Re: ronaldo
 

Re: ronaldo
 

For a start Sir Matthews may have been the best winger in his period.. but he would not have a chance in the modern game.. not enough pace, only average at passing and shooting.
I did say in an earlier post that the main reason for myself supporting United was the exciting way they play..and Ronaldo sums that up,thank God your not the Manager ,I suspect it would be boring stuff!

Re: ronaldo
 

You’re wrong there, Matthews in his prime would have had the beating of most if not all full backs in today’s game. His physical fitness was legendary. It had to be to be able to hold down a place in the then first division at 50 years of age (1965).

And Ronaldo wouldn’t have had a prayer in Matthews’ day. Not with the hard tackling, shoulder charges and a ball that weighed a ton when wet. It was no lightweight when dry either.

So you saw Matthews play did you? Was that in a previous life? Or was that when Stanley Matthews played as a guest for Manchester United?

Couldn’t pass or shoot?

Ask Stanley Mortensen, or any of the great England forwards of the day, if Matthews couldn’t pass. The reason why Mortensen scored so many goals for Blackpool and England was the accuracy of Matthews’ centres.

11 goals for England including a hat-trick seems to say he can shoot. In spite of being a goal maker he still managed to score 71 goals.

Better still have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Matthews

I don’t care who you support but you were totally out of order telling people not to comment unless they supported Man U.

Re: ronaldo
 

You did get my goat up Jambutty... what you were saying was that Ronaldo should not be in the team, and that he delayed United's winning of the EPL.. that is total rubbish.
Like most fans I have only seen Sir Stan in old footage, and so I may well be wrong , I never doubted his talent and ability in the 1950's .. but in todays game he would not be a factor.

Re: ronaldo
 

Three different clubs in thirty-odd years. Bandwagon jumper! :D

Re: ronaldo
 

Not like thee and me Wynonie I'm a Rover with over 50 years in, and your a Stanley with ^@>? years in:D:p

Re: ronaldo
 

48 years (apart from the bit in the middle when there was no Stanley to support!).

Re: ronaldo
 

I never stated that Ronaldo shouldn’t be in the team. Kindly don’t put words in my mouth.

The only total rubbish is your inability to read and understand what I wrote.

During the course of last season Man U lost 6 matches, many by the odd goal and drew 5. In some of those matches Ronaldo’s selfish desire to win the match or draw it by scoring an almost impossible goal rather than passing the ball to another player with a better chance of scoring cost United the game.

His arrogant and selfish attitude has been much less prevalent last season than the season before and hopefully will be a more complete team player next season.

On the other hand Ronaldo’s goal against Aston Villa, I think it was, was pure genius and lightning fast thinking. That one where he flicked the ball with his right heel to nutmeg a defender and score. It was featured in BBC’s Goal of the Season and in my opinion should win it, more so than his other entry – that free kick into the top corner. Then there was that other goal (I can’t remember which match it was) where the ball arrived at thigh height and he just thighed it into the net. Again another spontaneous reaction to an almost impossible situation.

Apart from his super fast reactions Ronaldo only has his speed of foot and the ubiquitous ‘step overs’. Stanley Matthews would leave the defender wrong footed and more often than not sat on the deck as he ghosted past to present yet another near perfect cross into the box. Stanley Matthews didn’t need speed of foot (although he was plenty fast enough to outstrip most defenders) to get past a defender, he had the skill and guile to leave the man standing even at the age of 50.

Not a factor in today’s game? Get real! Players of Matthews’ calibre would hold their own in any era.

Re: ronaldo
 

must agree Mathews would get in any team today, but yer missing the best of em all IMHO, Finney, he was even played out of natural position fer the national side to accomodate Mathews, could play great in other positions.:)

Re: ronaldo
 

I’ll go along with Tom Finney being one of the greats. It’s a moot point who was best.

Don’t forget that in those days players played for the love of the game and all had full time jobs outside of football. With a maximum wage of £20, but only during the football season, so they had to. If you lived in Preston and wanted a plumber it could easily have been Tom Finney who attended.

There were no ‘prima donnas’. In fact the ‘stars’ of the day would travel on the same bus as the supporters to a match.

Re: ronaldo
 

Ah! now that explains things, 48yrs of watching Accrington Stanley must eventually take some effect.. but you have my admiration, I reckon you could stand up to even the most evil torture mankind has ever designed!:)

Re: ronaldo
 

I can't have this.. I have edited your original post Jambutty.. but these first lines tell me you are saying Ronaldo has been a liability over the last two seasons... now I would take that as saying he should not have been in the team, if a player is, as you say, is making the team lose as many games than win.. then he should not be playing in the team.. yes?
I did see a program on the 1957 FA cup final which compared todays game with the 50's.. the only bad tackles I saw were on the goalkeepers, I got the impression that the game was more gentlemanly in those days, the really hard tackling came about in the early 70's

Re: ronaldo
 

I know, I know, supporting my hometown club, eh?...sheer madness and a concept which is totally alien to most Man U fans!

Re: ronaldo
 

Oooo! I am sorry! I wasn’t aware that I was supposed to bow to your opinion just because you “can’t have this”. Get real!

Once again in your arrogant conceit you are putting words in my mouth. I never stated that Ronaldo has been a liability these last two seasons.

You do know how to read and understand English I presume, although that point is in serious doubt.

I would remind you yet again that we are all entitled to voice our own opinions. If you don’t like them then the solution is simple – don’t read them.

The so called bad tackles that you saw were within the rules of the day and were deemed to be fair. The reason they were changed is because goalkeepers were a standing or advancing target, making a collision more dangerous for the goalkeeper. Although some forwards came out of a collision knowing full well that they had been in one. Today, when a goalkeeper jumps to catch or punch a ball he does so with one leg raised, presumably to try and protect himself.

But you are right, back in the fifties the players played to the rules but they still played hard. Free kicks and throw ins were taken from the spot the offence took place not some distance nearer the opposing goal. Players didn’t feign injury or try to get someone sent off. No one argued with the ref except possibly the team captain with a polite enquiry. No one mouthed obscenities at the officials and they certainly didn’t spend half the time spitting.

Re: ronaldo
 

To get back on thread, I dont think man u should let ronaldo go for another season at least, he is now coming into his own as a team player as well as a world class player in his own right, I have a feeling that united are looking reliant on one player again, but nobody thought united could get by without cantona, beckham and others, but they always managed, fergie has the next ronaldo lined up already, and when the time is right, he will introduce the replacements and let the 'stars' go, regardless of who they are.