Page 31 of 41

Re: In the Press

Posted: 28 Jun 2019, 18:44
by ilkley62
NottinghamWhite wrote:https://www.expressandstar.com/sport/20 ... larke/

Sniffer has his say ;)
Thanks for posting, enjoyed that

Re: In the Press

Posted: 28 Jun 2019, 23:07
by Deleted User 5081
NottinghamWhite wrote:https://www.expressandstar.com/sport/20 ... larke/

Sniffer has his say ;)
I enjoyed that. :thumbup:

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 04:33
by PockWhite
NottinghamWhite wrote:https://www.expressandstar.com/sport/20 ... larke/

Sniffer has his say ;)
Great read that!
Sniffer was my boyhood absolute hero!

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 07:18
by ChilwellWhite
Excellent read that.

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 07:42
by Costy
A good read but claiming that they were better players than the current Man City crop is a bit fanciful for me.

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 09:05
by Deleted User 728
This now comes down to conditioning, training facilities, medical improvements and all the jazz associated with comparing players from different eras.

Personally, I think our team between 1970-74 under The Don is the best of all time and would beat any side, club or international, either by playing, kicking or outwitting them off the park ..

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 09:08
by Wigan White
Costy wrote:A good read but claiming that they were better players than the current Man City crop is a bit fanciful for me.
I may be showing a little bias, but I don't think it is being fanciful.

Just to show a few comparisons in similar positions.

Kyle Walker v Paul Reaney
John Stones v Norman Hunter
Fernandinho v Billy Bremner
De Bruyne v Johnny Giles
David Silva v Peter Lorimer
Raheem Sterling v Eddie Gray

People can make their own minds up about who is/was the better player.

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 12:39
by Deleted User 5081
Wigan White wrote:
Costy wrote:A good read but claiming that they were better players than the current Man City crop is a bit fanciful for me.
I may be showing a little bias, but I don't think it is being fanciful.

Just to show a few comparisons in similar positions.

Kyle Walker v Paul Reaney
John Stones v Norman Hunter
Fernandinho v Billy Bremner
De Bruyne v Johnny Giles
David Silva v Peter Lorimer
Raheem Sterling v Eddie Gray

People can make their own minds up about who is/was the better player.
Without being biased in any sense of the word and 100% truth.... all of the superstars on the right were far superior to any of the players on the left. Honestly there is no comparison. Those guys you mentioned don't bleed for their clubs, they just bleed the money out of the clubs. The Leeds players playing for 100 quid a week are the ones who were true champions and fought for the family they were.

Today's footballers are too soft and molly cuddled and i would love to see some hard men in football. I don't condone violence in anyway but you can be a hard man without being violent too. Thankfully we had a whole team of hard men which contributed to their success.

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 12:41
by Deleted User 5081
rigger wrote:This now comes down to conditioning, training facilities, medical improvements and all the jazz associated with comparing players from different eras.

Personally, I think our team between 1970-74 under The Don is the best of all time and would beat any side, club or international, either by playing, kicking or outwitting them off the park ..
100% agree

Re: In the Press

Posted: 29 Jun 2019, 12:52
by Deleted User 5081
Costy wrote:A good read but claiming that they were better players than the current Man City crop is a bit fanciful for me.
How can you say it's fanciful?

The players these days are not as together as those Leeds players. Back in the seventies they didn't need so many physio's, no sports psychologists, and 90% less coaches and scouts etc. You had your core manager, an assistant, a team doctor or if you're lucky a physio included and a few coaches and scouts.

Today's footballers have everything done for them, (i'm not begrudging any of them what they get either) but, they are less inclined to be loyal to a club than they used to be. Sniffers interview he says he played for 100 quid a week which in my books was the difference between players of old and modern players. The focus was on the profession not the financial gains.

Modern footballers are still great players but they are too wishy washy when it comes to the game itself. they are certainly not like a family and many of them are not as adaptive on the field as the older generation of players. This is the reason why i believe that Leeds team were and if they could have their time again would hammer the likes of Man City, Barcelona and anyone else. They were true professionals, with a fire in the belly in every game, that modern day players haven't got but only a select few can muster.