Bats still can't get his head around the player with the most ability not Bing the better player. Bless him
Berbaking - he knows full well it was a silly comment nit no way will he back down lol
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 hour, 41 minutes ago
I don't see the great performances in doing what Rooney does with that ball to Valencia. Valencia is the constant not Rooney's crossing ability. If you see what I mean
--------------------
Not really, no. I don't follow.
Which natural talents Keane had over Beckham?
Keane's key attributes were his drive and turn of pace through the midfield, his ability to arrive late in the box and nab a goal (younger Keane, that is), his engine, his hard and accurate passing between the lines and his leadership. He could also fill in at CB. A truly great player no doubt. One of my favourites.
But Beckham had natural skills that Keane didn't. Keane couldn't ping the ball all around the park with unnerving accuracy and over pretty much any distance. He wasn't as a good of a goal scorer. He wasn't as good of a playmaker (more so when DB would play centrally). His engine wasn't any better than Becks (both very fit and mobile players). Shooting, passing, set plays... No brainer.
Your initial comment suggests at Cleverley could have slotted into Beckham's position in say, 99 and have been just as good. I mean, you must now realise that was a silly comment??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know why you have gone for a like for like with Keane or mentioned 99 and tom.
You speak of natural talent but it's known becks wasn't natural. Even SAF said before cantonas influence of working hard Beckham was average. Keane was never average as the fee we paid for him shows.
And yeah SAF made Tom a winner too
The Rooney point was to show how many cream over that pass yet its the simplest thing to do with Valencia hugging that line. Similarly many if Beckham's first time crosses to the strikers was about the strikers and his job was made simple for him
That's just a mix of nonsense and stupidness
Hahhaa
Not many players can ping balls around like Rooney does to Valencia. Rooney's pass is as much a skill as Valencia being there and being able to control it.
Difference is, Rooney is a bit of a one trick pony with his passing. Beckham wasn't - his range was better, his variation of pass was better, his accuracy was better. Your point about it being the strikers and Beckham's job being simple is ridiculous. How many players can or could cross a bit like him? It's a skill. Just watch Antonio Valencia struggle to do it! It doesn't matter how good the strikers are if the person feeding them can't do it.
Can you cite this Fergie/Becks reference?
Keane states in his own book and in interviews that he wasn't naturally skilful etc... and that he mostly played out of fear of letting people down, not having an education to do much else and so on. He worked as hard as anyone on his game.
As for like for like... The question was over natural talent. I want to know which natural talents Keane had over Beckham. I've listed both players key attributes. If we're to answer the question we need to define our terms. I've seen nothing from you so far that even begins to make the case, let alone enforces it.
SAF making Tom a 'winner' doesn't make Tom anywhere close to the level of player Beckham was. TC was shipped out to a lower league team where he is hardly pulling up trees. Beckham went on to captain his country, win over 100 caps and play for several of Europe's top clubs, as well as coming second in the Ballon d'Or.
Hard work will only get players so far. It needs to be supported by some innate talent to get to an elite level.
The problem here is you've backed yourself into a corner (and I think you well know it). You only have to explain on what level you feel Keane was more naturally gifted than Beckham to end the discussion. Shouldn't be hard if Beckham in reality is or was no netter than Tom Cleverley?
I think that's check mate
Beckham, had no pace, couldn't beat a player for toffee, no left foot, bad tackler, rubbish in the air.
Also his coming second in the ballon dor was entirely undeserved. Yorke was hands down the best player in the world that year and especially in the squad. Still a mystery how rivaldo won it and beckham came second and yorke wasn't even acknowledged
he wasn't slow but didn't need pace or tricks when he could use the ball as well as he did.
He tackled as well as most offensive players (scholes included)
He actually had a sect left foot although was far better on his right, as are many many top players.
Hilarious
He was slow, couldn't tackle and his left foot was crack.
Only thing hilarious here is your drivel chief.
comment by Reddevilsdouble - confident of a top 4 finish (U12215)
posted 3 hours, 24 minutes ago
Bats still can't get his head around the player with the most ability not Bing the better player. Bless him
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can see why so many people think you are thick as pigshiiit
comment by Stretty - mr mourinho (U3123)
posted 58 minutes ago
He was slow, couldn't tackle and his left foot was crack.
-----------------
1. He was average speed. Not 'slow'. Laurent Blanc was slow.
2. He made plenty of tackles, though he wasn't a specialist. That said, how many wide players or attackers are?
3. He used his left foot more than he was given credit for. Additionally, he fairly commonly produce a reverse pass/through ball with his left foot when dribbling infield from the right. I can think of a couple of beauties off the top of my head that led to great chances. Furthermore, his weaker foot was no weaker than 9/10 players' weaker foot. It's used a stick to beat him with out of desperation. Scholes didn't use his left much either. Like Beckham, he didn't need to.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 2 hours, 48 minutes ago
Not many players can ping balls around like Rooney does to Valencia. Rooney's pass is as much a skill as Valencia being there and being able to control it.
Difference is, Rooney is a bit of a one trick pony with his passing. Beckham wasn't - his range was better, his variation of pass was better, his accuracy was better. Your point about it being the strikers and Beckham's job being simple is ridiculous. How many players can or could cross a bit like him? It's a skill. Just watch Antonio Valencia struggle to do it! It doesn't matter how good the strikers are if the person feeding them can't do it.
Can you cite this Fergie/Becks reference?
Keane states in his own book and in interviews that he wasn't naturally skilful etc... and that he mostly played out of fear of letting people down, not having an education to do much else and so on. He worked as hard as anyone on his game.
As for like for like... The question was over natural talent. I want to know which natural talents Keane had over Beckham. I've listed both players key attributes. If we're to answer the question we need to define our terms. I've seen nothing from you so far that even begins to make the case, let alone enforces it.
SAF making Tom a 'winner' doesn't make Tom anywhere close to the level of player Beckham was. TC was shipped out to a lower league team where he is hardly pulling up trees. Beckham went on to captain his country, win over 100 caps and play for several of Europe's top clubs, as well as coming second in the Ballon d'Or.
Hard work will only get players so far. It needs to be supported by some innate talent to get to an elite level.
The problem here is you've backed yourself into a corner (and I think you well know it). You only have to explain on what level you feel Keane was more naturally gifted than Beckham to end the discussion. Shouldn't be hard if Beckham in reality is or was no netter than Tom Cleverley?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you are making up stuff that I never said. My comment was never about who was better out of Beck's and keano. I simply put forward my view of becks. Neither did I compare like for like becks and tom. Just that both did well under SAF. Tom going into oblivion was post saf
This is typical rdd or Robb tactics.
Reference you Want is from a speach from SAF in Dublin for Rory McIlroys Rory centre. Widely reported
comment by Reddevilsdouble - confident of a top 4 finish (U12215)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
I think that's check mate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you did "think" you wouldn't get called a liar even by admins
Sign in if you want to comment
Who had more talent
Page 5 of 5
posted on 22/1/17
Bats still can't get his head around the player with the most ability not Bing the better player. Bless him
posted on 22/1/17
Berbaking - he knows full well it was a silly comment nit no way will he back down lol
posted on 22/1/17
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 hour, 41 minutes ago
I don't see the great performances in doing what Rooney does with that ball to Valencia. Valencia is the constant not Rooney's crossing ability. If you see what I mean
--------------------
Not really, no. I don't follow.
Which natural talents Keane had over Beckham?
Keane's key attributes were his drive and turn of pace through the midfield, his ability to arrive late in the box and nab a goal (younger Keane, that is), his engine, his hard and accurate passing between the lines and his leadership. He could also fill in at CB. A truly great player no doubt. One of my favourites.
But Beckham had natural skills that Keane didn't. Keane couldn't ping the ball all around the park with unnerving accuracy and over pretty much any distance. He wasn't as a good of a goal scorer. He wasn't as good of a playmaker (more so when DB would play centrally). His engine wasn't any better than Becks (both very fit and mobile players). Shooting, passing, set plays... No brainer.
Your initial comment suggests at Cleverley could have slotted into Beckham's position in say, 99 and have been just as good. I mean, you must now realise that was a silly comment??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know why you have gone for a like for like with Keane or mentioned 99 and tom.
You speak of natural talent but it's known becks wasn't natural. Even SAF said before cantonas influence of working hard Beckham was average. Keane was never average as the fee we paid for him shows.
And yeah SAF made Tom a winner too
The Rooney point was to show how many cream over that pass yet its the simplest thing to do with Valencia hugging that line. Similarly many if Beckham's first time crosses to the strikers was about the strikers and his job was made simple for him
posted on 22/1/17
That's just a mix of nonsense and stupidness
Hahhaa
posted on 22/1/17
Not many players can ping balls around like Rooney does to Valencia. Rooney's pass is as much a skill as Valencia being there and being able to control it.
Difference is, Rooney is a bit of a one trick pony with his passing. Beckham wasn't - his range was better, his variation of pass was better, his accuracy was better. Your point about it being the strikers and Beckham's job being simple is ridiculous. How many players can or could cross a bit like him? It's a skill. Just watch Antonio Valencia struggle to do it! It doesn't matter how good the strikers are if the person feeding them can't do it.
Can you cite this Fergie/Becks reference?
Keane states in his own book and in interviews that he wasn't naturally skilful etc... and that he mostly played out of fear of letting people down, not having an education to do much else and so on. He worked as hard as anyone on his game.
As for like for like... The question was over natural talent. I want to know which natural talents Keane had over Beckham. I've listed both players key attributes. If we're to answer the question we need to define our terms. I've seen nothing from you so far that even begins to make the case, let alone enforces it.
SAF making Tom a 'winner' doesn't make Tom anywhere close to the level of player Beckham was. TC was shipped out to a lower league team where he is hardly pulling up trees. Beckham went on to captain his country, win over 100 caps and play for several of Europe's top clubs, as well as coming second in the Ballon d'Or.
Hard work will only get players so far. It needs to be supported by some innate talent to get to an elite level.
The problem here is you've backed yourself into a corner (and I think you well know it). You only have to explain on what level you feel Keane was more naturally gifted than Beckham to end the discussion. Shouldn't be hard if Beckham in reality is or was no netter than Tom Cleverley?
posted on 22/1/17
I think that's check mate
posted on 22/1/17
Beckham, had no pace, couldn't beat a player for toffee, no left foot, bad tackler, rubbish in the air.
Also his coming second in the ballon dor was entirely undeserved. Yorke was hands down the best player in the world that year and especially in the squad. Still a mystery how rivaldo won it and beckham came second and yorke wasn't even acknowledged
posted on 22/1/17
he wasn't slow but didn't need pace or tricks when he could use the ball as well as he did.
He tackled as well as most offensive players (scholes included)
He actually had a sect left foot although was far better on his right, as are many many top players.
Hilarious
posted on 22/1/17
He was slow, couldn't tackle and his left foot was crack.
Only thing hilarious here is your drivel chief.
posted on 22/1/17
comment by Reddevilsdouble - confident of a top 4 finish (U12215)
posted 3 hours, 24 minutes ago
Bats still can't get his head around the player with the most ability not Bing the better player. Bless him
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can see why so many people think you are thick as pigshiiit
posted on 22/1/17
comment by Stretty - mr mourinho (U3123)
posted 58 minutes ago
He was slow, couldn't tackle and his left foot was crack.
-----------------
1. He was average speed. Not 'slow'. Laurent Blanc was slow.
2. He made plenty of tackles, though he wasn't a specialist. That said, how many wide players or attackers are?
3. He used his left foot more than he was given credit for. Additionally, he fairly commonly produce a reverse pass/through ball with his left foot when dribbling infield from the right. I can think of a couple of beauties off the top of my head that led to great chances. Furthermore, his weaker foot was no weaker than 9/10 players' weaker foot. It's used a stick to beat him with out of desperation. Scholes didn't use his left much either. Like Beckham, he didn't need to.
posted on 22/1/17
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 2 hours, 48 minutes ago
Not many players can ping balls around like Rooney does to Valencia. Rooney's pass is as much a skill as Valencia being there and being able to control it.
Difference is, Rooney is a bit of a one trick pony with his passing. Beckham wasn't - his range was better, his variation of pass was better, his accuracy was better. Your point about it being the strikers and Beckham's job being simple is ridiculous. How many players can or could cross a bit like him? It's a skill. Just watch Antonio Valencia struggle to do it! It doesn't matter how good the strikers are if the person feeding them can't do it.
Can you cite this Fergie/Becks reference?
Keane states in his own book and in interviews that he wasn't naturally skilful etc... and that he mostly played out of fear of letting people down, not having an education to do much else and so on. He worked as hard as anyone on his game.
As for like for like... The question was over natural talent. I want to know which natural talents Keane had over Beckham. I've listed both players key attributes. If we're to answer the question we need to define our terms. I've seen nothing from you so far that even begins to make the case, let alone enforces it.
SAF making Tom a 'winner' doesn't make Tom anywhere close to the level of player Beckham was. TC was shipped out to a lower league team where he is hardly pulling up trees. Beckham went on to captain his country, win over 100 caps and play for several of Europe's top clubs, as well as coming second in the Ballon d'Or.
Hard work will only get players so far. It needs to be supported by some innate talent to get to an elite level.
The problem here is you've backed yourself into a corner (and I think you well know it). You only have to explain on what level you feel Keane was more naturally gifted than Beckham to end the discussion. Shouldn't be hard if Beckham in reality is or was no netter than Tom Cleverley?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you are making up stuff that I never said. My comment was never about who was better out of Beck's and keano. I simply put forward my view of becks. Neither did I compare like for like becks and tom. Just that both did well under SAF. Tom going into oblivion was post saf
This is typical rdd or Robb tactics.
Reference you Want is from a speach from SAF in Dublin for Rory McIlroys Rory centre. Widely reported
posted on 22/1/17
comment by Reddevilsdouble - confident of a top 4 finish (U12215)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
I think that's check mate
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you did "think" you wouldn't get called a liar even by admins
Page 5 of 5