madras Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had better heading technique, was superior on the floor, could take a mean set piece and strike a ball from distance, had better goalscoring instincts, had more intelligent movement, was lethal infront of goal and in his earlier days was a brilliant creative player. Their are similarities between the two in terms of they can both rough up defenders but Shearer was simply streets ahead in every area. check how many headers shearer scored from open play, not nearly as many as you'd think. yes shearer was better than carroll, but neither are fantastic footballers, thats the point. they are just very good at that aspect of the game. YOu might be on your own with this particular brand of pickle maddass. was shearer a good enough footballer to go in midfield ahead of sellars or rob lee. no, he was a very good goalscorer and leader but technically as a footballer ian wright was probably better and that does not mean i'd prefer him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had better heading technique, was superior on the floor, could take a mean set piece and strike a ball from distance, had better goalscoring instincts, had more intelligent movement, was lethal infront of goal and in his earlier days was a brilliant creative player. Their are similarities between the two in terms of they can both rough up defenders but Shearer was simply streets ahead in every area. check how many headers shearer scored from open play, not nearly as many as you'd think. yes shearer was better than carroll, but neither are fantastic footballers, thats the point. they are just very good at that aspect of the game. YOu might be on your own with this particular brand of pickle maddass. was shearer a good enough footballer to go in midfield ahead of sellars or rob lee. no, he was a very good goalscorer and leader but technically as a footballer ian wright was probably better and that does not mean i'd prefer him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 I'd say he's more Big Dunc than Big Al. Very good striker but nowhere near a world-class player which his fee would suggest. had ferguson no injury worries at the time and been 20 he'd have went for a bigger sum. remember at the time fergusons fee wasn't far off world class player type fees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had better heading technique, was superior on the floor, could take a mean set piece and strike a ball from distance, had better goalscoring instincts, had more intelligent movement, was lethal infront of goal and in his earlier days was a brilliant creative player. Their are similarities between the two in terms of they can both rough up defenders but Shearer was simply streets ahead in every area. check how many headers shearer scored from open play, not nearly as many as you'd think. yes shearer was better than carroll, but neither are fantastic footballers, thats the point. they are just very good at that aspect of the game. YOu might be on your own with this particular brand of pickle maddass. was shearer a good enough footballer to go in midfield ahead of sellars or rob lee. no, he was a very good goalscorer and leader but technically as a footballer ian wright was probably better and that does not mean i'd prefer him. You're only saying that because you're a massive racist [/ian Wright] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had better heading technique, was superior on the floor, could take a mean set piece and strike a ball from distance, had better goalscoring instincts, had more intelligent movement, was lethal infront of goal and in his earlier days was a brilliant creative player. Their are similarities between the two in terms of they can both rough up defenders but Shearer was simply streets ahead in every area. check how many headers shearer scored from open play, not nearly as many as you'd think. yes shearer was better than carroll, but neither are fantastic footballers, thats the point. they are just very good at that aspect of the game. YOu might be on your own with this particular brand of pickle maddass. was shearer a good enough footballer to go in midfield ahead of sellars or rob lee. no, he was a very good goalscorer and leader but technically as a footballer ian wright was probably better and that does not mean i'd prefer him. Shearer was a better finisher imo, but Wright was clearly better allround player, especailly for countering sides. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had better heading technique, was superior on the floor, could take a mean set piece and strike a ball from distance, had better goalscoring instincts, had more intelligent movement, was lethal infront of goal and in his earlier days was a brilliant creative player. Their are similarities between the two in terms of they can both rough up defenders but Shearer was simply streets ahead in every area. check how many headers shearer scored from open play, not nearly as many as you'd think. yes shearer was better than carroll, but neither are fantastic footballers, thats the point. they are just very good at that aspect of the game. YOu might be on your own with this particular brand of pickle maddass. was shearer a good enough footballer to go in midfield ahead of sellars or rob lee. no, he was a very good goalscorer and leader but technically as a footballer ian wright was probably better and that does not mean i'd prefer him. Shearer was a better finisher imo, but Wright was clearly better allround player, especailly for countering sides. thats what i'm saying man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer was a far better all round striker in every dimension than Ian Wright. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Madras is right, Shearer used to burst past defenders in his early days, but that was before he signed for us. Carroll is far more mobile than the Newcastle version of Shearer, although Shearer was technically better all round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer was a far better all round striker in every dimension than Ian Wright. I agree. I think footballing snobbery is getting in the way of judging what attributes a centre forward needs. Shearer showed signs of pretty much everything needed when taking into account his whole career. The fact he managed to re-invent himself after a couple of injuries is a testiment to how complete a centre forward he was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had better heading technique, was superior on the floor, could take a mean set piece and strike a ball from distance, had better goalscoring instincts, had more intelligent movement, was lethal infront of goal and in his earlier days was a brilliant creative player. Their are similarities between the two in terms of they can both rough up defenders but Shearer was simply streets ahead in every area. check how many headers shearer scored from open play, not nearly as many as you'd think. yes shearer was better than carroll, but neither are fantastic footballers, thats the point. they are just very good at that aspect of the game. YOu might be on your own with this particular brand of pickle maddass. was shearer a good enough footballer to go in midfield ahead of sellars or rob lee. no, he was a very good goalscorer and leader but technically as a footballer ian wright was probably better and that does not mean i'd prefer him. You're only saying that because you're a massive racist [/ian Wright] Obviously, that and he's s*** on Channel 5. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer was a far better all round striker in every dimension than Ian Wright. I agree. I think footballing snobbery is getting in the way of judging what attributes a centre forward needs. Shearer showed signs of pretty much everything needed when taking into account his whole career. The fact he managed to re-invent himself after a couple of injuries is a testiment to how complete a centre forward he was. Nice point, thanks for sort of re involving me Sewell son Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnypd Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 shearer was a fantastic footballer. only player i've seen who lost the ball less than him was zidane. no, he wasn't full of tricks and flicks, and there were fuckloads of more "skillful" footballers out there. but his ball retention, which is a mix of utilising his physique, first touch, close control and footballing intelligence, was better than 99.9% of footballers. though carroll is bigger and stronger he's not got the same ability to shield a ball and keep possession for his side. Carroll on the other hand is still quite raw, though improving all the time. in pretty much every match he'll do that thing where his first touch goes about 10 yards away from him and he has to fight to get it back. he's quite awkward in his limbs but has managed to fill out and use his physique to mask that. shearer also had far better passing and, in particular, crossing. while he also had a great range of finishing - from first time long range shots, powerful volleys, chips and lobs, side footers into the bottom corner, through the keeper's legs etc. carroll's simply not in the same league as a natural finisher, though again, he has a great attitude and is improving all the time. in the past 6 months or so he's developed a good long range shot, though it is by no means perfect. in essence, carroll's had to work a lot harder developing the footballing side of his game, and has been a relatively late bloomer, whereas shearer looked comfortable at these aspects immediately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer was a far better all round striker in every dimension than Ian Wright. all round striker maybe, all round footballer, no. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Madras is right, Shearer used to burst past defenders in his early days, but that was before he signed for us. Carroll is far more mobile than the Newcastle version of Shearer, although Shearer was technically better all round. Only after his injury at Goodison Park. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 All Ian Wright did was finish madras man.?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 shearer was a fantastic footballer. only player i've seen who lost the ball less than him was zidane. no, he wasn't full of tricks and flicks, and there were fuckloads of more "skillful" footballers out there. but his ball retention, which is a mix of utilising his physique, first touch, close control and footballing intelligence, was better than 99.9% of footballers. though carroll is bigger and stronger he's not got the same ability to shield a ball and keep possession for his side. Carroll on the other hand is still quite raw, though improving all the time. in pretty much every match he'll do that thing where his first touch goes about 10 yards away from him and he has to fight to get it back. he's quite awkward in his limbs but has managed to fill out and use his physique to mask that. shearer also had far better passing and, in particular, crossing. while he also had a great range of finishing - from first time long range shots, powerful volleys, chips and lobs, side footers into the bottom corner, through the keeper's legs etc. carroll's simply not in the same league as a natural finisher, though again, he has a great attitude and is improving all the time. in the past 6 months or so he's developed a good long range shot, though it is by no means perfect. in essence, carroll's had to work a lot harder developing the footballing side of his game, and has been a relatively late bloomer, whereas shearer looked comfortable at these aspects immediately. shearers crossing was good if always the same and a tad mythologised like solanos. carroll can do it but rarely has the chance as if he's out wide theres no-one to cross to. there was an occasion when he put three crosses over in one game for mcloven that ginola would've been proud of and the dane missed them all (tad harsh as i think a couple were good saves). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Madras is right, Shearer used to burst past defenders in his early days, but that was before he signed for us. Carroll is far more mobile than the Newcastle version of Shearer, although Shearer was technically better all round. Only after his injury at Goodison Park. I didn't think he was the same player even after his injury at Blackburn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 All Ian Wright did was finish madras man.?? you didn't watch him enough then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 All Ian Wright did was finish madras man.?? you didn't watch him enough then. I'll give it to Wright that he was good in the FA CUp, in 7 seasons at Arsenal he scored 54 FA Cup goals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Carroll isn't worth a penny over 7-8m imo. Very limited footballer but has a big heart and good in the air. I wouldn't even say he was that good in the air. Several times today he directed the ball into no man's land. He can climb and will get his head on the ball more often than not but that's not heading ability. As for the Shearer comparision... fucking hell Madras being contrary for the sake of it again. Shearer even towards his last few years was more mobile than Carroll is today. Watching him today he looked very sluggish and seamed to struggle getting around the pitch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had everything he needed. Carroll needs more than he has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4 Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had everything he needed. Carroll needs more than he has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had everything he needed. Carroll needs more than he has. What a post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Ian Wright was a very underrated striker. He was far from just a finisher. He was a give and go man and had a footballing brain on him. The number of chipped goals he scored or goals scored with his back to goal showed he had great awareness and intelligence. Not a patch on Shearer though. He was more of an Andy Cole type striker to your Shearer type. In his era I can only think of one centre-forward that was similar to Shearer in terms of an all-round game and that was Batistuta. I remember when we signed Shearer and the argument was that he and Sir Les were too similar and the same was said of Big Dunc when we signed him yet Sir Les and Ferguson were two completely different type of forwards to Shearer. I remember a Jimmy Grieves article on Shearer describing how he'd never seen a centre-forward like him in terms of all-round play. We'll certainly never see a like again, for Newcastle, England and in the game in general. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted April 17, 2011 Share Posted April 17, 2011 Shearer had far more to his game than Wright madras.Better finisher with either foot,better in the air,better at holding the ball up,better at crossing and whilst he was at Blackburn,better at taking on and beating players too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts