DOC wrote:maldini is very similar to giggs in their careers except maldidni came in to one of the best milan sides of all time while giggs came to a side on the rise which had to fight for its first few titles...
maldini is a great of the game, as is giggs, maldidni has more games and ECL tittles, while giggs had more league titles and domestic cups, whoever you see as greater is depending on how you view the achievements, but both very close in terms of class
Better check that out Doc.
Maldini debuted in 1985 - Milan were a rubbish side and the league was being dominated by Juve.
They did not hit any heights till around 88.
And Ronaldo 07 - your mama is the only one over rated.
How can anyone say the guy is over rated - 5 Champions leagues you di*ckhead. Thats more than Man Utd have ever won.
he didnt win the champion league all by himself .. If chelski win the champion league 5 times, u cant say malouda is a legend !!
im not saying he's shit, im just saying he's way too overrated by u all !!
DOC wrote:maldini is very similar to giggs in their careers except maldidni came in to one of the best milan sides of all time while giggs came to a side on the rise which had to fight for its first few titles...
maldini is a great of the game, as is giggs, maldidni has more games and ECL tittles, while giggs had more league titles and domestic cups, whoever you see as greater is depending on how you view the achievements, but both very close in terms of class
Better check that out Doc.
Maldini debuted in 1985 - Milan were a rubbish side and the league was being dominated by Juve.
They did not hit any heights till around 88.
And Ronaldo 07 - your mama is the only one over rated.
How can anyone say the guy is over rated - 5 Champions leagues you di*ckhead. Thats more than Man Utd have ever won.
he didnt win the champion league all by himself .. If chelski win the champion league 5 times, u cant say malouda is a legend !!
im not saying he's cabernet, im just saying he's way too overrated by u all !!
e-football wrote:I remember those years well (and how many of you saw as much football then as now????)
Giggs had bad hamstring problems in early/mid 90s and was not that good all the time. Macca was awesome, look at his goal v Celtic, European Cup final etc. Remember he also almost went to Barcelona before Madrid.
I am not going to say Macca will go down as a better player, but whilst he was at his best (he didn't stay at his peak for long), he was better than Giggs.
It was during these days I suffered watching Liverpool under Souness EVERY Week, watching Barnes handover the flair to McManaman was about the only bright point
i to saw a lot of football when "Macca" was playing and i think ur scouse loyalties are blinding you, "macca" wasn't fit to lace giggs boots ever.
lol i love the bit hes highlighted
quote "but whilst he was at his best (he didn't stay at his peak for long), he was better than Giggs. " unquote
he didnt stay at his peak for long lol giggsy is still in fine fine form, same as last season, so if giggsys peak has lasted more then mcmanaman, then i believe giggsy is the better player???
if mcmanaman was so gd and giggsy had so many injury probs, then y is 1 retired and the otha still cleanin up in 1 of the best leagues in the world
GIGGS is the best player never to play in a world cup.
A true man utd legend but not a top 10 player ever to play the game.
I would think he would crack the top 30 to ever play football.
Ian Rush was better than Giggs, he never played in a World Cup.
If I ran the 100m every week at 12secs, but once at 9secs I would be the world Record holder.
If someone ran the 100m every week at 9.1 secs who is the better runner? The record book would say me.
So me saying McManman was a better player even for short while holds, it's the same logic. You don't have to be at the top for long periods yo be better than anyone else.
e-football wrote:Ian Rush was better than Giggs, he never played in a World Cup.
If I ran the 100m every week at 12secs, but once at 9secs I would be the world Record holder.
If someone ran the 100m every week at 9.1 secs who is the better runner? The record book would say me.
So me saying McManman was a better player even for short while holds, it's the same logic. You don't have to be at the top for long periods yo be better than anyone else.
It's completely subjective of course, as one was a forward and one isn't. I wanted to see if anyone bit with some rubbish, you replied but didn't put anything I could argue with.
e-football wrote:Ian Rush was better than Giggs, he never played in a World Cup.
If I ran the 100m every week at 12secs, but once at 9secs I would be the world Record holder.
If someone ran the 100m every week at 9.1 secs who is the better runner? The record book would say me.
So me saying McManman was a better player even for short while holds, it's the same logic. You don't have to be at the top for long periods yo be better than anyone else.
wat does the 100m sprint have 2 do with the price of eggs
If you can't work it out, there is no point in debating with you. It is showing how being the best at any one time shows you are better than someone who is above average for along time. I thought it was pretty clear
(I am pleased to see you have learned to write in English recently though)
e-football wrote:Ian Rush was better than Giggs, he never played in a World Cup.
If I ran the 100m every week at 12secs, but once at 9secs I would be the world Record holder.
If someone ran the 100m every week at 9.1 secs who is the better runner? The record book would say me.
So me saying McManman was a better player even for short while holds, it's the same logic. You don't have to be at the top for long periods yo be better than anyone else.
wat does the 100m sprint have 2 do with the price of eggs
It was an egg and spoon race done to improve the players balance
e-football wrote:If you can't work it out, there is no point in debating with you. It is showing how being the best at any one time shows you are better than someone who is above average for along time. I thought it was pretty clear
(I am pleased to see you have learned to write in English recently though)
so because kobe bryant scored 81 points in a game and jordan scored 69, does that make kobe better?
e-football wrote:If you can't work it out, there is no point in debating with you. It is showing how being the best at any one time shows you are better than someone who is above average for along time. I thought it was pretty clear
(I am pleased to see you have learned to write in English recently though)
so because kobe bryant scored 81 points in a game and jordan scored 69, does that make kobe better?
e-football wrote:If you can't work it out, there is no point in debating with you. It is showing how being the best at any one time shows you are better than someone who is above average for along time. I thought it was pretty clear
(I am pleased to see you have learned to write in English recently though)
so because kobe bryant scored 81 points in a game and jordan scored 69, does that make kobe better?
On ei s one match, in which he wa s abtter player.
If Rooney missed an open goal next week, but Nani scored a 25 yard screamer it donets make Nani a better player.
My comment was about a series of events not a one off. BIG difference. Also we all know that Rooney too can score from 25 yards, but the other runner hadn't ever run at 9 seconds.
e-football wrote:If you can't work it out, there is no point in debating with you. It is showing how being the best at any one time shows you are better than someone who is above average for along time. I thought it was pretty clear
(I am pleased to see you have learned to write in English recently though)
so because kobe bryant scored 81 points in a game and jordan scored 69, does that make kobe better?
On ei s one match, in which he wa s abtter player.
If Rooney missed an open goal next week, but Nani scored a 25 yard screamer it donets make Nani a better player.
My comment was about a series of events not a one off. BIG difference. Also we all know that Rooney too can score from 25 yards, but the other runner hadn't ever run at 9 seconds.
there is no point in me arguing with a 6 yr old
go drink ur milk and go 2 bed its 830
e-football wrote:If someone ran the 100m every week at 9.1 secs who is the better runner? The record book would say me.
So me saying McManman was a better player even for short while holds, it's the same logic. You don't have to be at the top for long periods yo be better than anyone else.
thats jst like sayin giggs is the better player because he has a better appearance record then mcmanman, and thats jst stupid
u r really 1 eyed geez
Last edited by Le King on Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
what a goal wrote:GIGGS is the best player never to play in a world cup.
Alfredo Di Stefano.
I agree. You won't get e-football to agree though because di Stefano never played for Liverpool.
And a note to e-football. Steve Mac wasn't fit to lace Dalgish's boots. Best player to have played for Liverpool in living memory until Stevie G came along. Torres might pip them both - we'll see.
"The game is about glory, doing things in style and with a flourish, going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom."
Danny Blanchflower
what a goal wrote:GIGGS is the best player never to play in a world cup.
Alfredo Di Stefano.
I agree. You won't get e-football to agree though because di Stefano never played for Liverpool.
And a note to e-football. Steve Mac wasn't fit to lace Dalgish's boots. Best player to have played for Liverpool in living memory until Stevie G came along. Torres might pip them both - we'll see.
Since when did I bring the King into this
I didn't know Stefano hadn't played at a WC
I don't think 3 other UTD greats did either, Best, Edwards and Cantona
Johnny Giles was also a great in the 70s but Eire were not!!
Ryan, you are not even near the top of players not to have made it (sorry)
Appearance records aren't the point, we are talking talent. Ian Callaghan has many records but what does that mean? Fuck all!!
And MUFC boy, if I am 6 my mental age is still 4 times yours., and my supposed one eye is better than your blindness
Last edited by Facts and Stats on Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
e-football wrote:If you can't work it out, there is no point in debating with you. It is showing how being the best at any one time shows you are better than someone who is above average for along time. I thought it was pretty clear
(I am pleased to see you have learned to write in English recently though)
what would you rather do...
climb everest once...
or climb over that hill in your back-yard for 15 years....
i think thats basically what your trying to say.
lol
Tommy: We've lost Gorgeous George.
Brick Top: Well, where'd you lose him? He ain't a set of fucking car keys now, is he? And it ain't as if he's incon-fucking-spicuous now, is it?
e-football wrote:If you can't work it out, there is no point in debating with you. It is showing how being the best at any one time shows you are better than someone who is above average for along time. I thought it was pretty clear
(I am pleased to see you have learned to write in English recently though)
what would you rather do...
climb everest once...
or climb over that hill in your back-yard for 15 years....
