gray Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 But then Ginola with that flick, flick, bang goal, pure talent Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I went for Robert because I was too young to properly remember Ginola. Zog was just another "could've been" Could've been about as good as Ruel Fox. Never had the ability to become as good as the other two in this thread. I bet you didn't think that at the end of the 05/06 season. No, because I'm a ludicrously optimistic man. In hindsight he was never going to be as good as those two. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oakie Doke Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I went for Robert because I was too young to properly remember Ginola. Zog was just another "could've been" Could've been about as good as Ruel Fox. Never had the ability to become as good as the other two in this thread. I bet you didn't think that at the end of the 05/06 season. No, because I'm a ludicrously optimistic man. In hindsight he was never going to be as good as those two. I agree. I remember comparing him to C. Ronaldo back then. :-[ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. TC Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 almost all the replies saying Rupert the bear, but the poll is tied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Ginola, although he was a bit before me. Robert always had the potential and the skill, but he just wasn't consistent enough. Could have been a great player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hard to achieve that level of brilliance on a consistent basis, like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TêteDeMaure Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Laurent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hard to achieve that level of brilliance on a consistent basis, like. I know it is, but as opposed to struggling to be brilliant consistently, he looked as though he just wasn't pulling his finger out. If he just upped the work rate and effort, who knows what could have been? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4 Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Ginola wasn't that consistent either... after a solid first season he fizzled out even quicker than Robert did. Largely due to Dalglish apparently. Remember seeing a documentary on him on French tv around 97, Ginola was saying it was hard enough for him to understand English with Keegan, but with Dalglish it was a nightmare. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hard to achieve that level of brilliance on a consistent basis, like. I know it is, but as opposed to struggling to be brilliant consistently, he looked as though he just wasn't pulling his finger out. If he just upped the work rate and effort, who knows what could have been? Can't live with "what ifs" man. Not a personal dig, I just hate the whole philosophy. He was what he was. If he did have the attitude/application to go with it (at all times) then he wouldn't have been playing for us in the first place... Still think he was fucking ace. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hard to achieve that level of brilliance on a consistent basis, like. I know it is, but as opposed to struggling to be brilliant consistently, he looked as though he just wasn't pulling his finger out. If he just upped the work rate and effort, who knows what could have been? Can't live with "what ifs" man. Not a personal dig, I just hate the whole philosophy. He was what he was. If he did have the attitude/application to go with it (at all times) then he wouldn't have been playing for us in the first place... Still think he was fucking ace. Still sends shudders down my spine that our first choices that summer were Zenden and Jeffers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 They might have been brilliant as well, who knows? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 They might have been brilliant as well, who knows? Now come on! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 They might have been brilliant as well, who knows? Now come on! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hard to achieve that level of brilliance on a consistent basis, like. I know it is, but as opposed to struggling to be brilliant consistently, he looked as though he just wasn't pulling his finger out. If he just upped the work rate and effort, who knows what could have been? Can't live with "what ifs" man. Not a personal dig, I just hate the whole philosophy. He was what he was. If he did have the attitude/application to go with it (at all times) then he wouldn't have been playing for us in the first place... Still think he was fucking ace. the thing about him tracking back was bit flawed, because robert was at his best on the counter attack and tbf i would want him in the final third of the pitch, as he could score from almost anywhere and could create chances no matter what, robert always put in 1 very good cross / through pass a game which would create a great chance he got 24 assists in 1 season ffs that's probably more than this whole team Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hard to achieve that level of brilliance on a consistent basis, like. I know it is, but as opposed to struggling to be brilliant consistently, he looked as though he just wasn't pulling his finger out. If he just upped the work rate and effort, who knows what could have been? Can't live with "what ifs" man. Not a personal dig, I just hate the whole philosophy. He was what he was. If he did have the attitude/application to go with it (at all times) then he wouldn't have been playing for us in the first place... Still think he was fucking ace. the thing about him tracking back was bit flawed, because robert was at his best on the counter attack and tbf i would want him in the final third of the pitch, as he could score from almost anywhere and could create chances no matter what, robert always put in 1 very good cross / through pass a game which would create a great chance he got 24 assists in 1 season ffs that's probably more than this whole team Agree completely, we've got a guy who tracks back very diligently in Jonas but i doubt that's worth as many points as those assists and goals. Just look at the league table. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikri Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Hard to achieve that level of brilliance on a consistent basis, like. I know it is, but as opposed to struggling to be brilliant consistently, he looked as though he just wasn't pulling his finger out. If he just upped the work rate and effort, who knows what could have been? Can't live with "what ifs" man. Not a personal dig, I just hate the whole philosophy. He was what he was. If he did have the attitude/application to go with it (at all times) then he wouldn't have been playing for us in the first place... Still think he was fucking ace. the thing about him tracking back was bit flawed, because robert was at his best on the counter attack and tbf i would want him in the final third of the pitch, as he could score from almost anywhere and could create chances no matter what, robert always put in 1 very good cross / through pass a game which would create a great chance he got 24 assists in 1 season ffs that's probably more than this whole team What I'd give now for a lazy bastard who could provide 24 assists. Nah, far better to have hard working, proper footballers who offer fuck all but will track back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Robert was more productive but if it came down to it I would rather have Ginola as he was a better all round player. Charlie is not in the same class as either of the above mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Robert was more productive but if it came down to it I would rather have Ginola as he was a better all round player. Better looking too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 I used to love it when we were winning and in the 90th minute Ginola used to carry the ball to the opposition corner flag and just basically take the piss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Robert was more productive but if it came down to it I would rather have Ginola as he was a better all round player. Better looking too. Stronger, hehlfy looking hair too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themanupstairs Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 David Ginola for me, probably because he was here first. The goals against Man U and Ferencvaros were moments of pure magic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gray Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Robert was more productive but if it came down to it I would rather have Ginola as he was a better all round player. Better looking too. Stronger, hehlfy looking hair too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Imagine having both Ginola & Robert in the same team? Wouldn't that be great? Ginola for me. It'd get a bit congested on the left. could play ginola through the middle as he did play there very well on a couple of occasions. thats one of the reasons he gets my vote. he was more affective than people think because he took the pressure off our defence when he got the ball in a way robert couldn't and i just think he caused the opposition more problems than robert and was much better to watch. kept purely to stats robert probably edges it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alan Shearer 9 Posted May 22, 2009 Share Posted May 22, 2009 Laurent Robert. Anyone slagging him off is deluded cretin, great player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now