scratch
Q-School Graduate
Are we talking about Chris Waddle pop superstar and chart legend here?
Or Chris Waddle average premiership footballer?
Or Chris Waddle average premiership footballer?
That sir, is your opinion.Chris Waddle was a lot better than average and in his prime at Marseille in the early 90's. He was a player of considerable quality and had a lot more skill and verve that David Beckham who was basically a hard working player with a good attitude and the ability to hit decent passes from wide right. Not much more. Still, there is no educating some people on a subjective thing like football.....
From Wikipedia:
That sir, is your opinion.
From Wikipedia:
In general, an opinion is a belief about matters commonly considered to be subjective, i.e. it is based on that which is less than absolutely certain, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts. An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts. Opinions rarely change without new arguments being presented. It can be reasoned that one opinion is better supported by the facts than another by analyzing the supporting arguments.[1] In casual use, the term opinion may be the result of a person's perspective, understanding, particular feelings, beliefs, and desires. It may refer to unsubstantiated information, in contrast to knowledge and fact-based beliefs.
Think a few on here are too young to remember Waddle playing, at Marseilles he was brilliant. In his prime he would terrify defenders and had fantastic skill and pace, a real game changer. Beckham could cross from the right midfield and bend a free kick. Beckham was good but Waddle was way better.
Spot on. It's just that Beckham didn't come out and say that Waddle was an average player, not worthy of inclusion in his top 1000 list (premiership at that). To come out with this on Beckham's retirement makes Waddle look like a bitter prat IMO.Does this really have to be a Beckham v Waddle debate?? Surely both could be good players![]()
Spot on. It's just that Beckham didn't come out and say that Waddle was an average player, not worthy of inclusion in his top 1000 list (premiership at that). To come out with this on Beckham's retirement makes Waddle look like a bitter prat IMO.
At 47, I'm plenty old enough to remember Waddle well and he was a very good, but not great player, as was Beckham. Being great is very subjective though and different players have different strengths and abilities, which may or may not work well within the framework that is the team in which they played. I wouldn't put Beckham in the greats alongside Messi, Maradona, Best or Pele either, but he was one of the top midfielders of his generation.
So Beckham couldn't dribble. He could drop a long ball into the path of a forward half a pitch away though or just pass to Giggs and let him dribble. That he couldn't head the ball didn't matter so much either because he was often delivering the ball to be headed and couldn't be in 2 places at the same time.
It does seem Waddle was a better player when at Marseille than he was for Spurs or England. Unfortunately, not many of us were watching the French league 25 years ago.
You and your brother in law are wrong.I pretty much agree with Chris Waddle.
Beckham was a superb crosser of the ball and even better at selling shirts, pants, perfume and club merchandise.
A GREAT footballer, he was not.. Very good at what he was good at but pretty limited really. My brother in law is from Salford, is an OT season ticket holder (last 25 years) and is Man U through and through and he completely agrees. When the Man U team he figured in was in their prime, Beckham was the 4th best midfielder in their side after Keane, Scholes and Giggs. All much better than Becks but without the pop star wife and dream marketing looks.
A good player but great? Not in a million years...