D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Pointless these comparison debates, they always deteriorate in to tribalism, petty comments and no one ever changes their mind.
Pointless these comparison debates, they always deteriorate in to tribalism, petty comments and no one ever changes their mind.
West Ham are the only English league team to win the World Cup so clearly they’re the best ever...True plus city only team to ever get over 100 premier League points so clearly the best lol
West Ham are the only English league team to win the World Cup so clearly they’re the best ever...
It’s not “ridiculous” at all - it’s a defined criteria being used - Premier LeagueIt’s ridiculous to suggest the other games being played didn’t have an impact. Neither team only played Premier League games in the respective seasons and this meant rotating players. Arsenal didn’t play in any finals the year they went unbeaten in the league and didn’t even get to the semis of the Champions League. We had three “finals” in a very short time when you consider we had to win on the final day of the season and still won the lot.
But I’m not surprised you’re narrowing the parameters so you don’t have to say Man Utd and can bring Liverpool last year into the conversation.
And there’s the inevitable Liverpool inclusion.It’s not “ridiculous” at all - it’s a defined criteria being used - Premier League
I already included the 99 team ?Their achievements over the season were outstanding and will prob never be matched and will prob go down as the Greatest Season
Just looking in at the Premier League then yes I would include Liverpool last season as it was a season where record were broken
It’s very hard to judge but i think going on ability wise and the way they played plus results it would be the City 100 points plus one followed by Liverpool last year
And there’s the inevitable Liverpool inclusion.
And there’s the inevitable Liverpool inclusion.
What’s wrong with including a team that had the biggest winning margin in the history of Prem ? Ability wise , the way they played surely even you can see that
There are so many caveats behind last season and I’m sure you accept that.What’s wrong with including a team that had the biggest winning margin in the history of Prem ? Ability wise , the way they played surely even you can see that
I imagine you saw a lot of the 1968 team!?Of course they would. Just as our team right now would beat the 1968 team with Best, Charlton and Law without breaking a sweat.
There are so many caveats behind last season and I’m sure you accept that.
I imagine his comment is based on the relative fitness levels of the footballers in different eras, which I think makes it a fair point. By the middle of the second half a modern day side would be running rings round them.I imagine you saw a lot of the 1968 team!?
It’s just a generation thing. Fitness and tactical awareness alone would see them through with ease.I imagine you saw a lot of the 1968 team!?
But by that time the '68 team would be 6-0 up against the current defence.I imagine his comment is based on the relative fitness levels of the footballers in different eras, which I think makes it a fair point. By the middle of the second half a modern day side would be running rings round them.
Fitness has certainly improved I grant you.It’s just a generation thing. Fitness and tactical awareness alone would see them through with ease.
I don't agree with the first comment, as the modern defenders may appear useless in today's game, but compared to the defender of that era their pace and fitness would be ahead. Perhaps the '68 team would nab one or two goals in the first half, but in the second half when fitness starts to tell, the modern day side would nab 4 or 5 goals back. Obviously we're just being hypothetical though. The old side with new fitness training makes them a different team entirely so not really the same comparison.But by that time the '68 team would be 6-0 up against the current defence.
The old team with access to modern fitness training would murder the current lot.?
Actually, who knows?
Harry Maguire would probably beat Best for pace. ?I don't agree with the first comment, as the modern defenders may appear useless in today's game, but compared to the defender of that era their pace and fitness would be ahead. Perhaps the '68 team would nab one or two goals in the first half, but in the second half when fitness starts to tell, the modern day side would nab 4 or 5 goals back. Obviously we're just being hypothetical though. The old side with new fitness training makes them a different team entirely so not really the same comparison.![]()