|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 23,084
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 23,084 |
Barnes ..John that is, was magical .
That job interview was going so well until I realized I was fukked up on acid in the middle of a cornfield naked and talking to a scarecrow.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 845
Under 18 Player
|
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 845 |
Real tough one, but Salah's mentally stable for a start........stays on his feet more than Suarez too.
Salah for me , but only if this form is consistant over the next few seasons. Has the edge on pace but Suarez is the more natural finisher and a more aggressive player.
It's a bit unfair on Salah as he is naturally a winger, this season could just be a complete freak, hope not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
Ask David Burrows or Stan Staunton if Barnes got back and defended, as for goal scoring, Barnes played on the wing not centre forward and the season he did play up from he topped the scoring charts.
As for temperment I think only people who were around to witness what John Barnes went through could understand what it was like..he was a catylist for modern black players and people like Ian Wright, Les Ferdinand, and Rio Ferdinand will vouch for that.
The game experience was there for all to see even Digger moved back into midfield after injury, he was the main man in the Fowler, Redknapp, McManaman and Collymore team, not many could control play like him, the Newcastle 4-3 game prime example especialy the final collymore goal.. Tracking back is one thing, and Digger was no slouch, but Suarez covered ground and defended like N'Golo Kante while playing Centre Forward. I definitely agree that Barnes wins on temperament. Keeping a cool head vs the racist abuse he got is impressive. A better person for sure, and he achieved more for the club in terms of team honors, but for me, Suarez is just a freak talent with an unmatched desire to win. He's a special player, and that last season in particular, he was just a nightmare to defend. He might nutmeg you, he might run through you, he might split the defenders with a slide-rule pass, he might bend it around you and five other defenders, he might chip you and the keeper, he might just hit it from 50 yards. You had no idea. He was anarchy on the pitch, and he ran himself into the ground for every single ball. He scored from the halfway line, he scored up close, he scored curlers, he scored screamers, he scored free-kicks, he chipped keepers, he scored bullet headers. He had a telepathic relationship with Coutinho, Gerrard, Sterling, and Sturridge. He could play on the wing, SS, CAM, or as a number 9 and be the best player on the pitch at any of those positions. Barnes was magical in his day, and he definitely left more of an impact on the club than Suarez ever did, but as for who was the better player I think Suarez wins. If you put Barnes in his prime against Suarez in his prime on a pitch against each other, my money is on Luis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
swapshop
Unregistered
|
|
swapshop
Unregistered
|
Ask David Burrows or Stan Staunton if Barnes got back and defended, as for goal scoring, Barnes played on the wing not centre forward and the season he did play up from he topped the scoring charts.
As for temperment I think only people who were around to witness what John Barnes went through could understand what it was like..he was a catylist for modern black players and people like Ian Wright, Les Ferdinand, and Rio Ferdinand will vouch for that.
The game experience was there for all to see even Digger moved back into midfield after injury, he was the main man in the Fowler, Redknapp, McManaman and Collymore team, not many could control play like him, the Newcastle 4-3 game prime example especialy the final collymore goal.. Tracking back is one thing, and Digger was no slouch, but Suarez covered ground and defended like N'Golo Kante while playing Centre Forward. I definitely agree that Barnes wins on temperament. Keeping a cool head vs the racist abuse he got is impressive. A better person for sure, and he achieved more for the club in terms of team honors, but for me, Suarez is just a freak talent with an unmatched desire to win. He's a special player, and that last season in particular, he was just a nightmare to defend. He might nutmeg you, he might run through you, he might split the defenders with a slide-rule pass, he might bend it around you and five other defenders, he might chip you and the keeper, he might just hit it from 50 yards. You had no idea. He was anarchy on the pitch, and he ran himself into the ground for every single ball. He scored from the halfway line, he scored up close, he scored curlers, he scored screamers, he scored free-kicks, he chipped keepers, he scored bullet headers. He had a telepathic relationship with Coutinho, Gerrard, Sterling, and Sturridge. He could play on the wing, SS, CAM, or as a number 9 and be the best player on the pitch at any of those positions. Barnes was magical in his day, and he definitely left more of an impact on the club than Suarez ever did, but as for who was the better player I think Suarez wins. If you put Barnes in his prime against Suarez in his prime on a pitch against each other, my money is on Luis. yes it's a good debate...thing is, Barnes scored all those types of goals to and was great a free kicks and penalties, he was too strong to take the ball off too...the big thing you have to consider is and I think it's a deciding factor...Suarez played when forwards got protected...Barnes played when tackling was still allowed and no protection...he still shone and did all the above...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
OP
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
I being an old git remember Peter Thomson he was some winger up there with Barnes he was in the 66 World Cup team Unfortunetly it's not in film and only the memory but there is still a bit of utube on him.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
Ask David Burrows or Stan Staunton if Barnes got back and defended, as for goal scoring, Barnes played on the wing not centre forward and the season he did play up from he topped the scoring charts.
As for temperment I think only people who were around to witness what John Barnes went through could understand what it was like..he was a catylist for modern black players and people like Ian Wright, Les Ferdinand, and Rio Ferdinand will vouch for that.
The game experience was there for all to see even Digger moved back into midfield after injury, he was the main man in the Fowler, Redknapp, McManaman and Collymore team, not many could control play like him, the Newcastle 4-3 game prime example especialy the final collymore goal.. Tracking back is one thing, and Digger was no slouch, but Suarez covered ground and defended like N'Golo Kante while playing Centre Forward. I definitely agree that Barnes wins on temperament. Keeping a cool head vs the racist abuse he got is impressive. A better person for sure, and he achieved more for the club in terms of team honors, but for me, Suarez is just a freak talent with an unmatched desire to win. He's a special player, and that last season in particular, he was just a nightmare to defend. He might nutmeg you, he might run through you, he might split the defenders with a slide-rule pass, he might bend it around you and five other defenders, he might chip you and the keeper, he might just hit it from 50 yards. You had no idea. He was anarchy on the pitch, and he ran himself into the ground for every single ball. He scored from the halfway line, he scored up close, he scored curlers, he scored screamers, he scored free-kicks, he chipped keepers, he scored bullet headers. He had a telepathic relationship with Coutinho, Gerrard, Sterling, and Sturridge. He could play on the wing, SS, CAM, or as a number 9 and be the best player on the pitch at any of those positions. Barnes was magical in his day, and he definitely left more of an impact on the club than Suarez ever did, but as for who was the better player I think Suarez wins. If you put Barnes in his prime against Suarez in his prime on a pitch against each other, my money is on Luis. yes it's a good debate...thing is, Barnes scored all those types of goals to and was great a free kicks and penalties, he was too strong to take the ball off too...the big thing you have to consider is and I think it's a deciding factor...Suarez played when forwards got protected...Barnes played when tackling was still allowed and no protection...he still shone and did all the above... Yeah, Barnes could (and had to) look after himself, the tackles he endured from the likes of Wimbledon were hard, to be fair, I think Suarez is one of the few from the modern era who could play in the 80's, would have to muzzle him though 
|
|
|
|
|
|
swapshop
Unregistered
|
|
swapshop
Unregistered
|
Suarez played in an era where his opposition were just technically and physically better at football and as Athletes. People always seem to forget that sports and athletes get better over time. The defenders Suarez face have better training, drilling, nutrition, coaching and are selected from wider pools of talent which are refined from much earlier ages. He came against these players near enough every game as is the case with modern football and being a professional football player now. Barnes, as fantastic as he was, played during a time when footballers probably had fish and chips for tea and a pint after every match, a lot of them probably were plumbers etc on the side. Especially in the cup games. Some may say they prefer things the way they were back then, but lets not kid ourselves, the quality of football and footballers is much higher, faster and competitive now. yes fair enough points however players from yesteryear were physically stronger, they needed to be to make tackles count and also to play such long seasons without squad rotation...don't forget Barnes would of been unplayable playing nowadays in an era where defenders would stand off him, tackling non exist and and bowling green pitches to play on, don't think Suarez would of been as effective playing yesteryear but Barnes would of excelled now...I say that because Suarez as tricky as he was would never of been allowed to dribble without being chopped and playing on heavy pitches would of slowed him down even more where defenders would of been able to catch him easily, his temperament would never of survived...good discussion with valid reasons for and against...
Last edited by swapshop; 19/03/18 07:54 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
Ask David Burrows or Stan Staunton if Barnes got back and defended, as for goal scoring, Barnes played on the wing not centre forward and the season he did play up from he topped the scoring charts.
As for temperment I think only people who were around to witness what John Barnes went through could understand what it was like..he was a catylist for modern black players and people like Ian Wright, Les Ferdinand, and Rio Ferdinand will vouch for that.
The game experience was there for all to see even Digger moved back into midfield after injury, he was the main man in the Fowler, Redknapp, McManaman and Collymore team, not many could control play like him, the Newcastle 4-3 game prime example especialy the final collymore goal.. Tracking back is one thing, and Digger was no slouch, but Suarez covered ground and defended like N'Golo Kante while playing Centre Forward. I definitely agree that Barnes wins on temperament. Keeping a cool head vs the racist abuse he got is impressive. A better person for sure, and he achieved more for the club in terms of team honors, but for me, Suarez is just a freak talent with an unmatched desire to win. He's a special player, and that last season in particular, he was just a nightmare to defend. He might nutmeg you, he might run through you, he might split the defenders with a slide-rule pass, he might bend it around you and five other defenders, he might chip you and the keeper, he might just hit it from 50 yards. You had no idea. He was anarchy on the pitch, and he ran himself into the ground for every single ball. He scored from the halfway line, he scored up close, he scored curlers, he scored screamers, he scored free-kicks, he chipped keepers, he scored bullet headers. He had a telepathic relationship with Coutinho, Gerrard, Sterling, and Sturridge. He could play on the wing, SS, CAM, or as a number 9 and be the best player on the pitch at any of those positions. Barnes was magical in his day, and he definitely left more of an impact on the club than Suarez ever did, but as for who was the better player I think Suarez wins. If you put Barnes in his prime against Suarez in his prime on a pitch against each other, my money is on Luis. yes it's a good debate...thing is, Barnes scored all those types of goals to and was great a free kicks and penalties, he was too strong to take the ball off too...the big thing you have to consider is and I think it's a deciding factor...Suarez played when forwards got protected...Barnes played when tackling was still allowed and no protection...he still shone and did all the above... Suarez grew up playing barefoot with a ball made of tape in the Streets of Uruguay. I think he would have been able to handle the rough tackles and hard pitches just fine. There's also the small fact that he matched the premier league goal scoring record without taking penalties that year. Not sure Barnes would be able to shine the way he did today though. Suarez's opponents were on average a much higher athletic and technical standard. Barnes was in an era where players might have a fag or a pint after the match, or fish and chips for lunch.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,564 |
Suarez played in an era where his opposition were just technically and physically better at football and as Athletes. People always seem to forget that sports and athletes get better over time. The defenders Suarez face have better training, drilling, nutrition, coaching and are selected from wider pools of talent which are refined from much earlier ages. He came against these players near enough every game as is the case with modern football and being a professional football player now. Barnes, as fantastic as he was, played during a time when footballers probably had fish and chips for tea and a pint after every match, a lot of them probably were plumbers etc on the side. Especially in the cup games. Some may say they prefer things the way they were back then, but lets not kid ourselves, the quality of football and footballers is much higher, faster and competitive now. yes fair enough points however players from yesteryear were physically stronger, they needed to be to make tackles count and also to play such long seasons without squad rotation...don't forget Barnes would of been unplayable playing nowadays in an era where defenders would stand off him, tackling non exist and and bowling green pitches to play on, don't think Suarez would of been as effective playing yesteryear but Barnes would of excelled now...I say that because Suarez as tricky as he was would never of been allowed to dribble without being chopped and playing on heavy pitches would of slowed him down even more where defenders would of been able to catch him easily, his temperament would never of survived...good discussion with valid reasons for and against... What proof is there that they were physically stronger? Sure, you could get away with rough tackles that didn't touch the ball back then (which could cover up lack of skill), but the understanding of fitness is much better. You can't say that players like Ronaldo and Bale are smaller or less physically strong than players 20 or 30 years ago; they're built like brick houses. I don't think you can say defenders stand off more, either. Marking is much tighter, much more tactically and technically demanding. Brute strength just isn't the only required element anymore to defending. What is definitively provably is that players run harder and farther than they did back then. Here's a great example of the study that's been done on it. On average back then a match would require 8-11 KM covered, 25% of which was walking. Nowadays it's between 12-16 KM covered, much more of which was running at a top speed. Players play more matches with bigger cup and European campaigns, more international commitments. In 87-88 we only played 49 competitive matches. By comparison, we played 63 matches in Klopp's first season. https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot...lot-136038.htmlBack then, a good team could get away with only a few of the players being skilled on the ball, with a bunch of brutes or guys who were athletic, but not great on the ball. The game is tactically on another level too. Maybe Barnes would have shone in this day and age
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 6,054 |
Suarez played in an era where his opposition were just technically and physically better at football and as Athletes. People always seem to forget that sports and athletes get better over time. The defenders Suarez face have better training, drilling, nutrition, coaching and are selected from wider pools of talent which are refined from much earlier ages. He came against these players near enough every game as is the case with modern football and being a professional football player now. Barnes, as fantastic as he was, played during a time when footballers probably had fish and chips for tea and a pint after every match, a lot of them probably were plumbers etc on the side. Especially in the cup games. Some may say they prefer things the way they were back then, but lets not kid ourselves, the quality of football and footballers is much higher, faster and competitive now. yes fair enough points however players from yesteryear were physically stronger, they needed to be to make tackles count and also to play such long seasons without squad rotation...don't forget Barnes would of been unplayable playing nowadays in an era where defenders would stand off him, tackling non exist and and bowling green pitches to play on, don't think Suarez would of been as effective playing yesteryear but Barnes would of excelled now...I say that because Suarez as tricky as he was would never of been allowed to dribble without being chopped and playing on heavy pitches would of slowed him down even more where defenders would of been able to catch him easily, his temperament would never of survived...good discussion with valid reasons for and against... What proof is there that they were physically stronger? Sure, you could get away with rough tackles that didn't touch the ball back then (which could cover up lack of skill), but the understanding of fitness is much better. You can't say that players like Ronaldo and Bale are smaller or less physically strong than players 20 or 30 years ago; they're built like brick houses. I don't think you can say defenders stand off more, either. Marking is much tighter, much more tactically and technically demanding. Brute strength just isn't the only required element anymore to defending. What is definitively provably is that players run harder and farther than they did back then. Here's a great example of the study that's been done on it. On average back then a match would require 8-11 KM covered, 25% of which was walking. Nowadays it's between 12-16 KM covered, much more of which was running at a top speed. Players play more matches with bigger cup and European campaigns, more international commitments. In 87-88 we only played 49 competitive matches. By comparison, we played 63 matches in Klopp's first season. https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot...lot-136038.htmlBack then, a good team could get away with only a few of the players being skilled on the ball, with a bunch of brutes or guys who were athletic, but not great on the ball. The game is tactically on another level too. Maybe Barnes would have shone in this day and age I think Barnes would have been successful in the modern era, pre his injury, he was big, powerful, athletic and fast, he could hold his own against the tough tackling, if he was skilful in the 80's, he definitely could be skilful now as he would have allot more protection from the Ref.
|
|
|
|
|
