But Shearer for England wasn’t the same without Sheringham and he was nearly 30 by the time Owen cemented his place in the England side.
Owen would have struggled to get into the England side over the Shearer/Sheringham partnership because he wasn’t as good as 90s Shearer.
Sheringham got dropped for Owen.
Lets all ignore style of play the team wanted coming into it hey lads.
And after Shearer retired, because of Owen, Owen was better for England than Shearer ever was.
None of them took us to European or world glory....
From what I remember Owen started on the bench for England at the ‘98 WC but there was loads of media interest in him because he was young and had such lightning pace, didn’t he score in a friendly just before the tournament to be the youngest England scorer? Sheringham hadn’t replicated his Euro ‘96 form and there was pressure to play Owen and then the Argentina goal catapulted him to the worlds attention (which still ended up being his biggest international moment).
Like I said, their international careers aren’t comparable. For Liverpool Fowler was the better player imo.
“Owen was better for England than Shearer ever was.”
What!? Euro 96.
comment by Sheriff JW Pepper (U1007)
posted 4 minutes ago
None of them took us to European or world glory....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark comment here... just for those who weren't sure
I’m making the point about their competition, though, which you’re trying to excuse. Young Fowler was better for Liverpool yeah and had more to his game. But my whole point is that Fowler didn’t play at as high a level because he was past it by the time the level of the prem got to a much better standard in the early/mid 00s, and didn’t have an England career, which was a higher standard than the prem in the mid 00s, nor was his record as good in Europe.
Le Tiss had more to his game as well. But he didn’t play at the highest level like Owen did either.
Englands performance against Holland in Euro 96 was easily the greatest performance by an England side in my lifetime and Shearer and Sheringham were instrumental to that.
What is this higher lever you keep talking about? They played the majority of their careers at the same time. When the PL quality improved Owen was a sub for us and injured most of the time. Is Kane better than Shearer because he played during a higher standard in the PL? Both peaked early in their career but Owen’s career was in the spotlight more because of his goal against Argentina.
When has international football been of a higher standard?
The discussion is who is the better player, I don’t think you can say that one player is better simply because you think the standard was higher. I’m basing it on their ability and qualities, Owen’s game was so much about pace, without it he offered little, Fowler never had pace but was more intelligent and actually a better finisher, he also offered more than just goals.
Owen still scored for fun when he lost his pace.
Post 2000 he wasn’t lightning fast, yet he scored with ease.
I’ve already told you when those standards shifted. The premier league in the early to mid 90s was like the fourth best league in Europe and international football was clearly considered higher at the time. By the early 00s that standard in the league had massively changed from what it was in 95/96, when Fowler was at his best.
Kane is better than Shearer because he’s better at football and plays in a much stronger era. It’s harder to compare them given the time difference, not so much comparing the shift between the mid 90s to the 00s when the CL money came pouring into the premier league and it the levels kept going up.
There was a semi final away against Roma, think it was 2001, for Liverpool and they got absolutely played off the pitch but won 2/0 because of Owen’s two goals.
He scored in the final that year too for them.
He was elite.
https://youtu.be/SNsQG6yDzlc?si=sHGo7bO7BWBWaPYP
This is it.
Roma absolutely hammered them too, yet Owen got them a 2-0 lead single handedly. Oh and they won it that year too.
He was in the conversation to be the best in the world at one point.
Fowler never was. Ever.
I’d say it was around his last season at Liverpool where he started to get injuries and show signs of a losing his pace which was 2003-04. Looking at his stats he never scored over 20 goals a season which his game was only ever about) from that point. Fowler’s decline was around the penultimate seasons at Liverpool which was only 3 years earlier. From what I recall he had a really impressive time at Leeds when he joined mid season in 2002. So this period where Owen was playing at a higher level was only for 2 seasons.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 6 minutes ago
I’d say it was around his last season at Liverpool where he started to get injuries and show signs of a losing his pace which was 2003-04. Looking at his stats he never scored over 20 goals a season which his game was only ever about) from that point. Fowler’s decline was around the penultimate seasons at Liverpool which was only 3 years earlier. From what I recall he had a really impressive time at Leeds when he joined mid season in 2002. So this period where Owen was playing at a higher level was only for 2 seasons.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Owen lost his pace in 99/00 with that hamstring tear.
He was still and elite player after that.
“ He was in the conversation to be the best in the world at one point.”
Yes because the hype surrounding him was huge and his Argentina goal made him a global star. But he never reached that level or became one of the best strikers in the world.
Fowler didn’t have the global fame but domestically he was great. Like I said, ask Liverpool fans, the vast majority will pick Fowler, not just because he had a greater connection to the club but because he was better for them.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 4 minutes ago
“ He was in the conversation to be the best in the world at one point.”
Yes because the hype surrounding him was huge and his Argentina goal made him a global star. But he never reached that level or became one of the best strikers in the world.
Fowler didn’t have the global fame but domestically he was great. Like I said, ask Liverpool fans, the vast majority will pick Fowler, not just because he had a greater connection to the club but because he was better for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Owen in his prime was easily top 3 strikers in the world.
Michael Owen is such a dullard. Absolutely zzzzzz to listen too. I remember his bizarre statements about only watching around 4 films all the way through, in his entire life as he just finds them boring. I think he said he only watches matches he played in or horse racing as his only interests.
Just an utterly bizarre individual and he's way to boring and dull to be called eccentric. Great finisher in his prime but never anykind of football legend.
comment by Bumble (U6465)
posted 45 seconds ago
Michael Owen is such a dullard. Absolutely zzzzzz to listen too. I remember his bizarre statements about only watching around 4 films all the way through, in his entire life as he just finds them boring. I think he said he only watches matches he played in or horse racing as his only interests.
Just an utterly bizarre individual and he's way to boring and dull to be called eccentric. Great finisher in his prime but never anykind of football legend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think people have let their hatred of him as a pundit, get in the way of how elite he was.
I do agree that Owen’s personality does affect people’s perception of him as a player because he’s a boring c-nt. But I also think he never reached the expectation that came when he scored against Argentina. Like others on this thread have said, there are a lot of better strikers that have played in the PL, before, during and after his time.
I actually find Owen unintentionally hilarious, but pretty sure he's on the spectrum or something.
That clip of him in that 'soccer skills' show he did, volleying close range shots at a 14 year old in front of Neville Southall - i think it's one of my favourite bits of TV.
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 37 minutes ago
I actually find Owen unintentionally hilarious, but pretty sure he's on the spectrum or something.
That clip of him in that 'soccer skills' show he did, volleying close range shots at a 14 year old in front of Neville Southall - i think it's one of my favourite bits of TV.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just watched that and this one:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WqOxNspUPyE
I keep watching back his celebration at 1.26.
Sign in if you want to comment
Michael Owen: Disrespected?
Page 5 of 6
6
posted on 26/3/24
But Shearer for England wasn’t the same without Sheringham and he was nearly 30 by the time Owen cemented his place in the England side.
Owen would have struggled to get into the England side over the Shearer/Sheringham partnership because he wasn’t as good as 90s Shearer.
posted on 26/3/24
Sheringham got dropped for Owen.
posted on 26/3/24
Lets all ignore style of play the team wanted coming into it hey lads.
posted on 26/3/24
And after Shearer retired, because of Owen, Owen was better for England than Shearer ever was.
posted on 26/3/24
None of them took us to European or world glory....
posted on 26/3/24
From what I remember Owen started on the bench for England at the ‘98 WC but there was loads of media interest in him because he was young and had such lightning pace, didn’t he score in a friendly just before the tournament to be the youngest England scorer? Sheringham hadn’t replicated his Euro ‘96 form and there was pressure to play Owen and then the Argentina goal catapulted him to the worlds attention (which still ended up being his biggest international moment).
Like I said, their international careers aren’t comparable. For Liverpool Fowler was the better player imo.
posted on 26/3/24
“Owen was better for England than Shearer ever was.”
What!? Euro 96.
posted on 26/3/24
comment by Sheriff JW Pepper (U1007)
posted 4 minutes ago
None of them took us to European or world glory....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark comment here... just for those who weren't sure
posted on 26/3/24
I’m making the point about their competition, though, which you’re trying to excuse. Young Fowler was better for Liverpool yeah and had more to his game. But my whole point is that Fowler didn’t play at as high a level because he was past it by the time the level of the prem got to a much better standard in the early/mid 00s, and didn’t have an England career, which was a higher standard than the prem in the mid 00s, nor was his record as good in Europe.
Le Tiss had more to his game as well. But he didn’t play at the highest level like Owen did either.
posted on 26/3/24
Englands performance against Holland in Euro 96 was easily the greatest performance by an England side in my lifetime and Shearer and Sheringham were instrumental to that.
posted on 26/3/24
*mid 90s
posted on 26/3/24
What is this higher lever you keep talking about? They played the majority of their careers at the same time. When the PL quality improved Owen was a sub for us and injured most of the time. Is Kane better than Shearer because he played during a higher standard in the PL? Both peaked early in their career but Owen’s career was in the spotlight more because of his goal against Argentina.
When has international football been of a higher standard?
The discussion is who is the better player, I don’t think you can say that one player is better simply because you think the standard was higher. I’m basing it on their ability and qualities, Owen’s game was so much about pace, without it he offered little, Fowler never had pace but was more intelligent and actually a better finisher, he also offered more than just goals.
posted on 26/3/24
Owen still scored for fun when he lost his pace.
Post 2000 he wasn’t lightning fast, yet he scored with ease.
posted on 26/3/24
I’ve already told you when those standards shifted. The premier league in the early to mid 90s was like the fourth best league in Europe and international football was clearly considered higher at the time. By the early 00s that standard in the league had massively changed from what it was in 95/96, when Fowler was at his best.
Kane is better than Shearer because he’s better at football and plays in a much stronger era. It’s harder to compare them given the time difference, not so much comparing the shift between the mid 90s to the 00s when the CL money came pouring into the premier league and it the levels kept going up.
posted on 26/3/24
There was a semi final away against Roma, think it was 2001, for Liverpool and they got absolutely played off the pitch but won 2/0 because of Owen’s two goals.
He scored in the final that year too for them.
He was elite.
posted on 26/3/24
https://youtu.be/SNsQG6yDzlc?si=sHGo7bO7BWBWaPYP
This is it.
Roma absolutely hammered them too, yet Owen got them a 2-0 lead single handedly. Oh and they won it that year too.
He was in the conversation to be the best in the world at one point.
Fowler never was. Ever.
posted on 26/3/24
I’d say it was around his last season at Liverpool where he started to get injuries and show signs of a losing his pace which was 2003-04. Looking at his stats he never scored over 20 goals a season which his game was only ever about) from that point. Fowler’s decline was around the penultimate seasons at Liverpool which was only 3 years earlier. From what I recall he had a really impressive time at Leeds when he joined mid season in 2002. So this period where Owen was playing at a higher level was only for 2 seasons.
posted on 26/3/24
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 6 minutes ago
I’d say it was around his last season at Liverpool where he started to get injuries and show signs of a losing his pace which was 2003-04. Looking at his stats he never scored over 20 goals a season which his game was only ever about) from that point. Fowler’s decline was around the penultimate seasons at Liverpool which was only 3 years earlier. From what I recall he had a really impressive time at Leeds when he joined mid season in 2002. So this period where Owen was playing at a higher level was only for 2 seasons.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Owen lost his pace in 99/00 with that hamstring tear.
He was still and elite player after that.
posted on 26/3/24
“ He was in the conversation to be the best in the world at one point.”
Yes because the hype surrounding him was huge and his Argentina goal made him a global star. But he never reached that level or became one of the best strikers in the world.
Fowler didn’t have the global fame but domestically he was great. Like I said, ask Liverpool fans, the vast majority will pick Fowler, not just because he had a greater connection to the club but because he was better for them.
posted on 26/3/24
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 4 minutes ago
“ He was in the conversation to be the best in the world at one point.”
Yes because the hype surrounding him was huge and his Argentina goal made him a global star. But he never reached that level or became one of the best strikers in the world.
Fowler didn’t have the global fame but domestically he was great. Like I said, ask Liverpool fans, the vast majority will pick Fowler, not just because he had a greater connection to the club but because he was better for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Owen in his prime was easily top 3 strikers in the world.
posted on 26/3/24
Michael Owen is such a dullard. Absolutely zzzzzz to listen too. I remember his bizarre statements about only watching around 4 films all the way through, in his entire life as he just finds them boring. I think he said he only watches matches he played in or horse racing as his only interests.
Just an utterly bizarre individual and he's way to boring and dull to be called eccentric. Great finisher in his prime but never anykind of football legend.
posted on 26/3/24
comment by Bumble (U6465)
posted 45 seconds ago
Michael Owen is such a dullard. Absolutely zzzzzz to listen too. I remember his bizarre statements about only watching around 4 films all the way through, in his entire life as he just finds them boring. I think he said he only watches matches he played in or horse racing as his only interests.
Just an utterly bizarre individual and he's way to boring and dull to be called eccentric. Great finisher in his prime but never anykind of football legend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think people have let their hatred of him as a pundit, get in the way of how elite he was.
posted on 26/3/24
I do agree that Owen’s personality does affect people’s perception of him as a player because he’s a boring c-nt. But I also think he never reached the expectation that came when he scored against Argentina. Like others on this thread have said, there are a lot of better strikers that have played in the PL, before, during and after his time.
posted on 26/3/24
I actually find Owen unintentionally hilarious, but pretty sure he's on the spectrum or something.
That clip of him in that 'soccer skills' show he did, volleying close range shots at a 14 year old in front of Neville Southall - i think it's one of my favourite bits of TV.
posted on 26/3/24
comment by -bloodred- (U1222)
posted 37 minutes ago
I actually find Owen unintentionally hilarious, but pretty sure he's on the spectrum or something.
That clip of him in that 'soccer skills' show he did, volleying close range shots at a 14 year old in front of Neville Southall - i think it's one of my favourite bits of TV.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just watched that and this one:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WqOxNspUPyE
I keep watching back his celebration at 1.26.
Page 5 of 6
6