Bobo Glimt vs Spurs - 2.2 a gift

Joao Pedro sent off Chelsea, 2 yellows

Arsenal pelanty overturned at Newcastle for goalie getting
a touch. They are getting there but still loads of debates
over var.

So Pedro's banned for the Ajax game? they've literally got no strikers left apart from George and he look average.

Livarpool should have brought the rat on.

Wrong yet again mes, Dixie scored his record 60 goals in 1927/28.

The first Tesco store opened in 1931 in Edgeware

Guiu can play for Chelsea.

Injuries mounting after cwc...

oh forgive for I have sinned, it was the 1930's Tesco shop workers he was banging in hat tricks against every instead, well that makes a HUGE difference

Interesting stats on Fred Dixie thanks, the matches I seen him for Brazil he wasn't very good, neither was Hulk, but maybe they just had off days, it was small sample.

mes, Dixie had scored over 200 goals before Tesco opened their first small store, please try harder

Malay, yes Fred was obviously a better player than those who just judge him on the 2014 World Cup (like mes) would think. at least he did score at that tournament, more than Hulk did

I see hulk is still playing at a very high level aged 39.

Not sure why anybody would question he was a decent player.

Obviously doesn't stand comparison to Messi and ronaldo
but still a very good striker.

I would not dispute he has  been a decent striker YHTL, but if we agree on that then Fred must have been too as the stats don't lie.

Hulk may well have been a better player to watch but internationally at least Fred was a better goal scorer.

Expectations are high of a Brazilian centre forwards, perhaps
unrealistcally so at times, especially for those of us that grew up
watching pele, and each new striker is hyped to fever pitch
and will never hit them heights, it's simply not possible.

Measuring each striker on actual ability is hard as we
don't have full view of them like we do epl strikers.

So judgements are made on what we see and how we feel
about their game. For me Hulk is/was a class above Fred
but others will not agree and nobody can be sure as
there are no sliding doors to see how one compares against
the other if roles are swapped.

Richarlison looked to be decent, but maybe isn't a 9,and
suffers in comparison for that very comparison, as likely
did Fred and hulk and so many other wanabee peles.

Undoubtedly with information you provided Dixie, Fred had a brilliant career, it's maybe just a case Brazil have had so many outstanding players over the years, the bar is high to get his achievements fully recognised from afar.

We've danced this dance before Dixie and you still believe even given the context of 20's/30's football in which was a largely amateur era due to the fact that so many players at the top level then could not dedicate their lives to the game and had to have real jobs, training maybe once a week, that Dean should be up there in the pantheon of great strikers due to statistics, and in particular, a one off great season in which he filled his boots against Postman, milkman, cinema ushers, sheep shearers and future Tesco workers

You stand alone my friend, very alone, in the pouring down rain under dark thundery skies with only your faint shadow for company thanks to the dimming light that the nearby Victorian Lamppost affords you, with football connoisseurs such as myself catching sight of your sunken silhouette through the smeary windows in the warmth of our own homes, looking on with a tinch of sympathy, but a heavy dose of condescending righteousness

Kind Regards

Congratulations on winning the first prize in the "football was only invented in 1992" competition mes

As ever i have to point out that you can only play against your contemporaries, please pay attention.

There have been many great goal scorers in English top flight football history, but only ONE has scored 60 league goals in a season.

His name was William Ralph Dean aka Dixie.  A name immortalised in the record books of our national game. He played against the best defenders of the time, the same as modern day strikers do.
Indeed defenders back then were allowed to dish out a lot more to attackers than they can get away with these days.


And no other player has even managed to get 50 in an English top flight season. The record has remained for nearly a century and will likely NEVER be beaten, if it was so easy to
score goals back in the day then why could nobody else get near Dixie's tally ? 

And to disprove your "one off wonder" slur, Dixie scored 44 in the 1931/32 season, which sits THIRD on the all time list for our top flight.

Dixie's name is etched in footballing stone for eternity.

We know all this, you've told us all before about the statistical genius, you must be a distance relative to be so passionate about someone you've never seen live, or maybe because Everton historically do not really have any historically great forwards in the game, not at world level anyway. The football then is probably on a par with non league football today, how could it not be, the professionalism, athleticism, skill level, evolution and advancements of coaching abilities, sports science, recovery techniques etc, you wouldn't herald a striker from non league as a true great with because he has a great record at that level would you.

A great forward of his time in a largely amateur era, but would never be mentioned in the list of great strikers in most people's minds given the context.

Also told you before that Maradonna is the greatest player ever and his best years were pre 92.

Kind Regards.

their brazilian by birth, lots of these brazilians are whipped off to europe before theyve ever kicked a ball on copobaccana beach

You should be bigging up the 1930’s Mesmerised after all that was when Arsenal dominated.

Talking out of your arris again mes, you have no regard for footballing history do you lad ?  If you play against the best opponents in any era and set records then you are a true great but you seem unable to understand such a basic maxim.  You seem to be suggesting that top players of the past could not have adapted to the modern game which frankly is a bizarre take as they would be privy to all of the latter day benefits that you mention.

FYI Everton have probably had more renowned forwards than most other English clubs, Edgar Chadwick, Dixie, Tommy Lawton, Alex Young, Joe Royle, Bob Latchford, Graeme Sharp etc etc.

Dixie also holds another record - the most goals for one club in the top flight - 310.

I think the real reason you are crabbing Dixie's achievements is that when he set his record in 27/28, he needed to score a hat trick on the last day to reach 60 for the season - luckily he was up against Arsenal

Captain - yes i agree mes should big up Arsenal in the 30s, if dixie was the great goal scorer then Herbert Chapman was the great innovator, first with Huddersfield and then Arsenal. One of the greatest managers our game has ever seen.

You are trying to over complicate a simple point, which is when nobody other die hard Everton fans is going to hold up players from that era as one the true greats, yes it's all relative, but it's like in tennis, nobody takes records and statistics from the Pre Open-era seriously either. It's pure guess work to suggest that player then could adapt now, whether they could or couldn't is by the by, nobody knows, so we can only take those that have been apart of the truly professional era that's encompassed all the modern advancements that have evolved over time, as players who are apart of the conversation of 'true greats'.

It was probably the late 50's/early 1960's onwards where football became much more professional, particularly the 60's+  first £100 week player in Johnny Haynes, abolition of the maximum wage rule, the ending of severe transfer restrictions (Retain and transfer system), greater TV and media exposure thanks to broadcasters and highlights programs which led to a sharp increase of personal endorsements deals, that's where today's modern commercialisation of the game really has it's roots. European football began during this time and that also help to make the game more professional as player at the very top began to compete with the best on the continent and not just England.

It's a case of sod's law for your hero who didn't get the chance to prove however good he  may have been in today's game which is as athletic, skillful and professional as the game could ever possible be, fined tuned to the max, we've reached the limits of what an elite player looks like and is like. Putting players from a bygone era such as the 20's where training was probably once a week on a cow's patch of a training pitch, the goal keeper was an overweight bus conductor smoking 20 Benson & Hedges a day and the defenders he was running past were straight in the pub after the game, doesn't really cut it does it.

Kind Regards.

and the defenders he was running past were straight in the pub before* the game, doesn't really cut it does it.

Aristotle suffers similar comparisons

mes has convinced me everyone* in the past was short, fat, and stupid.
*with the exception of a north London club, of course.

That's just a dumb post kincsem, nobody mentioned a players height or intellect, the working class jobs that were mentioned where because that's the occupations most players back then actually had, they have to have real jobs, football for a lot of them was a side thing they fitted in around what they did for a living to put food on the table. There was no modern day welfare state back then as safety net, they worked, or they died. Kind Regards.

dumb post?

you said "so we can only take those that have been a part of the truly professional era"
perhaps modern players would be ineffective with a heavy wet leather ball, muddy pitches, and 11 against 11 (no substitutes), unlike the present 16 against 16.

No doubt they would, in the same way modern tennis player would struggle with wooden tennis racquets, but what has that got to to with the price of cheese? This is about truly great players, players from 100 years ago through no fault of their own can't be in that conversation as in every which way it was largely an amateur era for all the aforementioned reasons laid bare in previous posts. Kind Regards.

Is your proof payment to players makes them better than players who are/were not paid?

In the last few days I finished reading "The greatest game ever played".
An amateur golfer beat two top professional players in the 1913 US Open.
One of the players he beat won the (British) Open a record six times (still a record).

Perhaps sprinters now cover the 100 metres in a faster time, but shoe technology and synthetic tracks help (and "supplements").
Bob Hayes ran 10.0 in the 100m final in the 1964 Olympic Games on a chopped up lane one of a cinder track (the inner lane used by the 800m, 1500m, 5000m, 10000m runners).

The way you state things you would think human DNA has improved massivly in the last few decades.

100 years ago a bloke could just about run 100m in 10.4 seconds

Probably 12 seconds from 1 end of pitch to other, when sober.

It's still competitive though as opponents had same
fitness disadvantage to modern day.

Doubtless if dixie was a genius of a player word
of mouth would pass it down, same as golfers of that
era, and cricketers are.

When I was at school dixie was a stat alongside bon accord
therefore my feeling is that he wasn't a genius, but
obviously must have been very good, and very resilient.

Might have been sold when they got relegated, but
no need back then, just crack on in division 2.

Of course being so resilient he would likely have
been able to withstand modern training, so it's possible
he could have improved even more than his contemporaries
and attained genius status under modern conditions.

Is your proof payment to players makes them better than players who are/were not paid?


Being paid more meant football was starting to become their one and only job, where they could train more and put their full focus into the sport.

It's highly unlikely top sprinters today can win medals cheating and get away with it, that doesn't stop them trying though. Bolt was the only one that often lined up in Olympic finals that had never tested positive for drugs or missed a drugs test, 40+ odd years ago it was much easier to evade the drugs testers, which is why there's been talk for many years from the IAAF about scraping World records held back then or any one in on the list.

Kind Regaards.

I will try again.

You might have noticed that the England manager has only a choice of about 70 English players from the Premier League.
For a World Cup a few years back I did the analysis.
The England manager had to pick a 23 man squad from about 70 players.

There are 22 teams of 11, or 242 players in the Premier League.
What has happened is Rupert Murdock bought the television rights to football for big money.
The Premier League clubs got a share of the new money.
The Premier League pay more money for higher placings in their league.
To attain higher placings in the league (and more money) the clubs bought better players from Argentina, Brazil, France, Italy, Spain, Germany.
The local players probably did not get better, the choice was bigger (worldwide) and the lesser English players were replaced by better foreign players.

You might know this as at one time Arsenal was largely a French club.
I looked at the current Arsenal Wiki page.
Their 12 player squad are from ESP; FRA; ESP; ENG; ECU; BRA; ENG; NOR; BRA; ENG; BRA; NED - three English players in the twelve or 25% English.
If players are better it is (my opinion) due to selecting from the world instead of selecting from England.

It is a replacement of players with better players, not players improving.
This imagined improvement in players is only selecting better players from outside to replace the lesser players in England.

The idea of greatly improved humans is flawed logic.
The famous Italian horse breeder and trainer Federico Tesio (speaking in the 1940s) ridiculed the idea of great improvement in modern horses over previous generations.
He commented that if genetic improvement could be so easily attained all he would have to do to make giraffes out of horses would be to hang the hay nets high above the horses and their necks would stretch.

Your comment about everyone being on drugs 40+ year ago except Usain Bolt is anothr unsubstantiated statement.

Your comment about everyone being on drugs 40+ year ago except Usain Bolt is anothr unsubstantiated statement.


Will you learn to read ffs, where did I say EVERYONE WAS ON DRUGS 40+ year ago ?

Along with insinuating I said everyone was short or dumb earlier that played football in the 20's when I said no such thing.

Along with your dumb post about how I simply thought players were better just because they paid, completely oblivious to the obvious thought process that the abolition of the maximum wage cap would allow for players to become more professional by only having one job to concentrate on football.

Stop putting words into mouth or better still learn to read and digest posts properly before banging away at the keyboard you mug.

Kind Regards.

"we've reached the limits of what an elite player looks like and is like " says mes.

Firstly, how can you possibly know that ?

Secondly, if that is true then evolution seems to have let us down looking at a lot of the "elite" players on show each week

kincsem - good analysis, interesting stuff.

YHTL - Dixie could have moved following that relegation but he loved the club too much and knew that they would likely go straight back up.

Of course they did, with him scoring 39 goals.   The next season they won the first division again (just the 44 goals for Dixie and the next year the FA cup.

Yeah, it's not happening today, sadly

Good on him for staying, but finances are huge today.

It's like trying to explain the ABC's to children, and you children keep me busy schooling you

Of course we've reached the limits of what an elite player looks like and is like.

Elite players play at the elite level, and at the current elite level, they could not possible be any fitter or any better prepared for a football match, their wholes lives revolve around it, back in the 20's it was more like a hobby, it wasn't a guaranteed living where you dedicated your life to training, eating well, sleeping well and doing absolutely everything you could to win a football match.

Why is this so difficult for people to understand, that a player from 100 years ago should not be in the conversation as one of the true greats of the game, as said earlier, you'd probably have to start as a bare minimum from the late 50's/early 60's onwards for all the aforementioned reasons given in previous posts as when true professionalism began to kick in.

Whether Dixie Dean could have played in the much more advanced and complete era of football that is today is whole other topic for conversation, and only hypothetical conclusions could ever be drawn, but it's by the by in regard to this debate, the true greats of the game, and statistics from 20's don't quite cut it.

Kind Regards.

hypothetical ?  Like claiming we have reached the limits of what an elite player looks like and is like you mean

A scientist you ain't son.

So exactly how much fitter and better prepared could a modern day Pro actually be then Dixie with all the millions spent on state of the art training centres and facilities, highly trained coaching staff who spent years attaining qualifications, all the possible medical tests they could do to make sure the player is as fit as possible and as healthy as possible at all times...........you tell me......Son

To dip in to your vernacular, we are still evolving you MUG

Ergo, we most probably have not reached the limits of what a human can or will achieve physically.

So the foremost evolutionary geneticists of the age are mistaken, as an anonymous hampton wick on a betting forum knows better

You try to use stats from the 1920's to claim a player is one of the greatest and now because you've had your lard arse served to up on a silver platter over that debate, you've deliberately decided to be as pedantic and as obtuse as possible by prattling on about evolution and what a player might look like in thousands of years time

For the record you absolute mug, humans have been steadily getting taller and taller over time especially in industrialised countries and as modern football proves, there's is an optimum height for a footballer that can dribble with the ball well in today's game, which is why you don't see  many great 6ft plus players dribbling like a Hazard or a Messi or a Maradonna, all smaller players with lower centres of gravity that helps with stability when running at pace, as humans get much taller on average they'd be even worser footballers in that sense. You rarely even get 6ft6 plus defenders because any taller than that and they too are useless as movement becomes a problem.

So we have reached the limits of what an elite players looks like - especially considering how finely honed and tuned they are thanks to be given all the modern benefits that nutrition, training and recovery techniques could possible give them.

Keep digging down Dixie, you'll be in Australia soon.

Kind Regards.

"modern is better because of fitness" makes no sense.

If 10 year old Dixie Dean was brought here in a time machine he could have the same training etc as modern players so why couldn't he be a top player

Yeah, it's likely he would improve for modern training
and diet. Seems to have had the physicality that
would allow him to build from fitness training.

Of course I'm guessing, but that's all we have.

I didn't say he couldn't, I didn't say he wouldn't.

Players today are primed for action and reared like race horses, being in the best possible physical condition against other players in their best possible physical condition is football maxed out, you can then compare abilities. Given we have scouting networks and clubs using scientific data to sign the best players, the avereage ability of players is obviously high.

The era 100 years ago was largely amateurish, lots of players training maybe once week, having actual real jobs and not having the best diet to be in the best physical shape to play therefore not being able to get the very best out of themselves, this is all common sense but I actually have to explain it to people as to why you can't hold up players from that era as true greats in comparison with modern greats for all reasons listed on nearly every single posts I've made.

Kind Regards.

The evolutionary geneticists are actually predicting we will probably be SHORTER in the future you MUG  .
Back to school for you son.

And if you have to be a super fit elite athlete, avoiding off field activities that would affect performance to play in the modern game,  then how can you pick a player from 30/40 years ago as your choice for the greatest ever ?  Especially one with the off field reputation of Maradona (one N, note) ffs .  You are defeating your own argument.

You haven't given any real reasons mes apart from the fitness angle.

In the 1920s the best played against the best.

In the 2020s the best play against the best.

Both eras have great players.  It really is that simple.

It's obvious you are fishing now, because you can honestly not be as thick as you and be genuine.

Why will we be shorter?

Everything is still set up to give height an advantage

After all the tall blokes were shot in ww1 there's not
been any advantage in being short.

Mes appears to have accepted he has lost that argument with that typical response.

YHTL - there are a few papers out there hypothesising on the fact we may be shorter in the future. different reasons given too, including elements of natural selection, the advance of technology meaning we do not need such large brains or larger stature, or simply a need to use less energy. It's interesting stuff but of course is just hypothetical.

It's not true that pros 100 years ago trained once a week and spent most of their time as milkmen or whatever.

There was a maximum wage so they weren't getting rich but they were still earning more than the average. Some of them had jobs they did in the summer.

If the question is how would a player from one era do in another then 'fitness' is irrelevant, as if they were in the modern era they would have modern fitness.

We were 6ft average 40k years ago

Pretty sure we are heading back, (up to 5ft 9 from 5 ft 4) but with smaller brains.

Hey ho.

I've pinged several mini essays trying to explain to you in several different ways as possible, but still it didn't help, and why would it, because your chosen username is Dixie Dean and you're married to the course, love is truly blind, even if you've seen him play

It's like Fred and Hulk, you rushed to google to quickly whip out Freds stats, no opinion on either player, just like with Dean, it's just stats with you, not even worth debating with. Must be a Dean relative or being paid to promote his legacy lol.

. Kind Regards

Tober you haven't really been following the conversation.

The simple question is, can you hold up players from the 1920's as greats that rank alongside modern greats? you think Dixie Dean is going to be in the same conversation in most people's minds when talking about the likes of Henry, Zidane, Maradonna etc.

The point is not that he wouldn't make it in today's game, nobody's debated that, the point is he can't be considered a true great because the era he played in was so unsophisticated in terms of preparation, opposition level and yes fitness which makes a player able to maximise his potential, in comparison to the much more professional era of football which took hold from the 60;s onward when maximum wage cap was scrapped and practically all players lives bega to revolved total dedication to the club they were playing for.

I don't know why this is so difficult for people to understand.

Kind Regards.

Another bizarre retort.  You are just as entrenched in your position as i am in mine, so less of the intellectual superiority from you son, at least until you can actually exhibit some

Tobermory - agree 100 per cent with your last post, mes just doesn't seem to get it

The forum dunce is throwing stones in glass houses, it's the old days on here, keep going 'son'

mes, can you make any argument without throwing around insults?

The well known forum grass makes his eventual appearance. I've made untold succinct and in depth points on this thread unless you have no ability to read whatsoever, you must of seen them.

The first time I called anyone a name was kinscem after the third time of misquoting my thoughts, then Dixie called began the name calling if you bother to read back, I wont call you a name though because we know reporting posts and posters is almost a full time occupation for you, isn't it nobby the forum curtain twitcher.

Kind Regards.

So that's a no then.

the era he played in was so unsophisticated in terms of preparation, opposition level and yes fitness which makes a player able to maximise his potential,

The biggest ever change in the preparation/speed of the game & increased fitness was probably from the early to late 1990s.

So was football in 2000 superior? Is Arsenal's 1989 title worth less than the one they won in 2002

tobermory - i don't suppose mes even took up my suggestion of looking up the record of Herbert Chapman one of the finest ever managers who was in charge of Arsenal in the mid 20s and early 30s.
If he had then he would realise that the old guff he wrote (that you requoted above) was really total nonsense.

Chapman was renowned for his innovative tactics and formations, insisted on his players being very fit and had a strict training regime, they had access to physios and masseurs etc. He had scouts out all the time checking on opponents and likely future signings. Most top flight clubs did such things.

In other words, the complete opposite of the picture that the naive mes paints of that era.

Anyway, back on topic. 2.2 Spurs was a terrible tip from Storm Alert.

There's probably absolutely no point in trying to be reasonable or logical on this subject matter with someone who's name is 'Dixie' Dean and is obviously a fully paid up member of the Dixie Den fan club for whatever strange reason, must be a distant family member.

You've even tried your level best to shift the goalposts on to 1930's managers to suit your narrative and help your argument along.

Let me bring you back to the centre where you and this debate belongs.

No player from 1920's football can be held up a a true footballing great that ranks along side greats such as Maradonna, Zidane, Brazilian Ronaldo, Henry, Messi etc

The standard of football was no where near the same level, not even Messi in the greatest team of all time could ever manage more than 50 league goals in a season and that was him maxing out. Dean scored 60 league goals in 29 different matches that season

Here's a bit more context  One explanation put forward in the book was the change in the offside law that came in the previous season, making it so that two defenders had to be closer to the goal than the attacker rather than three as it had been previously. And it’s true, scoring averages did go up across the board.
and so it took time for defenders to adjust to  the new rule

I'm not saying he was not a good player, or that he could not have played in today's game, but you only have to watch some of the footage that exists of the level back then to understand that it was Sunday League stuff.


Kind Regards.

An entertaining thread with many interesting claims.

mesmerised
The first time I called anyone a name was kinscem after the third time of misquoting my thoughts, then Dixie called began the name calling if you bother to read back, I wont call you a name though because we know reporting posts and posters is almost a full time occupation for you, isn't it nobby the forum curtain twitcher.

Misquoting your thoughts?
I am not a mind reader.
If your posts are fantasy presented as fact then it is open season.

I feel like I have to dumb down to explain things to you, because already on 3 occasions you've failed to either read what I've written properly or presented it in a way that was false, now you think that where I said you were misquoting my thoughts, I was actually talking about thoughts I hadn't relayed here, you're either dim or very dim, not given you third option

Let's walk you through it.

1. You said "mes has convinced me everyone* in the past was short, fat, and stupid." - I never once mentioned any players height or intellect or anything like that, so your observations told me you either hadn't bothered to read every post properly or you are not very bright to have deduced that from what I had written.

2. You then said "Is your proof payment to players makes them better than players who are/were not paid?" - An overly  simplified characterisation . Clearly player becoming more professional on full wages without the need for another job, allowed for them to dedicate as much time as possible to training, making dietary changes and become much fitter athletes thus giving a greater output on the pitch in terms of performance, but you've interpreted that the way a 5 year old would "er mes said they're getting paid more, they must be better".

3. You then said "Your comment about everyone being on drugs 40+ year ago except Usain Bolt is anothr unsubstantiated statement." - I never said any such thing whatsoever, your the way you've even worded that fake quote makes it look like Bolt was even around 40 years ago, what I said was 40+ years ago it was easier to evade drug testers which is why there's been talk for many years that the IAAF will end up re-setting and scraping those dodgy records, I was probably being generous with time, I think they wanted to scrap records set pre 2000. What I also said about was that when he often lined up finals, he was the only one not have been tested positive for drugs at some point in his career, because of modern testing techniques and requirements for being available for testing outside of comeptiton, it makes it far far harder than what it was 40 odd years ago to get away with it. So it today's sprinting whilst sprinters still cheat, they're not likely to be as lucky as some of the past stars of the sport  as they'll be found out. Just like Lance Armstrong was in Cycling and all those other mugs.

Please learn to read, digest and deduce the content of posts correctly, it saves time and makes you look a little bit less slow upstairs then you already appear to be, I'll just have to file you under "not quite the full shilling" and to be ignored.

Kind Regards.

Try learning to read mes - Herbert Chapman took over at Arsenal in 1925 and had already won two league titles at Huddersfield in the early 20s.

So how on earth am i shifting the goalposts to the 1930s (not that it would change the argument anyway)  ????  HC died in January 1934 ffs !  His innovations etc were in the 1920s, comprende ?

The offside rule changed in 1925, dixie's record was set 2/3 years later. Defenders had well adapted to the new rule by then, i think even you could have taken something new on board in that time frame

lads give it up, 2 things learned Dixie is a revered Legend with Everton fans and they will fight his corner on his achievements and I fully agree with that.
2nd won Norwegian's are not rotten, but I knew that anyway and so did bookies

Shifting the goalposts as we were initially talking directly and solely about Dixie Dean and then you moved it on to managers, prattling on and on about Herbert Chapman who I never once mentioned and has fk all to do with 'true great players' of the game

You'll never get the masses, that includes football journo's, greats of the game or most fans in general to think that players 100 years ago will ever thought of or included in the same breath as the likes of Maradonna and Messi, but I'm sure the Dean family appreciates your hard fought efforts Kind Regards.

I agree with Malay, not much point continuing trying to educate pork as my elders used to say.

I have come to the conclusion that the only thing you are "mesmerised" by is your own reflection.

Kind Regards

That's a firm "I've given up trying to convince myself he's a true great" post

Kind Regards.

I may have given up trying to convince you (who wouldn't by now ?), it has just become tiresome having to read the elongated guff that you hilariously refer to as "succinct points" .

dixie is a bona fide great - look in the book as they say.


Meanwhile, Keep looking in that mirror son.

You essentially believe a footballer playing sub-standard football 100 years ago is all time great and hang on to dear life this freak season he had that no modern great has ever come remotely close to matching, as said before even Messi topped out at 50, you do not have an argument, you just argue.

And it's me that should not bother, I am objective, why wouldn't be, I've no dog in the fight, you on the other hand have the handle 'DixieDean', hardly objective...Kind Regards, Son.

Football was a very different game 100 years ago.

Just as Dixie would struggle nowadays I imagine Earling would struggle in the 1920.

Especially if he had to do a Saturday morning shift down the docks before facing Preston North End.

A few of the mesmerised comments

for Tottenham however a point would be a great result ..... mes is an Arsenal supporter
Richarlison up front so that's a clean sheet for Bodo then ..... mes is an Arsenal supporter
212 million people in Brazil and they really can't produce a better centre forward than Richarlison ..... mes is an Arsenal supporter

We all know your love for stats because of your 1920's hero Dixie Dean who clocked millions of goals against Shopkeepers, Tesco workers, security guards and flower stall holders ..... made up mes "facts"

a one off great season in which he filled his boots against Postman, milkman, cinema ushers, sheep shearers and future Tesco workers ..... made up mes "facts"

We know all this, you've told us all before about the statistical genius, you must be a distance relative to be so passionate about someone you've never seen live, ..... made up mes "facts"

today's game which is as athletic, skillful and professional as the game could ever possible be, fined tuned to the max, we've reached the limits of what an elite player looks like and is like. Putting players from a bygone era such as the 20's where training was probably once a week on a cow's patch of a training pitch, the goal keeper was an overweight bus conductor smoking 20 Benson & Hedges a day and the defenders he was running past were straight in the pub after the game, doesn't really cut it does it. ..... made up mes "facts"

but it's like in tennis, nobody takes records and statistics from the Pre Open-era seriously either. It's pure guess work to suggest that player then could adapt now, whether they could or couldn't is by the by, nobody knows, so we can only take those that have been a part of the truly professional era that's encompassed all the modern advancements that have evolved over time, as players who are a part of the conversation of 'true greats'. ..... made up mes "facts" on tennis

Real facts
The tennis Open era began in 1968 (pros could play in all events)

Tennis Grand Slam singles winners
Don Budge 1938
Maureen Connolly 1953
Rod Laver 1962, 1969
Margaret Court 1970
Steffi Graf 1988

Rod Laver won a Grand Slam in the amateur era and in the professional era.
mes would not have laver as a true great as "we can only take those that have been a part of the truly professional ....... as players who are a part of the conversation of 'true greats"

argue
[ˈɑːɡjuː]

verb
argue (verb)
argues (third person present)
argued (past tense)
argued (past participle)
arguing (present participle)
give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view:

argument (noun)
arguments (plural noun)
a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory:


Thought you might like a quick english lesson mes

"you do not have an argument, you just argue"  how can you present an argument if you are not arguing your case, you numpty

Kinscem, Rod Laver was a great of his era, but everyone knows that if he played today, i.e. the most advanced, powerful and techincal era of the sport, he wouldn't even be top 100, he was 5ft8, you need a bigger frame to allow for a more powerful game that today's tennis requires, nobody under 5ft 11 has won a slam in decades. His era was also serve and volley, it's a baseline game now, his era had 3 of the slams on grass, the least used surface today, it's more dynamic now with 3 different surfaces used at the 4 slams. It was virtually a different sport in his day. When the open era began and it 'suddenly became professional' obviously it's not going to be at it's most professional from day one is it, the next generation will take time to come up and take it to the next level - incidentally, nobody takes Courts slams seriously on the whole, she won so many playing 5 rounds rather than today's 7, and alot of the Aussie slams she won were against local bums, most top players didn't bother going down there for years, that even exteneded to the likes of Agassi and McEnroe who missed some.

Dixie still making an absolute fo.ol of himself, doesn't understand he's just argueing his point mindlessly for the sake it because for weird reason he's a paid up member of the Dixie Dean fan club - a player he has literally never seen play once, but it's ok people, he can read statitsics off wiki like a good un' what an absolute Grade A mug.

I'll take that as an "oh gawd, mes has made himself look a cretin again" admission

Poor sod, he's had his yellow stained pants pulled over his bonce, spun around and tripped over so many times, he's now reduced himself to using caustic, malicious and hostile terminology to express himself to let me know not that he's not just been rattled in the last day or so, oh no, he's been absolutely seething with incandescent rage the whole time, thanks Dixie. Kind Regards.

Well we got the "true mesmerised" in the end. 

Try a self awareness course little one, hopefully it will be of benefit.

imagined 'victories'

mesmerised ignores his own words
"but it's like in tennis, nobody takes records and statistics from the Pre Open-era seriously either.
It's pure guess work to suggest that player then could adapt now, whether they could or couldn't is by the by, nobody knows"

nobody knows, but mesmerised does know.
"but everyone knows that if he played today, ....... he wouldn't even be top 100"

Yes we got the true dixie, one who throws his dummy out and calls people cretins when he can't get his own way then stomps off like the big baby he is.

Tennis, Nobody knows but anyone can have a good guess based on obvious factors such a a player height. But players such as Rod Laver would be a midget in today's tennis, he was 5ft8, he was too small to compete today in terms of winning grand slams, that much is obvious and he's even said as much in the past.

Kind Regards.

That really takes the biscuit, you taking umbrage  after your previous rant


Maybe you should take another break and calm down a little.

Yes I'm really shaking my fists in anger,.....I'm calling anonymous people on the internet "cretins"

You have referred to anonymous people on this thread as follows - "the forum dunce", "forum grass", "you're either dim or very dim", "not quite the full shilling" "poor sod he's had his yellow stained pants pulled over his bonce"?   

And yet you get triggered by the use of the word cretin

That self awareness course awaits you little one. book it.

Cretin's a  much stronger and venomous word dixie, my turn of phrases is much softer in comparison, yours depicts anger and rage.

Why did you come back Dixie when you'd basically signed off - where you trying to locate your dummy, it's over there in the corner, try not to stumble over Kinscem's on the way Kind Regards.

Cretin is one of the mildest rebukes one could utter, you cretin

Well at least you have confirmed that English Language was not your specialist subject at school.

That course awaits, take some time out again.

What a lovely, lovely bite

I reckon any fair minded person who had the misfortune to trawl through this thread would soon ascertain who was the one ranting and biting.

Clue :  It ain't me.

It aint him, he proclaims, in complete exasperation

Skuttle off now mes, take your white flag with you...
Dixie's got your number son.

No, mes should stay and entertain us all with his endless array of insults and regular claims of unique insight and wisdom!

nobby the sensitive little flower is absolutely desperate for me to insult him so he can hammer the report button again, which he freely admits he does, but he clearly has nothing better to do with his life, as called out some 16 years on the thread bumbled yesterday imagine being in your 60's and trying to lay traps on the internet for people to get banned to create your own echo chamber because you have better to do - LOL.

Can't read what emitdeb says, the guy with the Anti Semitic avatar, because he's blocked like he is with most people, but if he's in anyone's corner, you know you're in trouble.

Kind Regards.

I am pleased to hear that I am spared the worst of your schoolyard abuse.

Proof positive that the report button works.

Not in your case it doesn't, you were hoping for a perma ban - unlucky chucky

You call nobby a sensitive flower but youre the only person to block me.. I thimk youre the over sensitive type my friend... No one wants you banned perma, Every village need a mesmerised...

Not at all mes but I can see that someone with a mind as muddled as yours might see a month-long ban as some sort of victory. Well done!

You were devasted it wasn't a perma ban, you can tell by your continuing efforts to engage with me desperately looking for a bite so you hammer away at that report button again, it's a full time job for you, all those deleted posts, all those accounts you must have signed in and out off, all that effort, for nothing, poor sod. Kind Regards.

Mad as a box of frogs

Yes you are