When you compare players of yesteryear with players of today. How do you judge their assets if you have not seen them actually play?
What you see on film, which is of course edited high lights? What you read in old clippings? In all honesty you cannot make a true assessment in my view unless you have seen them in the flesh.
So I would judge that you would be wrong to assess someone unless you have seen for yourself. You can of course compare records but to say one player is better than another based on films or hearsay for me is folly.
Some of the players previously mentioned were Awesome, all were different in many ways. To compare them to Lambert would be totally unjust as they all played differing systems and most of the mentioned latter day heroes, a constant higher level of football. Lambert has only played 14 or 15 games at the highest level and while good, has still to make his mark.
Not sure I agree with you there. I don't think watching someone on TV or YouTube is that different from watching them in the flesh. Sure, I can see your point that you're only seeing the best bits, but it's the best bits that show you just how good they were. For instance, I wasn't around to see Pele, but I've still seen him do things that I know 99.9% of footballers aren't capable of. I wasn't around to see Lev Yashin, but I've seen him makes saves that I don't think any keeper today would have made. Sure, these players probably had tons of mediocre games that I haven't seen, but I've seen the bits that made them stand out.
