World class means would they get in a world squad of 18 at that time.

comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 55 seconds ago
World class means would they get in a world squad of 18 at that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schmeichel?

Rooney

He’s spot on. Most of United’s success came from the reds.

Refs *

Failed wum

comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 9 minutes ago
World class means would they get in a world squad of 18 at that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What if there are more than 18 real top quality players at the time?

comment by #Culer (U22564)
posted 1 hour, 23 minutes ago
Giggs wasn’t world class
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you sure you’re old enough to be using the internet without supervision?

comment by #Culer (U22564)
posted 1 hour, 12 minutes ago
It’s mad because there’s 4 world class players that Fergie lists in his ‘all time’ list, but I would argue we have 4 world class players now:

Bruno
Shaw
Pogba
Rashford

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Idiot

comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 14 minutes ago
World class means would they get in a world squad of 18 at that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I also don't get this line of thinking that some people have. Basically it means, for example, there can not possibly be more than 3 world class CFs at any one time.

The definition of world-class has always been subjective and sadly reached to a point where if a player has had 10 great games, they are considered world class.

My list under Sir Alex would be:

Peter Schmeichel
Edwin van der Sar

Jaap Stam
Rio Ferdinand
Nemanja Matić
Denis Irwin
Patrice Evra

Michael Carrick
Roy Keane
Mark Hughes
Paul Scholes

Cristiano Ronaldo
Ryan Giggs
David Beckham

Éric Cantona
Wayne Rooney
Ruud van Nistelrooy

Tendency to use world class too easily.

People in this thread are saying united had 7-8 world class players in the late 90s, and yet they generally failed in Europe.

comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by The Mur Man (U22601)
posted 14 minutes ago
World class means would they get in a world squad of 18 at that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I also don't get this line of thinking that some people have. Basically it means, for example, there can not possibly be more than 3 world class CFs at any one time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly, it's such a silly interpretation. Why make those sort of limitations unnecessarily. If you had Messi, Ronaldo, Lewandowski, Suarez, Henry, Kane, Aguero all at their peak, you wouldn't say any weren't world class just cause you had to leave them out.

Ronaldo
Beckham
Scholes.
Rio.

Each of them walk into any team in their peak.

Honourable mentions include Rooney, Giggs (who's longevity is what makes him the closest to world class)

comment by Keano's Magic Hat (U10101)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
I'd be inclined to agree with SAF, although I would add Rio and Keane and Rooney to that list too.

WC is a term that is thrown around nowadays. An absolute pre-requisite for me is that they are champion on multiple occasions, along with their obvious talent and consistent performance levels.

Very few in that bracket at present in the PL for me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lineker, Gerrard, Socrates, Maradona, Kane, Griezmann?

Personally I would define world class as top 2-3 players per position over a 2-3 year period.

For that reason I would definitely add more players than SAF listed.

Perhaps his standards are higher than ours or perhaps he’s just defining world class differently, which we all do.

Schmeichel, Rio, Scholes, Keane, Ronaldo all definites for me. Rooney, RVN and Giggs all borderline too.

Eric too would come into the borderline category

Beckham was world class at crossing and set pieces. Whether that was enough to put him into that elite bracket is subjective, but he was certainly a top player for United

People get way too emotional about this, it's a bit odd. If you can't agree a definition then the conversation just isn't going anywhere, you're literally just going to talk past each other. If I have this type of discussion then I'll typically clarify my definition as someone who is considered one of the best in their role at any given time. You can argue this will change over time and I would agree. One of the best in the world now may not make a top 50 list of another era.

I'm not really sure why it matters either, if I think Van Nistelrooy was a world class striker and someone else doesn't, it doesn't bother me, nor does it affect either of us, that's just the way with a subjective term.

I personally feel we've had more 'world class' players than Fergie obviously does but we're clearly operating with a different definition.

I think Van Persie was world class, at the very least for a period of time. I'm fine if other people don't and I don't feel the need to convince them that he was world class instead of 'very good' or whatever they would define him as. I don't think it's a unique club that has a finite limitation on who gets in. Just a way of describing the players that get to a certain level and seeing as different people appreciate different characteristics, that is going to vary.

comment by Ron (U1646)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
Tendency to use world class too easily.

People in this thread are saying united had 7-8 world class players in the late 90s, and yet they generally failed in Europe.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah football can be that way. The better team doesn't always win, the better players don't always play well and particularly in a knockout competition, it isn't as black and white as 'the team with the most world class players wins'. You could pick through many a champions league campaign and argue that X team who didn't win was better than the team that did.

Arsenal haven't won the champions league, does that mean they've never had any world class players? I'd disagree. Henry didn't lead them to a champions league, does that mean he wasn't one of the best players the Premier league has seen? Is Harry Kane less of a talent because he hasn't won a trophy? It will affect how they are remembered but that's different to how talented they actually were.

He means his favourites, stam, keane, yorke, robson, hughes, the great dane, rvn, rvp all wc players

Thought vidic was better than rip.

I’d say vidic, Rooney (unbelievable player underrated by so many), Keane were world class off the top of my head. Obviously I doubt Fergie would say Keane due to their history.

comment by GTWI4T- some people deserve to get trolled (U6008)
posted 4 hours, 16 minutes ago
Scholes wasn't world class either. Lovely little player but not world class.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I take it you don't think Gerrard was world-class then?

comment by clapfreesince2003 (U22207)
posted 33 seconds ago
comment by GTWI4T- some people deserve to get trolled (U6008)
posted 4 hours, 16 minutes ago
Scholes wasn't world class either. Lovely little player but not world class.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I take it you don't think Gerrard was world-class then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe he thinks Gerrard was better than scholes?

comment by Nickasaurus (U9257)
posted 26 minutes ago
Thought vidic was better than rip.

I’d say vidic, Rooney (unbelievable player underrated by so many), Keane were world class off the top of my head. Obviously I doubt Fergie would say Keane due to their history.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who would you say were world class from Chelsea?
I’d say Terry, Petr and a lot of people close