|
|
Post by kustokie on Apr 3, 2015 16:28:05 GMT
I know that Sir Bobby played for the shit as well but I'm going to be extremely disappointed when he loses his record to that spanner-faced gerontophile. As usual the old Trafford loving media can't wait for King Wayne to cement his legendary status. It says so much about the modern game that an international under achiever can wriggle his way into the record books like this. There should be asterix next to the Rooney in the record books because Sir Bobby had a lot other great goal scorers either playing alongside him and/or competing with him for playing time - Hurst, Greaves, Hunt to name of few. We were so blessed with good forwards in those days that my personal favorite, Greaves couldn't get into the England side for 66 WC Final. What do folks think about Rooney's competition for goals and playing opportunities compared to Sir Bobby? |
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Apr 3, 2015 16:28:18 GMT
Swings and roundabouts then rob. Absolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 3, 2015 16:42:35 GMT
Most of fergies strikers scored goals for fun due to the great teams built around them
Cole
York
Horse head
RVP
sheringham
Ole
And now Rooney
After watching his teams you get the sense Heskey would have been prolific in those utd teams.
Cole in particular missed countless chances for utd but still managed to score a shed load.
Rooney had been extremely lucky. If he had stayed at Everton or gone to Newcastle I don't think he would have scored the goals he has. I'm not saying he's not a bad player. He is very good but goal scoring aside he has not moved to that world class level often thrown at him
|
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Apr 3, 2015 16:50:06 GMT
Rooney may break the record, but he hasn't played great for England. In South Africa, he was super shit, but then, so were they all. Him reaching Charlton's record tells me one thing; the record doesn't mean anything. Internationals play far more games than back then. I think a better record would be a goals to games ratio, after all, if one player gets to play 50 games and another gets to play 100, he's bound to score more goals (depending on what position he plays, of course). Another thing people don't consider is the competition. An international friendly against the Faroe Islands, verses a World cup game against Germany and the value of those goals scored are very different, especially when the opposition are so poor, you rack up 3 or 4 goals in an easy game. Rooney and Sir Bobby's goals per game ratio are almost identical. SB 49 goals in 106 games WR 47 goals in 103 games |
|
|
|
Post by StokieAsh13 on Apr 3, 2015 16:54:19 GMT
He ain't Messi/ Ronaldi granted, but are we really saying Suarez, Aguero etc are above him?
Games for United - 473
Goals - 229
Assists - 118
So by that he has contributed to 347 goals in 473 appearances and people question his consistency.
And we can go back to yes he hasn't done in it on the international stage but how many England players have.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Apr 3, 2015 16:59:21 GMT
Bobby Charlton as someone said earlier was not a striker as such but more an attacking midfielder, so the comparison with Rooney is not strictly fair to Charlton.
One of the great United players Dennis Viollet scored 159 goals in 259 games and got just two England caps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 16:59:49 GMT
2 points here: 1. Charlton was a midfield player whereas Rooney is a Striker 2. Charltons goals came against low level teams such as Germany, France, Holland, Portugal, Spain, Russia, Argentina, Scotland etc. whereas Rooneys goals were against stiff opposition such as Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Moldova, Malta, San Marino. Enough said really, oh and Charlton has won the World Cup whereas Rooney never will not especially while Hodgson is manager Rooney in comparison isn't good enough to lace Bobby Charltons Boots Spot on. While both excellent, Charlton is a gentleman, a credit to Man Utd.... an ambassador for the club, Rooney however is vermin, a granny shagging, embarrassment. Nothing to do with footballing ability mind, just a reason why I hate the fact he will be considered "England's Greatest" |
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Apr 3, 2015 17:00:47 GMT
2 points here: 1. Charlton was a midfield player whereas Rooney is a Striker 2. Charltons goals came against low level teams such as Germany, France, Holland, Portugal, Spain, Russia, Argentina, Scotland etc. whereas Rooneys goals were against stiff opposition such as Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Moldova, Malta, San Marino. Enough said really, oh and Charlton has won the World Cup whereas Rooney never will not especially while Hodgson is manager Rooney in comparison isn't good enough to lace Bobby Charltons Boots Spot on. While both excellent, Charlton is a gentleman, a credit to Man Utd.... an ambassador for the club, Rooney however is vermin, a granny shagging, embarrassment. Nothing to do with footballing ability mind, just a reason why I hate the fact he will be considered "England's Greatest" I don't think he will be considered that to be honest - he'll just be record goalscorer. |
|
|
|
Post by StokieAsh13 on Apr 3, 2015 17:01:17 GMT
Bobby Charlton as someone said earlier was not a striker as such but more an attacking midfielder, so the comparison with Rooney is not strictly fair to Charlton. One of the great United players Dennis Viollet scored 159 goals in 259 games and got just two England caps. So has Rooney always played as a striker? No he hasn't. He played a long time as a number 10. This season he's still Uniteds top scorer and spent most of it playing CM. |
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Apr 3, 2015 17:03:08 GMT
Agreed, amazing record. Think he did get a medal yeah. If I remember correctly (and I might be wrong!) Greaves didnt get a medal initially and only received one within the last 5 or 6 years after a campaign. Then he sold it last year.  |
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 3, 2015 17:05:04 GMT
2 points here: 1. Charlton was a midfield player whereas Rooney is a Striker 2. Charltons goals came against low level teams such as Germany, France, Holland, Portugal, Spain, Russia, Argentina, Scotland etc. whereas Rooneys goals were against stiff opposition such as Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Moldova, Malta, San Marino. Enough said really, oh and Charlton has won the World Cup whereas Rooney never will not especially while Hodgson is manager Rooney in comparison isn't good enough to lace Bobby Charltons Boots Not many can lace his boots so that's a bit unfair. Rooney is a brilliant player and an England legend. Anything else is non-footballing jealous hatred. |
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 3, 2015 17:09:49 GMT
Bobby Charlton as someone said earlier was not a striker as such but more an attacking midfielder, so the comparison with Rooney is not strictly fair to Charlton. One of the great United players Dennis Viollet scored 159 goals in 259 games and got just two England caps. So has Rooney always played as a striker? No he hasn't. He played a long time as a number 10. This season he's still Uniteds top scorer and spent most of it playing CM. Rooney has played for this countries most dominant team for over a decade now. |
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Apr 3, 2015 17:10:06 GMT
I've watched a fair amount of recordings Ash of Charlton and Rooney, the first thing that you notice is that Charlton is genuinely two footed and could hit these old case balls with tremendous power.
It also appears to me that Charlton, with the ball, moves quicker than Rooney and goes past players more easily. He scored vital goals in the World Cup and of course in the 1968 European Cup win over Benfica.
|
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Apr 3, 2015 17:11:53 GMT
So has Rooney always played as a striker? No he hasn't. He played a long time as a number 10. This season he's still Uniteds top scorer and spent most of it playing CM. Rooney has played for this countries most dominant team for over a decade now. Isn't that what the best players tend to do, by and large? |
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Apr 3, 2015 17:12:29 GMT
Rooney is a very good player, but not as good as he was a couple of years ago any longer! Still a very good player though!
|
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 3, 2015 17:13:48 GMT
2 points here: 1. Charlton was a midfield player whereas Rooney is a Striker 2. Charltons goals came against low level teams such as Germany, France, Holland, Portugal, Spain, Russia, Argentina, Scotland etc. whereas Rooneys goals were against stiff opposition such as Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Moldova, Malta, San Marino. Enough said really, oh and Charlton has won the World Cup whereas Rooney never will not especially while Hodgson is manager Rooney in comparison isn't good enough to lace Bobby Charltons Boots Not many can lace his boots so that's a bit unfair. Rooney is a brilliant player and an England legend. Anything else is non-footballing jealous hatred. Rooney is a national disgrace, who as mentioned earlier, should never have played again, after the South African debacle. |
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 3, 2015 17:14:46 GMT
I've watched a fair amount of recordings Ash of Charlton and Rooney, the first thing that you notice is that Charlton is genuinely two footed and could hit these old case balls with tremendous power. It also appears to me that Charlton, with the ball, moves quicker than Rooney and goes past players more easily. He scored vital goals in the World Cup and of course in the 1968 European Cup win over Benfica. I don't know why there is a debate over Rooney and Charlton. Sir Bobby was one of the best footballers the world has ever seen whereas Rooney is a good player. It could be argued that the reason we won the World Cup in 1966, apart from home advantage, was the fact that in Charlton and Moore we had two, if not the two, best players in the World at that time. If Charlton was playing now it would cost north of £100million to sign him. |
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 3, 2015 17:17:25 GMT
Rooney has played for this countries most dominant team for over a decade now. Isn't that what the best players tend to do, by and large? Well no not really. Manchester Utd has really been the exception under Ferguson I would say. |
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Apr 3, 2015 17:23:24 GMT
Isn't that what the best players tend to do, by and large? Well no not really. Manchester Utd has really been the exception under Ferguson I would say. Ronaldo has been at Real Madrid since 2009 and doesn't seem to be looking to go anywhere. Messi has been at Barca since he was a kid. Ditto Xavi and Iniesta. Schweinsteiger has been at Bayern since he was a kid. Zlatan moves a lot but generally from the top club in one country to the top club in another. As has Robben. Gerrard was at Liverpool his entire career. Lampard was at Chelsea for a decade. Bergkamp was at Arsenal for a decade. |
|
|
|
Post by StokieAsh13 on Apr 3, 2015 17:25:50 GMT
So has Rooney always played as a striker? No he hasn't. He played a long time as a number 10. This season he's still Uniteds top scorer and spent most of it playing CM. Rooney has played for this countries most dominant team for over a decade now. You're kind of missing the point. Has he not earnt his place there? Even when he was rumoured to leave in 2013 who was after him? Mourinho? Most managers rave about him. It's not a coincidence. |
|
|
|
Post by StokieAsh13 on Apr 3, 2015 17:27:58 GMT
I've watched a fair amount of recordings Ash of Charlton and Rooney, the first thing that you notice is that Charlton is genuinely two footed and could hit these old case balls with tremendous power. It also appears to me that Charlton, with the ball, moves quicker than Rooney and goes past players more easily. He scored vital goals in the World Cup and of course in the 1968 European Cup win over Benfica. I've not said Rooney was better than Charlton not would I. I'm simply saying he's a lot better than most give him credit for. I hope we get a player like that for 10 years. |
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 3, 2015 17:56:55 GMT
Well no not really. Manchester Utd has really been the exception under Ferguson I would say. Ronaldo has been at Real Madrid since 2009 and doesn't seem to be looking to go anywhere. Messi has been at Barca since he was a kid. Ditto Xavi and Iniesta. Schweinsteiger has been at Bayern since he was a kid. Zlatan moves a lot but generally from the top club in one country to the top club in another. As has Robben. Gerrard was at Liverpool his entire career. Lampard was at Chelsea for a decade. Bergkamp was at Arsenal for a decade. I'll give you the Barca crowd, but apart from Messi they are not goalscorers. |
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 3, 2015 18:00:11 GMT
Rooney has played for this countries most dominant team for over a decade now. You're kind of missing the point. Has he not earnt his place there? Even when he was rumoured to leave in 2013 who was after him? Mourinho? Most managers rave about him. It's not a coincidence. I don't think I am. It is a lot easier to gain goals, and assists, at a club that has dominated their league for such a period of time. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2015 18:04:45 GMT
2 points here: 1. Charlton was a midfield player whereas Rooney is a Striker 2. Charltons goals came against low level teams such as Germany, France, Holland, Portugal, Spain, Russia, Argentina, Scotland etc. whereas Rooneys goals were against stiff opposition such as Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Moldova, Malta, San Marino. Enough said really, oh and Charlton has won the World Cup whereas Rooney never will not especially while Hodgson is manager Rooney in comparison isn't good enough to lace Bobby Charltons Boots Spot on. While both excellent, Charlton is a gentleman, a credit to Man Utd.... an ambassador for the club, Rooney however is vermin, a granny shagging, embarrassment. Nothing to do with footballing ability mind, just a reason why I hate the fact he will be considered "England's Greatest" thing is that for all we kbow charlton could have got up to just as much dodgy shit as rooney has however the media was COMPLETELY different back then.they didn't hound players to death 24/7 looking for ways to entrap them or destroy their image and we didn't have people taking snaps every second on camera phones or slaggy chavs looking for a quick buck to enhance their careers in glamour modelling.the world is a very different place in that respect nowadays |
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Apr 3, 2015 18:10:47 GMT
George Best ?
I think you can be pretty sure mick Charlton was one of footballs decent guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Apr 3, 2015 18:16:59 GMT
Ronaldo has been at Real Madrid since 2009 and doesn't seem to be looking to go anywhere. Messi has been at Barca since he was a kid. Ditto Xavi and Iniesta. Schweinsteiger has been at Bayern since he was a kid. Zlatan moves a lot but generally from the top club in one country to the top club in another. As has Robben. Gerrard was at Liverpool his entire career. Lampard was at Chelsea for a decade. Bergkamp was at Arsenal for a decade. I'll give you the Barca crowd, but apart from Messi they are not goalscorers. But they are top players who stayed at a top club for years, which you were saying they didn't do? And it was a criticism of Rooney that he's done the same, I don't quite get why? |
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 3, 2015 18:35:19 GMT
I'll give you the Barca crowd, but apart from Messi they are not goalscorers. But they are top players who stayed at a top club for years, which you were saying they didn't do? And it was a criticism of Rooney that he's done the same, I don't quite get why? No not at all. My point was that it would have been a lot easier to score in that team, than in any other team in the Division, in the last decade and more. |
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Apr 3, 2015 18:38:16 GMT
But they are top players who stayed at a top club for years, which you were saying they didn't do? And it was a criticism of Rooney that he's done the same, I don't quite get why? No not at all. My point was that it would have been a lot easier to score in that team, than in any other team in the Division, in the last decade and more. But he's earned his place at the top table so it seems unfair to give him stick for that - especially since most top players are going to stay at top teams if they get the chance. It's not like any hairy-arsed chancer could be plonked up front in that team and have the same record. |
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 3, 2015 18:41:22 GMT
I don't believe he has earned that place.
|
|
|
|
Post by manumasochist on Apr 3, 2015 18:41:33 GMT
Rooney may break the record, but he hasn't played great for England. In South Africa, he was super shit, but then, so were they all. Him reaching Charlton's record tells me one thing; the record doesn't mean anything. Internationals play far more games than back then. I think a better record would be a goals to games ratio, after all, if one player gets to play 50 games and another gets to play 100, he's bound to score more goals (depending on what position he plays, of course). Another thing people don't consider is the competition. An international friendly against the Faroe Islands, verses a World cup game against Germany and the value of those goals scored are very different, especially when the opposition are so poor, you rack up 3 or 4 goals in an easy game. Rooney and Sir Bobby's goals per game ratio are almost identical. SB 49 goals in 106 games WR 47 goals in 103 games So that's part of my point. What about the quality of opposition? What about the fact that Rooney plays up front and Charlton, midfield? I wonder how many goals Charlton would have racked up against San Marino or Trinidad? Charlton's International opponents - Argentina
- Austria
- Brazil
- Bulgaria
- Colombia
- Czechoslovakia
- East Germany
- Ecuador
- Finland
- France
- Hungary
- Ireland
- Italy
- Luxembourg
- Mexico
- N.Ireland
- Netherlands
- Norway
- Peru
- Poland
- Portugal
- Romania
- Scotland
- Soviet Union
- Spain
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- United States
- Uruguay
- Wales
- West Germany
- Yugoslavia
Rooney's International Opponents - Algeria
- Andorra
- Argentina
- Australia
- Azerbaijan
- Belarus
- Belgium
- Brazil
- Bulgaria
- Chile
- Costa Rica
- Croatia
- Czech Republic
- Denmark
- Ecuador
- Egypt
- Estonia
- France
- Germany
- Honduras
- Hungary
- Iceland
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Japan
- Kazakhstan
- Liechtenstein
- Macedonia
- Mexico
- Montenegro
- Netherlands
- Northern Ireland
- Norway
- Peru
- Poland
- Portugal
- Russia
- San Marino
- Scotland
- Serbia Monten.
- Slovakia
- Slovenia
- Spain
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Trinidad/Tobago
- Turkey
- Ukraine
- United States
- Uruguay
- Wales
|
|
