|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Jul 18, 2017 10:39:21 GMT
Does anyone recall a programme from the early/mid 1980s where people would debate who was the greater of two generations of sportsmen/women? All fun of course as it is so hard to take into account the styles of the day.
The précis is that someone from the past (usually 1950s/60s era) would be compared to a contemporary. For example Joe Davis and Steve Davis, Jimmy Greaves and Ian Rush.
Who would be the two you would choose to consider if the programme was recommissioned? Maybe Federer and Fred Perry or Maradonna and Ronaldo.
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Jul 18, 2017 12:18:07 GMT
Pele and Matty Taylor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2017 20:39:04 GMT
Chris Eubank and Chris Eubank Jnr
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2017 0:15:30 GMT
Ali and Tyson
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2017 7:57:12 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2017 7:31:59 GMT
No comparison, Ali would destroy Tyson. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Jul 21, 2017 11:00:35 GMT
Does anyone recall a programme from the early/mid 1980s where people would debate who was the greater of two generations of sportsmen/women? All fun of course as it is so hard to take into account the styles of the day. The précis is that someone from the past (usually 1950s/60s era) would be compared to a contemporary. For example Joe Davis and Steve Davis, Jimmy Greaves and Ian Rush. Who would be the two you would choose to consider if the programme was recommissioned? Maybe Federer and Fred Perry or Maradonna and Ronaldo. Nobby and Leonidas of Sparta. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2017 12:41:29 GMT
No comparison, Ali would destroy Tyson. Be a hell of a fight to watch though !! both were destructive in their day and both different types of fighter close one to call |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2017 15:00:07 GMT
Does anyone recall a programme from the early/mid 1980s where people would debate who was the greater of two generations of sportsmen/women? All fun of course as it is so hard to take into account the styles of the day. The précis is that someone from the past (usually 1950s/60s era) would be compared to a contemporary. For example Joe Davis and Steve Davis, Jimmy Greaves and Ian Rush. Who would be the two you would choose to consider if the programme was recommissioned? Maybe Federer and Fred Perry or Maradonna and Ronaldo. Nobby and Leonidas of Sparta. No contest. I win. He'll have his poxy spear, shield and sword, and I will slot him from 300 metres with my trusty weapon! Top tip: never bring a sword to a gun fight. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Jul 22, 2017 20:02:30 GMT
Nobby and Leonidas of Sparta. No contest. I win. He'll have his poxy spear, shield and sword, and I will slot him from 300 metres with my trusty weapon! Top tip: never bring a sword to a gun fight. You`re absolutely right. I didn`t think of that. You wonder how they ever managed to beat the Persians. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jul 24, 2017 15:08:16 GMT
Froome and Wiggins.
watered off that Wiggins gets all the glory and plaudits while Froomes achievements don't even merit a podium position in Sports Personality of the Year.
Froome would have won the tour that Wiggins won were it not for team orders.
The guy is a legend.
|
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jul 24, 2017 18:54:48 GMT
Mayweather Jr v Sugar Ray Leanord.
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Jul 24, 2017 19:34:39 GMT
Froome and Wiggins. watered off that Wiggins gets all the glory and plaudits while Froomes achievements don't even merit a podium position in Sports Personality of the Year. Froome would have won the tour that Wiggins won were it not for team orders. The guy is a legend. Good one Hugo. As a bit of a hobby cyclist myself in years gone by, I've always thought winning the tour is the ultimate sporting achievement. Or at least used to, until it was revealed they were all up their eyeballs in drugs. Now we're assured they're all clean, and I hope it's true. Froome isn't very media-friendly, but then neither was Andy Murray, and the nation loved him anyway. Wiggins meanwhile has a knighthood and all the glory. I'm not suggesting Wiggins isn't a great athlete, but the lack of recognition for what Froome has achieved is astounding. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jul 24, 2017 19:40:16 GMT
Froome and Wiggins. watered off that Wiggins gets all the glory and plaudits while Froomes achievements don't even merit a podium position in Sports Personality of the Year. Froome would have won the tour that Wiggins won were it not for team orders. The guy is a legend. Good one Hugo. As a bit of a hobby cyclist myself in years gone by, I've always thought winning the tour is the ultimate sporting achievement. Or at least used to, until it was revealed they were all up their eyeballs in drugs. Now we're assured they're all clean, and I hope it's true. Froome isn't vertical media-friendly, but then neither was Andy Murray, and the nation loved him anyway. Wiggins meanwhile has a knighthood and all the glory. I'm not suggesting Wiggins isn't a great athlete, but the lack of recognition for what Froome has achieved is astounding. Thing is with the Tour, they are either all clean or all cheating. Armstrong wasn't the only drug cheat. There wasn't a single clean rider in any of the races he won!! That's why they have never awarded his wins to anyone else. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 8:36:21 GMT
Froome and Wiggins. watered off that Wiggins gets all the glory and plaudits while Froomes achievements don't even merit a podium position in Sports Personality of the Year. Froome would have won the tour that Wiggins won were it not for team orders. The guy is a legend. Good one Hugo. As a bit of a hobby cyclist myself in years gone by, I've always thought winning the tour is the ultimate sporting achievement. Or at least used to, until it was revealed they were all up their eyeballs in drugs. Now we're assured they're all clean, and I hope it's true. Froome isn't very media-friendly, but then neither was Andy Murray, and the nation loved him anyway. Wiggins meanwhile has a knighthood and all the glory. I'm not suggesting Wiggins isn't a great athlete, but the lack of recognition for what Froome has achieved is astounding. I read, or saw some where that the reason why the public haven't taken him to heart like Wiggins is because the public still see him as Kenyen, even though his parents are British. Rightly, or wrongly I think thats the reason. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 14:51:23 GMT
Good one Hugo. As a bit of a hobby cyclist myself in years gone by, I've always thought winning the tour is the ultimate sporting achievement. Or at least used to, until it was revealed they were all up their eyeballs in drugs. Now we're assured they're all clean, and I hope it's true. Froome isn't very media-friendly, but then neither was Andy Murray, and the nation loved him anyway. Wiggins meanwhile has a knighthood and all the glory. I'm not suggesting Wiggins isn't a great athlete, but the lack of recognition for what Froome has achieved is astounding. I read, or saw some where that the reason why the public haven't taken him to heart like Wiggins is because the public still see him as Kenyen, even though his parents are British. Rightly, or wrongly I think thats the reason. Kenyan? He's a bit pale to be from there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 14:54:26 GMT
I read, or saw some where that the reason why the public haven't taken him to heart like Wiggins is because the public still see him as Kenyen, even though his parents are British. Rightly, or wrongly I think thats the reason. Kenyan? He's a bit pale to be from there. Born in Kenya, didnt come over here till his teens I think it was. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Jul 25, 2017 20:08:26 GMT
Mayweather Jr v Sugar Ray Leanord. Depends on the weight. If they fought at welter, I`d go for Mayweather. But SRL was a more natural middleweight, ( can`t for the life of me see Mayweather beating Hagler at middleweight, the way Leonard did. ) Good shout though. Would have been some fight. |
|
|
|
Post by William Wilson on Jul 25, 2017 20:16:29 GMT
Good one Hugo. As a bit of a hobby cyclist myself in years gone by, I've always thought winning the tour is the ultimate sporting achievement. Or at least used to, until it was revealed they were all up their eyeballs in drugs. Now we're assured they're all clean, and I hope it's true. Froome isn't vertical media-friendly, but then neither was Andy Murray, and the nation loved him anyway. Wiggins meanwhile has a knighthood and all the glory. I'm not suggesting Wiggins isn't a great athlete, but the lack of recognition for what Froome has achieved is astounding. Thing is with the Tour, they are either all clean or all cheating. Given the history of the tour, over the last 30 years or so, I know which I find the most likely. Quite possibly the reason why Froome has received so little recognition for his efforts. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Jul 26, 2017 5:38:05 GMT
Thing is with the Tour, they are either all clean or all cheating. Given the history of the tour, over the last 30 years or so, I know which I find the most likely. Quite possibly the reason why Froome has received so little recognition for his efforts. True, but you only have to look at the manner of Froomes wins to know he's as clean as possible. He has won by unorthodox attacks such as his racing decent last year or cheeky little attacks on climbs as well as being world class at TT. He hasn't done the long climbing attacks that marked the Armstrong/Landis/Contador grand tour wins. |
|
