearer and Ronaldo together would have annihilated everyone in sight in the 90's EPL. Shearer should really have gone abroad when he left and joined Ronaldo at Barcelona. All the top clubs in Europe lose players at some point (even City probably will to someone like Barca, R Madrid eventually) though the main problem is when they sell to someone in the same league. I think there's absolutely no chance in hell of someone moving from City to United these days.

[Al]

Well OK some of his goals were more skillful than just plain ruthless. The majority of his long range goals were absolute bullets though not so much lobs...and the Norwich goal wasn't that far out. He was certainly an excellent crosser too which requires technique as do volleyed shots. He was never a showboat though and he certainly couldn't dribble round several players. That's why he was never the best striker in Europe (original and best Ronaldo was compared to Pele/Maradona something Shearer certainly wasn't) but he was certainly good enough to play for any club in the World and succeed. His physical side was certainly the "old fashioned" part of his game and he had been referred to as a "classic English centre forward." Heading and pace (moreso when he was younger declined over injuries and age but he still had his other attributes) exceptional as well.

I didn't do him a disservice at all. Thought I was paying him a massive compliment actually. I prefer ruthless players with a powerful shot over "flicks and tricks" like I said. Shearer and Ronaldo together would have annihilated everyone in sight in the 90's EPL. Shearer should really have gone abroad when he left and joined Ronaldo at Barcelona. All the top clubs in Europe lose players at some point (even City probably will to someone like Barca, R Madrid eventually) though the main problem is when they sell to someone in the same league. I think there's absolutely no chance in hell of someone moving from City to United these days.

Sorry Vinjay, can't agree. Shearer was one of the most skilful players I have seen in over 60 years of football both technically and dynamically. You can't get better than that. Ronaldo is his equal though.

[VinjayV4]

Sorry Vinjay, can't agree. Shearer was one of the most skilful players I have seen in over 60 years of football both technically and dynamically. You can't get better than that. Ronaldo is his equal though.

Just to comment more on original Ronaldo I'm referring more to his dribbling and general footwork. Not so much skillful tricks (though he was certainly capable of that) and he could handle himself physically as well. He probably couldn't hit the ball as hard as Shearer but he was certainly a ruthless finisher. There was virtually nothing he couldn't do though like Shearer he had to adapt after his injuries. Its Shearer's explosive finishing I like more than anything in a player and the way Martin Tyler screamed...SHEARRRRRRRER!. Even Ronaldo probably couldn't hit the ball that hard as frequently.

As for Shearer I'm not saying he had a poor first touch and he certainly was adept at "holding the ball up". We know though he couldn't do some of the things that Ronaldo could do like dribbling round several players. Maybe he could have performed a few "tricks" but he was "no nonsense" and not a "showboater". I don't think excellent technique is quite the same as performing incredible acts of individual skill.

You have to agree I'm afraid that while people compared Ronaldo to Pele/Maradona nobody ever did with Shearer.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Sorry Vinjay, can't agree. Shearer was one of the most skilful players I have seen in over 60 years of football both technically and dynamically. You can't get better than that. Ronaldo is his equal though.

We all see what we want to see. Ronaldo, when he was fit was something else. Shearer was a great goalscorer but technically wasn't on the same level as Ronaldo. He lack of real pace and dribbling ability puts him behind the Brazilian. That's not mentioning his lack of a real left foot.

[Al]

We all see what we want to see. Ronaldo, when he was fit was something else. Shearer was a great goalscorer but technically wasn't on the same level as Ronaldo. He lack of real pace and dribbling ability puts him behind the Brazilian. That's not mentioning his lack of a real left foot.

Did you see Shearer in his prime? He certainly didn't lack pace. Lack of a left foot? Have you really watched him?

[VinjayV4]

Did you see Shearer in his prime? He certainly didn't lack pace. Lack of a left foot? Have you really watched him?

I agree with Tyrone generally but certainly not on the "lack of pace" part. He lost some of it after his 1997 injury whereas after his injury at Rovers it didn't really effect him at all.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

We all see what we want to see. Ronaldo, when he was fit was something else. Shearer was a great goalscorer but technically wasn't on the same level as Ronaldo. He lack of real pace and dribbling ability puts him behind the Brazilian. That's not mentioning his lack of a real left foot.

I think its essential to distinguish between Shearers. Post-97 Shearer wasn't a patch on the player that went before. Understandable really, anyone who's torn ligaments would agree you're never the same player. Its remarkable how Shearer recovered when he did it at Rovers, but the one at Newcastle affected his game quite badly.

Before that injury he had pace, agility and could beat a man. Maybe not Ronaldo level but not far off. And no left foot?? You mean it was only a howitzer whilst his right was a cruise missile?

[VinjayV4]

We all see what we want to see. Ronaldo, when he was fit was something else. Shearer was a great goalscorer but technically wasn't on the same level as Ronaldo. He lack of real pace and dribbling ability puts him behind the Brazilian. That's not mentioning his lack of a real left foot.

Yeah people see what they want to see. I still try to convince myself Colin Hendry never made a mistake (aside from that West Ham penalty which even I admitted was poor and also when Paul Gascoigne bamboozled him) and was truly the best defender in World football.

I think its essential to distinguish between Shearers. Post-97 Shearer wasn't a patch on the player that went before. Understandable really, anyone who's torn ligaments would agree you're never the same player. Its remarkable how Shearer recovered when he did it at Rovers, but the one at Newcastle affected his game quite badly.

Before that injury he had pace, agility and could beat a man. Maybe not Ronaldo level but not far off. And no left foot?? You mean it was only a howitzer whilst his right was a cruise missile?

I don't think it had a tremedously "bad effect" because he was still an exceptional striker who could score over 20 goals a season. I'm not sure he ever passed the 30 goal mark in a season at Newcastle but that would have partly been due to the league improving as a whole.

[Al]

Yeah people see what they want to see.

Definitely applies to you and Tyrone. How dare you criticise the best centre forward I have ever seen!

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Definitely applies to you and Tyrone. How dare you criticise the best centre forward I have ever seen!

You mean in the flesh or on TV Al ? In my world nobody is beyond constructive criticism. I don't have blue and white eyes, I find they get in the way of objectivity. I started out when De Stefano and Puskas ruled the TV. From what I saw then and later on both were better. There's been lots better over the years since then.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

I don't think it had a tremedously "bad effect" because he was still an exceptional striker who could score over 20 goals a season. I'm not sure he ever passed the 30 goal mark in a season at Newcastle but that would have partly been due to the league improving as a whole.

He came close in his first season at Newcastle. 92-97 he averaged 0.75 goals per game, after his second career-ender he averaged 0.49 goals per game. That's a pretty huge difference, he'd have scored 100 more goals in his career if he'd carried on at his pre-injury rate.

Imagine Shearer without those injuries playing for Barcelona like Ronaldo did where you're served up chances on a plate every game. The mind boggles. Its a shame injuries and the unfashionable clubs Shearer played for prevented him getting the recognition he deserved.

[Salgado Is Still A Hero]

Don't want to do a disservice to Shearer but Ronaldo pre-his injuries was really something else.

In fact that's not a disservice to Shearer at all, being considered one of the the absolute greatest of all time is no mean feat and Ronaldo was exactly that. Shearer was the level below, yet still unbelievable.

And it has nothing to do with being served chances on a plate. The original Ronaldo had for me, an unparreled mix of dribbling and power that saw him destroy defenders on his own.

I say unparreled based on just the players that I've seen.

[only2garners]

Shearer and Ronaldo were at Brentford? Should have gone.

[Leonard Venkhater]

Shearer and Ronaldo were at Brentford? Should have gone.

Hahaha...well both would have been proud of Duffy's goal!

[JBiz]

Can you remember the times when he lifted the ball over the keeper to score and the way he killed the ball. He had all the flair I need and was always exciting to watch.

We rarely agree so I would not expect us to agree on the definition of flair.

Same to Den;

Don't get me wrong, I remember his ability. My favourite player of all time in a Rovers shirt for good reason.

I just always saw flair as a more about creativity, originality or spontaneously moving the ball around. Shearer a great touch and could shoot, pass, cross even tackle. World class striker- example of same era: better than Le Tissier, but I'd say le Tis had more flair if that makes sense.

RIP Cruyff, I've just watched a load of his highlights - that's more what I see as flair, skills, turns and trickery. The unexpected.

[VinjayV4]

Yes its certainly gone off topic! Surprised its still ongoing really but the mods can always close the thread if they want...

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Talking about World class centre forwards. Just been watching some film of Johan Cruyff. What a player. That's what pace and dribbling ability bring to centre forward play.

[mhead]

Also a lesson to quit smoking.

[Stuart]

He had a 'flair' for scoring goals. And that's the object of the game

Not if your surname is...

[ABBEY]

Not if your surname is...

r

[47er]

Not if your surname is...

Yes,where on earth will the goals come from now?