Fantastic old pic of Greavsie from Holsten76 on gg

[lily_lane]

Greavesie and Venables used to nip out at half-time for a quick pint at the Corner Pin,

LOL! :grin: Did the barman have them lined up on the counter ready and waiting?! :beer:

 

[lily_lane]

Smooth:
http://www.jamd.com/image/g/3133702

:clap: WOW! What a stylish pic. Bobby Moore just oozed class and poise, and only 23 at the time. Astonishing. :bowdown:

And yep, "gay midget" totally sums up Yul Brynner TCO. :up:

 

[lily_lane]

Cool pictures. Although lets face it, none of even the best players back then could compete in today's top level @ their peak playing careers.

..Er, that's a bold statement, my friend. :razz:

I would suggest they may have been lesser *athletes* but many were much more skillful players on the ball - the heavy old fashioned ball they played with back then.

Modern equipment in every sport has allowed technical advances, but not necessarily better natural skill. So there! :wink:

 

[whatsappnin]

WOW! Eek I don't know, so I'll believe you.....(she says trying to pretend she's young).....

dont know if it's true but I heard some of the players use to leg it into the pub outside the ground for a whiskey at half time!!!

any truth in that?

 

[TheChosenOne]

I would say the 70s myself. With those World in Action documentaries with a diseased lung in a jar. By then people who'd smoked for decades (my parents) were hooked so it was hard to be condemnatory.

My old Man used to smoke the Players Navy Cut
and me ma smoked Senior Service.

Dad stopped aged about 60 and Ma stopped when she was about 30 odd.

I know 'cos I used to nick one out of each packet every morning when I was about 13-14

 

[GosfordSpur]

Liberty, not sure if you are trying to wind up us old-timers but if not, are you seriously suggesting that 60's stars such as Peter Osgood, Bobby Moore, George Best, Denis Law, and our very own Jimmy Greaves, Dave Mackay, Martin Peters and Cliff Jones would not be superstars today? To quote Mark Twain "tis best to keep quiet and appear stupid than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt"!

 

[SpurSince57]

In terms of fitness, Liberty's right. Put the Double Side up against our current first XI and they'd be run off the park. The other point is that footballers are a lot bigger these days—we refer to Keane as a 'little guy', but I'd hazard a guess that he's taller than any of the Double Side except Smith, Brown and Norman. Big Maurice towered over almost everyone else in the game, but I'm pretty sure he was only just over six foot, and Smithy was only 5' 10". I was really surprised when I bumped into him in the street when I was 16 or 17 and realised he was slightly shorter than me.

But in terms of skill, no contest. It's incredible what the old-timers could do with those heavy leather balls and heavy boots on pitches that often looked as if they'd had cattle grazing on them. It's really hard for anyone in their 20s to appreciate that.

Really, though, it's as pointless a comparison as Lewis v. Ali v. Marciano.

 

[Has1978]

In terms of fitness, Liberty's right. Put the Double Side up against our current first XI and they'd be run off the park. The other point is that footballers are a lot bigger these days—we refer to Keane as a 'little guy', but I'd hazard a guess that he's taller than any of the Double Side except Smith, Brown and Norman. Big Maurice towered over almost everyone else in the game, but I'm pretty sure he was only just over six foot, and Smithy was only 5' 10". I was really surprised when I bumped into him in the street when I was 16 or 17 and realised he was slightly shorter than me.

But in terms of skill, no contest. It's incredible what the old-timers could do with those heavy leather balls and heavy boots on pitches that often looked as if they'd had cattle grazing on them. It's really hard for anyone in their 20s to appreciate that.

Really, though, it's as pointless a comparison as Lewis v. Ali v. Marciano.

Ali stops Marciano in the 11th. Takes a decision vs Lewis. He was an athlete way ahead of his time - and more of a hero to me than any politcian, rockstar or (other) sportsman ever will be. And heavyweight boxers now are shite.

Oh and on topic - Liberty is right. It's frighteningly quick now. I watched the first famous 4-3 Liverpool Newcastle game the other week - and even watching that game I could tell the players were slower! And that was only 12 years ago.

 

[TheChosenOne]

Going on from this, it might help to mention that before Jimmy Hill managed to get the £20 per week maximum wage ceiling scrapped in 1961 a lot of players were on season money and summer wages at reduced rates.

They also didn't have the back room experts medical teams and dieticians.

An elite a few got endorsements money but nothing like todays players.

 

[yiddotilidie]

I really must read his autobiography asap.

Definitely recommended.

 

[Ironskull]

Cool pictures. Although lets face it, none of even the best players back then could compete in today's top level @ their peak playing careers.

It's probaly true, but having said that, how many of today's players would be able to play effectively if they had to do so under the old conditions? heavy pitches, heavy footballs, heavy tackles? If you've ever seen footage of Stanley Matthews at work then you might well have been surprised at how blindingly skillful he was. No way should we get carried away with the idea that players of old were duffers. I reckon that in many respects they were at least equal to today's players.

What the players of Greaves' generation had that today's players don't have, was car-free streets and very little else to do but play football. Kids would play football for hours even on school days. Nowadays the streets and the parks are empty and even the best kids play little football compared with their predecessors. Spurs once had a player, Johnny Brooks I think who grew up on a farm and spent much of his formative years chasing and catching chickens. If the kids weren't playing football they were out doing something else that made them fit and lithe. So few of those players ever met a coach until they joined a professional club, and even then the coaching was unsophisticated by comparison. In a great many respects they were similar to modern third world players, most of whom develop the skills we're so jealous of in free-flowing street-football without a coach in sight.

Yes modern football is faster and the players are more tactically aware, and physically stronger and fitter, but I doubt very much whether their basic skills levels are equal to those of yesterday's players except perhaps at the very highest levels, where coaching methods such as the Coerver method, and the concentration of talent at a few clubs has created a highly skilled core. Even then it's arguable as to whether players such as George Best would have been better players in today's day and age, or whether modern coaching requirements would have eliminated the improvisation that was an important part of his game.

As for entertainment value, again it's difficult to make comparisons, but I want to go home now.

 

[chinaman]

Ball skills are much more difficult to acquire than physical fitness. I'm sure the masters of old would have been as fit as the modern day players had they been subjected to the same training. But few of today's players will ever acquire the level of skills of yesteryears.