I'd have to say that most players from today's team would make it into the All-Time XI. I would however have Michu in the second striker position and Allchurch up front. I would also have Ferrie in the squad, shame about the injuries, he would have excelled in our current squad.
Third member: Wilf Milne - http://www.theswanseaway.co.uk/2013/04/all-time-swansea-xi-left-back-wilfred.html
I can't believe some of the complete and utter tripe you post. Do you know anything about football? Ivor and Matthews wouldn't be as good as today's average footballers? Do us all a favour will you and belt up!! Having an opinion is one thing, spouting garbage is another. You talk about fitness. They were as fit as they could be for their time but, take my word for it, had they been playing in today's game, they would have been up there as one of the fittest as well. They were top professionals who would have done whatever it took to get to and remain at the top of the game. Briefly on Matthews. He was a legend that many place in the greatest England team of all time. This guy played regularly at the top level (First Division) when he was in his FIFTIES! Not fit? As for Ivor, he was a good friend, so I will avoid personal bias and quote Sir Matt Busby who said that he vied with the greatest of all time. Follow that up with Sir Bobby Charlton who said much the same thing. How about Bobby Moore who said he was the greatest inside forward he ever played against? To that you can add Sir Trevor Brooking who headed a panel that voted Ivor (Matthews as well) as one of the 100 greatest ever British footballers. Then there was the small matter of the manager of the 1958 Brazilian World Cup winning team who stated that Ivor was easily the best player of the competition. Fast forward to the end of his career when he played in the Welsh League. I trained with him twice a week and, although I was many years younger and reasonably fit, I just couldn't keep up with him. Neither could anyone else in the team - and we had some super fit youngsters of 16 to 20 with aspirations of breaking into league football. After the first training run of about three miles, Ivor would be in the gym doing his wind down laps while there was literally a row of players spewing their guts up outside. Me included. That was just half the training! We had gym work to follow: more running, doggies, press-ups, relay sprints finishing off with fast paced seven a side stuff. I'll stress that Ivor wasn't urging us on, he was LEADING us and he was not a young man then. By the way, all this was in addition to his daily runs on the beach which varied from 3 to 7 miles depending on the weather. Now we'll talk about skill and leather balls. Ivor had a cannon ball shot with his left foot but could also hit them hard with his right. That was with the old leather balls that held water and felt like they weighed a ton. What he would do with today's Mickey Mouse beach balls designed to swerve and dip, Lord only knows. He was renowned for scoring goals from distance then. I would guess that he'd be pulling the trigger today from 40 yards or more because his skill, timing and technique was just superb. Take account of today's benefits such as great playing surfaces, designer nutrition, specialist this that and everything then add in the enormous protection that the modern players get from the officials and Ivor would have been in Seventh Heaven. Ivor was a quiet, modest and unassuming man but if he is looking down and reading what you posted, I guess it would be with a sad shake of his head.
ivor come on.....they were the super stars of their era, soccer has moved on in leaps and bounds since their day and not one of those players would be able to keep up with todays players. no way on this earth would they. I have heard it say many times that the players with the leather ball do not have the fitness for a start. a lot of them smoked even at half time. its a well known fact.....they were the best of their era thats all....
Debates such as this are often very difficult. However, when naming sides such as this you need to take into consideration the advancement in sport science, nutrition, pitch quality etc when selecting sports stars. I use this to look at a comparison between George Best and Lionel Messi. How would Messi do during the 60s and 70s where the pitches were like bogs and in a culture where players hit the booze during the season, without the dominance of sport science and the advancement in nutrition and fitness programs/recovery periods. How would he also fare against players who used to kick the crap out of Best? Then on the other side, you have George Best. How much better would he have been in today's game with perfect pitches and massive advancements in sport science and nutrition etc, not to mention the fact that players ain't allowed to 'tackle' anymore. Its the same with rugby union. I regard Gareth Edwards the greatest union player of the amateur era, while I believe that Richie McCaw is the greatest player of the professional era.
Dai, top players from that era were as fit as they needed to be for the game as it was then. That is not to say that, if those players could be transported in time, they would be ineffective in today's game. I'm absolutely certain that they would be superstars today if they adopted modern day training methods etc. I agree with you when you say that training METHODS and standards of fitness back then were inferior to what they are now. But the players certainly were not. If one could establish a theoretical time frame template by bringing all the top players from the different eras into one time dimension, and subjecting those players to identical training regimes with identical conditions, the cream will rise to the top. There are hundreds of players from past eras who would be superstars using that criteria. John Charles, Cliff Jones, Duncan Edwards, Tom Finney and many, many others far too numerous to name. To say that these players would be less than average is, quite honestly, a total nonsense. The one concession I would possibly make is about goal keepers. Stoppers today have a far more difficult job than the guys who had to deal with a leather ball. The old ball travelled slower with a truer flight. Today's keepers have to deal with a lightweight piece of plastic that swerves, dips, bobbles and flies like a guided missile. On the other hand, they don't have anything like the physical challenge that keepers of old had to face. Featherbed ride in comparison.
Thats right valley...so its impossible to mix and match the two eras.....that is my point.....Besty was in a class of his own just like messi is today but if you had to have someone in your team today then messi would win hands down....By the way best was another who had a sly ***... bobby charlton was another smoker believe it or not...
Ivor is also correct when he says that the players had the ability in the 60s, 70s and 80s etc. If you put the following players, Best, Maradona, Pele and Cruyff in today's game, they would rip teams apart on their own. Now the question is, could Ronaldo, Messi and Bale and Suarez be as effective in their era with atrocious pitch conditions etc, not to mention the fact they would be playing against hard men who liked to tackle, compared to the lightweights we see in the modern game, where the art of tackling is slowly disappearing? Of course this is all speculative and players are picked on each individuals preference
I am on about the leather ball players you know.....Best was up there with the best of the best and there is not that many today that has the skill he hadin his prime......
Just a shame that Duncan Edwards lost his life along with the others in the Munich disaster. Have always wondered just how good would he have become, and that if he had survived and recovered, then Utd may never have made a move for Best.
I do like it when we try and put an all time 11 together each has there own opinion on the players that should be included. It's soo difficult to compare the game of today than with it back in the 50's 60's so on!!!. The older ones (Dai, Phil & Ivor) may have been lucky enough to see Charles, Allchurch play in the flesh. Just these two players are held in high esteem over the world. Charles was revered in Turin and boy what wouldn't we all give to have a modern day equivalent to him and Ivor. My earliest memory of the Swans is back in 70's, and then the player for me to look up to was Wyndam Evans, he was my hero at the time. Now is Wyndam better than Jimmy? who knows. But we have been lucky to see some great players, don the white shirt of Swansea City.
Fourth member of the All Time XI is Mel Charles. http://www.theswanseaway.co.uk/2013/04/all-time-swansea-xi-centre-back-mel.html Dai should love that...
None of the old time players would get into any top side today. Its totally different type of football....they were the best of their era of how football was played then....today average players would leave them for dust. defenders would run rings around them....thats called progress im afraid and is the same with any team sport......Big names they were but their football was slow and long ball rubbish. today's players would have a field day against them.......most of the premiership sides today and some championship sides would beat the 1966 England world cup squad with the way the game has moved on.....they would have difficulty in getting enough ball time for a start especially with us and the other good passing sides. Its called progress....
I'm fairly sure I saw Curtis run rings around anyone who dared to come near him in Roger's testimonial...
exactly a testimonial... how would he do against today's players.....anyway Curtis was not leather ball and even his era would have outclassed the big names of the leather ball brigade...
So would Curtis have walked all over Cliff Jones, Mel Nurse and Mel Charles? In turn would the current squad piss all over Curtis? I think not Dai.
scott get real...everyone knows the game is much superior to what it was.....todays footballers would run rings around them without getting out of 5th gear.....
I used to think that, then I watched a documentary about John Charles which showed him at the beach - the guy was more ripped than any modern footballer I've seen. Players back then got hacked down on a regular basis and were expected to do it all over again way sooner than modern footballers are - and even then modern footballers aren't expected to be able to play two games a week all season without their performances suffering. We disagree as usual, so I'm leaving it there.
Would be interesting to see if the likes of Ronaldo and Messi could handle the treatment the likes of Best et al had to put up with. Personally, I don't think they would have been able to handle it.
