- Joined
- Jan 15, 2021
- Messages
- 579
- Supports
- Chelsea
Henry, the best player to ever play in the premier league for me.
You’re massively underestimating Henry’s technical ability. Everyone will have different assessments of different players, but anyone who says that Henry was nowhere close to Cantona technically is miles off in their assessment.He wasn't, In terms of touch and ability with the ball at your feet he was never of that level. The better comparison in that sense would be Bergkamp.
Indeed. Not to dis Cantona at all but there's not a player in history that Henry was "nowhere close to" regarding technical ability.You’re massively underestimating Henry’s technical ability. Everyone will have different assessments of different players, but anyone who says that Henry was nowhere close to Cantona technically is miles off in their assessment.
You should read The Rebel who would be King. Got loads of info on his time in France and his various spats with national team members. Plus is a generally interesting book on his life.Why did Cantona perform poorly for France and in Europe with Utd? Those are the big question marks over him
That is just nonsense. Cantona was truly a special player, cool as feck with unmatched charisma to go with his playing ability. You will get a nod in that sense from every football fan who got the chance to see his career and not just United supporters.Cantona was brilliant for us but outside of United fans no one really cares much for him. Henry was in a league of his own broadly speaking. This is not even a serious question.
You’re massively underestimating Henry’s technical ability. Everyone will have different assessments of different players, but anyone who says that Henry was nowhere close to Cantona technically is miles off in their assessment.
Agree with this. What made Henry so hard to defend against was his immaculate technique at the searing pace he could play at.Indeed. Not to dis Cantona at all but there's not a player in history that Henry was "nowhere close to" regarding technical ability.
The guy was absolutely ridiculous. He'd probably get more respect as a player if he hadn't also been lightning fast.
Because he wasn't as good. Henry was a top 50 player all time. Cantona, while great, was not quite that good, except in the Premier League at a time when the PL was comparably relatively weaker than the Serie A of today...I that's enough to compare one against the other to see who goes down as the bigger great. For example Henry is spoken about as arguably the greatest Premier League player ever, and I wanted to know where Cantona fares and why he'd be not mentioned in the same breath.
He wasn't, just wasn't that type of player.You’re massively underestimating Henry’s technical ability. Everyone will have different assessments of different players, but anyone who says that Henry was nowhere close to Cantona technically is miles off in their assessment.
Oh there are loads and without pace Henry wouldn't have been anything close to what it he was.Indeed. Not to dis Cantona at all but there's not a player in history that Henry was "nowhere close to" regarding technical ability.
The guy was absolutely ridiculous. He'd probably get more respect as a player if he hadn't also been lightning fast.
I'd say more his imagination and searing pace.Agree with this. What made Henry so hard to defend against was his immaculate technique at the searing pace he could play at.
Cantona and Payet in the same category ?!He wasn't, just wasn't that type of player.
Oh there are loads and without pace Henry wouldn't have been anything close to what it he was.
I'd say more his imagination and searing pace.
You lot need to stop acting like he was a player with a feather touch and loads of ability with the ball at his feet. He was never elite in that regard. He was an amazing player but that was for other reasons.
My point is Cantona technically belongs in the same category as Bergkamp, Di Canio, Zola, Le Tiss, David Silva, B.Silva, Djorkaef, Jay Jay, Payet etc you know, guys who were amazing with the ball at the feet. Henry just doesn't belong there.
Thanks for the suggestionYou should read The Rebel who would be King. Got loads of info on his time in France and his various spats with national team members. Plus is a generally interesting book on his life.
He didn't perform poorly for France.Why did Cantona perform poorly for France and in Europe with Utd? Those are the big question marks over him
Why did Cantona perform poorly for France and in Europe with Utd? Those are the big question marks over him
Nothing to be sorry about. Henry hands down. But contona was the catalyst that made United, well United.Henry was arguably the best player to ever play in the Premiership. Cantona was great for you and should be remembered as your most important player for a good chunk of the 90s. But sorry to say Henry was the better player.
You think Di Canio, Bernardo Silva and Payet were more technically gifted than Henry?He wasn't, just wasn't that type of player.
Oh there are loads and without pace Henry wouldn't have been anything close to what it he was.
I'd say more his imagination and searing pace.
You lot need to stop acting like he was a player with a feather touch and loads of ability with the ball at his feet. He was never elite in that regard. He was an amazing player but that was for other reasons.
My point is Cantona technically belongs in the same category as Bergkamp, Di Canio, Zola, Le Tiss, David Silva, B.Silva, Djorkaef, Jay Jay, Payet etc you know, guys who were amazing with the ball at the feet. Henry just doesn't belong there.
Yep, Henry was technically superb.You’re massively underestimating Henry’s technical ability. Everyone will have different assessments of different players, but anyone who says that Henry was nowhere close to Cantona technically is miles off in their assessment.
I suppose this is a Man Utd forum. Respectfully, this thread wouldn't exist on any other.Henry by quite a distance.
Nistelroy was a great goalscorer.Henry was a great goal scorer.
Cantona was that and so much more. If you want to win things you go with Cantona.
To me it's Cantona and it's easy.
But he played for Man Utd though (I know he helped start the process with respect to the PL titles but you'd have done it anyway).Cantona won 5 leagues in less than 6 years he spent in England and he was banned for 8 months of them, that's a crazy record.
Henry was great in premier league. He was kinda disappointing in all the other things he did even if it was football or handball he played. To me atleast. Maybe i expected to much.Nistelroy was a great goalscorer.
Henry was far more than just a goalscorer.
Cantona will always be legendary to me. He was missing piece in a puzzle. After 15 years watching Utd and then until the day he retired , I was always excited to watch him play. Henry was different. Silky smooth and got into goal scoring positions based more on pace.Cantona was revolutionary in transforming Manchester United into the arrogant and dominant champions that is their identity today. Was he as talented at football as Henry? No. If I was to repeat history which would I choose in Manchester United's path? Cantona, 100 times out of 100.
Cantona at United forged an identity for the club. Henry at Arsenal forged an identity for himself.
He didn''t just help start the process, he was the deciding factor.But he played for Man Utd though (I know he helped start the process with respect to the PL titles but you'd have done it anyway).
Cantona literally did nothing outside the Premier league. Never did it in Europe or at international level.Henry was great in premier league. He was kinda disappointing in all the other things he did even if it was football or handball he played. To me atleast. Maybe i expected to much.
Cantona on the other hand, he was a King.
RedCafe really is superior to any other football forum in the world. Wide web.I suppose this is a Man Utd forum. Respectfully, this thread wouldn't exist on any other.
It's not even a conversation.