Most people on here disagree with your opinion, but what I was saying most people disagree with is this: They were both top World Class players. Without trying to belittle you, you probably don't remember Bergkamp at his best. He scored some amazing goals. 'He wasn't a great goal scorer, but a scorer of great goals'. I do remember Henry's goal against Man U (I was there) and it was amazing, like so many of his goals. But Bergkamp scored many better including my favourite against Newcastle. BUT Paul Merson was better than both...
France '98 is the only world cup where I watched almost every match and I certainly saw a lot of Bergkamp. It may surprise you to know I'm an Arsenal fan because of Dennis Bergkamp's genius in the late 90's so I have nothing against him and I'm not speaking from ignorance but a priviledged position having watched both intently.
And Henry's praise of Bergkamp as the best he's played with means nothing in this debate as he wasn't comparing himself to Bergkamp. Zidane spoke of Scholes like he had some man-love for him: it doesn't mean Scholes was a better midfielder than Zidane.
You seem to be of the opinion that I disagree with you! I don't necessarilly. What I am saying is there is very little to choose between the 2. They were both absolute legends and I am privileged to see both play at their peaks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7aq9cEZa7c There will always be some (mostly the younger fans) that prefer Henry and some (mostly the older fans) that prefer Bergkamp. The thing about Bergkamp is that he did more on the World stage than Henry, especially as Henry was playing in the best side in the World at that stage. Also you have to remember that Bergkamp was the 1st World class player that Arsenal signed and there was a huge Wow factor when we signed him.
henry and bergkamp were different players, and what made them great was playing alongside each other. other people may disagree, but i think bergkamp was best when he played with henry, and was remembered for creating so many of thierry's goals, while scoring quite a few for himself. also, henry was without doubt at his best alongside bergkamp as he had a genius alongside him to give him the ball where he was most dangerous, in and around the box. different players can't really be compared. you can't just say defender, midfielder and attackers. you should specify our best players in each of these positions: goalkeepers - seaman centre backs - campbell full backs - cole central midfielders - vieira/fabregas wingers - pires second strikers - bergkamp strikers - henry
That to me has to be one of the most laughable comments I have ever seen. RVP is not even close to Bergkamp on any level.
bergkamps my legend no matter what. Cuz i met him when i was 1998. i was walking through islington as i was going for a tour (bday present) and i had my yellow away shirt (gunner on the bottom back) with 10 bergkamp on the back. On the way to the stadium a man tapped me on the shoulder and said 'your shirt. great player' . it was bergkamp himself. walked with him to the stadium and he came on the tour with us (and the others ) i was star shocked. got it signed though and he got a scarf signed by wrighty and merson (who were at the ground for what ever reason)
could be on scoring ability soon. Who knows what will happen in 18months. could sign and be here another 4yrs. and smash berggy record. Which at the moment he has 18 goals to go
It's not just about goals though. He probably will score more than Bergkamp, doesn't mean he is a better player though. Ian Wright scored more than Bergkamp, doesn't mean that Wrighty was better than Bergkamp!!! Although interesting to note that Wrighty had a better goals to games ratio than Henry. Does that mean Ian Wright was better than Henry?
Not the greatest, but my favourite, slightly under-rated player, was Freddie Ljungberg. Although not a striker, he was such a class goal poacher. He would just suddenly be on the end of a pass, or if the defence were making a meal of a clearance, Freddie would be there with a toe poke or a scrambled finish. A lot of his goals were tap-ins or simple finishes but they were hugely important and because teams would concentrate on marking Henry and Pires, it meant that he could find those little pockets of space and ghost into the box. However, my namesake does claim the midfield spot for me. With Bergkamp as striker, Toure as defender and Lehmann as goalkeeper.
We had this debate before and the OP seems to want to try and change everyone's mind, it's a close run thing, but bergkamp gets it because I have always regarded bergamp and pires as part of the reason henry played so well. The last 2 seasons henry played for arsenal he couldn't play at the same level, that was the years bergkamp and pires were bit part players and the year that they left, maybe it was coincidence, maybe not? Plus dennis played and adapted his game as he got older, henry is 34 and now plays in the USA because he would probably struggle at a real top club now, at the same age bergkamp was playing in the invincible season. I see you have posted an article on the spurs, man u, liverpool and chelsea board, and the majority seem to think bergkamp. Just accept it, if your want to think henry then that's your choice, but don't try and force people to change their minds, we had this debate 3 or 4 weeks ago and the majority said bergkamp.
Settle down, its only my opinion, take a chill pill, I really don't believe that henry performed as well in those 2 seasons as previously, I didn't state that he had bad seasons, just that he wasn't quite at the same level.
No, obviously not (well apart from Merse :-; ) but anyone who thinks RVP is in the same ballpark as Bergkamp are fools.
