Manchester United 1999 vs Manchester United 2008 | Poll Added

[LoveFootball]

How does asking someone their age to gauge how lucid they were over the course of an old football season translate to "being an internet warrior?"
I literally asked you how old you were outright, that's like the fundamental opposite of just guessing. What is wrong with you man? How is asking someone a simple question to get a better understanding of their perspective stupid? And why are you ignoring my attempts to move on from this silly age rubbish and talk about football? I said what I had to say about that and made a whole host of points on why I think you're underselling the ability of 99 and you called me a bloody internet warrior like it's 2002 or something. You're having a complete shocker here mate but it's not too late to move on.
Indeed. I feel like a lot of people are overselling how much better the 08 midfield was compared to 99 considering they only really had one season together. Sure Carrick was a class apart but Scholes was approaching his last legs and Hargreaves was shifted around a lot more than people are suggesting before he eventually fell apart. Compare that to Scholes and Keane who had plenty of time ahead of them, as well as Beckham sometimes tucking into three during more difficult games. None of this is a slight against our 07/08 side mind you, I was a season ticket holder at the time and travelled to all of their finals so I absolutely adored them for giving me such an enjoyable few years before our eventual decline.

Ok. Now that you seem to have settled down, let talk about football.

Now i get your point about that 99 side, they are my favorite side as I felt in love with more then one player in that team; Keane, Giggs, scholes, Beckham, Peter, Neville were my preferred players. They were amazing and could beat anyone any day of the year. They braved obstacle and achieved many things. They won many thing by pushing themselves behind limits and always thought back to overturn many lost situations. They were a talented team of course but I think they achieve great things out of strength of will then talents.

The 2008 team had talents all over the pitch, they made winning looks easy because of the ability of every players on the pitch. I never felt confidence about a victory than with that team. the defense was very strong and modern, attack very strong and unpredictable with many different deadly option. That team could beat any team in the world without putting much effort, without pushing themselves beyond the limits.

When you look at the option we had all over the pitch and compare them to 99 side especially in attack than you can see my point:

We had a front 3 capable of scoring 20+ goals each with a CR7 hitting monstrous numbers; on the bench we had players such as Nani, Berbatove, Saha who could cause irreparable damages to any club in the world and could guaranty you goals;

in the defense we had an amazing ball playing CB in Rio building from the back meaning that we could be able to control the game with midfielder maestro such as Scholes and Carrick, we had Evra a modern FB who offered more in attack then Irwin and Neville; scoring against that team was the hardest thing the opponent had to face.

On the bench we had a mature SAF with 2 continental assistants who modernized our style, reason why we were able to dominate European football only for Messi and Pep to wake us up from our dream.

I know that that 99 squad was amazing but when it comes to associated talent with fighting spirit, I think the 2008 side wins hands up. That team won 3 consecutive PL and was near an exploit of winning 3 CL in a row and all of this in the face of a super power Chelsea, and they continued to resist against an anomaly of club in City. There's a reason why that period coincide with the most successful period of our history.

 

[LoveFootball]

In 38 league games the 2008 vintage only won by a margin of 4 goals or more on 5 occasions, against the might of Newcastle, Sunderland, Villa and Wigan. Is that the sort of company 1999 United should keep?

Not only that, in 7 Champions League knockout games, United only scored more than 1 goal once. They were the kings of grinding out narrow wins, especially against top opposition, and it would likely be a similarly tight outcome in this theoretical match-up.

The 1st bold that is because most average teams played defensive in fear losing by huge margin; even the great Pep's Barca and the amazing attack of Klopp Liverpool struggled to put many past compacted defenses. That is just the nature of the game, when you defend more, you don't concede much; reason why Mourinho won many games because he also benefited on the luxury of having world class players executing that game strategy.
But I guess the 99 would not play defensive so prone to concede many against that deadly trio of the 2008 side.

The 2nd bold, SAF became more pragmatic in Europe and knew how to control game and win by a small margin; he didn't unleash our attack at his full potential. Most of the time he would play with 5 MD to protect the defense. Winning became more important to him than attacking football. Even during the 8-2 trashing of Arsenal, I remember him telling his players to slow down a bit.

 

[Eckers99]

All this talk about tactics is bollocks. The '99 team came up against 5 man midfields and found ways to adapt. Both teams would need to adapt to negate the other (would Vidic and Rio be used to 2 strikers in tandem like Yorke and Cole?).

It pretty much comes down to personnel. '08 had the better defence, attack is very hard to call, but '99 wins the midfield battle every time, which shades the contest for me.

 

[MrPooni]

Ok. Now that you seem to have settled down, let talk about football.

I think I've been pretty calm and level headed throughout this whole exchange. You're the one who has been freaking out over innocuous things from the off, you even lashed out another poster for trying to help diffuse the situation and now you're going to pretend I'm the unreasonable one here?

Now i get your point about that 99 side, they are my favorite side as I felt in love with more then one player in that team; Keane, Giggs, scholes, Beckham, Peter, Neville were my preferred players. They were amazing and could beat anyone any day of the year. They braved obstacle and achieved many things. They won many thing by pushing themselves behind limits and always thought back to overturn many lost situations. They were a talented team of course but I think they achieve great things out of strength of will then talents.

Now you're arguing with yourself. This whole debacle started when you stated that 08 would beat 99 "4-0 every day of the year" and now you're saying the complete opposite. Which one is it?

The 2008 team had talents all over the pitch, they made winning looks easy because of the ability of every players on the pitch. I never felt confidence about a victory than with that team. the defense was very strong and modern, attack very strong and unpredictable with many different deadly option. That team could beat any team in the world without putting much effort, without pushing themselves beyond the limits.

When you look at the option we had all over the pitch and compare them to 99 side especially in attack than you can see my point:

We had a front 3 capable of scoring 20+ goals each with a CR7 hitting monstrous numbers; on the bench we had players such as Nani, Berbatove, Saha who could cause irreparable damages to any club in the world and could guaranty you goals;

Berbatov didn't join us until the 08/09 season after we let go of Saha for being crocked so I'm not sure why you're bringing him up. Plus the 07/08 team scored the same number of goals in the league as the 98/99 side (80) so again you're talking absolute rubbish here mate, in fact the 99 side went on to break the PL goal scoring record the season after the treble with 97 goals so again more rubbish.

in the defense we had an amazing ball playing CB in Rio building from the back meaning that we could be able to control the game with midfielder maestro such as Scholes and Carrick, we had Evra a modern FB who offered more in attack then Irwin and Neville; scoring against that team was the hardest thing the opponent had to face.

On the bench we had a mature SAF with 2 continental assistants who modernized our style, reason why we were able to dominate European football only for Messi and Pep to wake us up from our dream.

Exactly – 07/08 were actually far more conservative than you implied earlier, which is why they had a superior defensive record to 99 which runs counter to your own argument above this one.

I know that that 99 squad was amazing but when it comes to associated talent with fighting spirit, I think the 2008 side wins hands up. That team won 3 consecutive PL and was near an exploit of winning 3 CL in a row and all of this in the face of a super power Chelsea, and they continued to resist against an anomaly of club in City. There's a reason why that period coincide with the most successful period of our history.

The 98/99 squad went on to win 3 titles in a row too so again you're having an absolute nightmare here. City weren't a factor either as the Sheikh didn't takeover the club until the latter stages of 2008 transfer window which was after the 07/08 double. They didn't get their shit together until a couple of seasons after that which suggests you need to sort out your perception of time before getting into arguments like this.

 

[P-Nut]

The thing is it wasn't just Yorke and Cole you had to worry about. You also had to worry about Scholes, Beckham, Giggs, Sheringham and Solskjaer as well.

You can't have all 7 on the pitch at once though.

Sure Scholes, Becks and Giggs will cause issues but I was more on about just the forwards.

 

[royboy16]

I think the defence and midfield of 99 are better,therefore I chose the 99 team.

 

[MrPooni]

You can't have all 7 on the pitch at once though.

Sure Scholes, Becks and Giggs will cause issues but I was more on about just the forwards.

Here's the thing, in the context of a one-off contest I'd be more afraid of Solksjaer and Sheringham coming off the bench during the dying minutes of a big game than final season Louis Saha, especially with prime Beckham pinging quality balls into the box. It's also worth factoring in how often 07/08 Rooney was shunted out on the left against tough opposition nullifying some of his potency as an attacking force.

 

[red4ever 79]

The 99 team is our most successful side ever. From the back to the middle they were much stronger than the 08 side. That quartet in midfield was for me pound for pound our best midfield of all time.

 

[LoveFootball]

I think I've been pretty calm and level headed throughout this whole exchange. You're the one who has been freaking out over innocuous things from the off, you even lashed out another poster for trying to help diffuse the situation and now you're going to pretend I'm the unreasonable one here?
Now you're arguing with yourself. This whole debacle started when you stated that 08 would beat 99 "4-0 every day of the year" and now you're saying the complete opposite. Which one is it?
Berbatov didn't join us until the 08/09 season after we let go of Saha for being crocked so I'm not sure why you're bringing him up. Plus the 07/08 team scored the same number of goals in the league as the 98/99 side (80) so again you're talking absolute rubbish here mate, in fact the 99 side went on to break the PL goal scoring record the season after the treble with 97 goals so again more rubbish.
Exactly – 07/08 were actually far more conservative than you implied earlier, which is why they had a superior defensive record to 99 which runs counter to your own argument above this one.
The 98/99 squad went on to win 3 titles in a row too so again you're having an absolute nightmare here. City weren't a factor either as the Sheikh didn't takeover the club until the latter stages of 2008 transfer window which was after the 07/08 double. They didn't get their shit together until a couple of seasons after that which suggests you need to sort out your perception of time before getting into arguments like this.

"talking rubish...", "emoji", ...."you're having an absolute nightmare here..." ..... It really hard to have a good debate with someone when he's talking like this, almost like arguing with a teenager.

You highlighted and perfectly selected point that suit your arguments and ignore the rest.
I'd avoid to go too far in that debate as people choices on this thread are more driven by sentiment then fact (hence the whole premise of "older people prefer the 09 side and younger one opt for 2008); this thread will go on the same way than the CR7 vs Messi debate where all side would fight to defend their choice ignoring fact and circumstances (like the 2008 was facing a super opponent in Chelsea with unlimited fund and with a squad assembled with some great players of that era) which will result in what you have already done in selecting some point to suit your arguments and responding to some point without pushing your brain a little bit far to try to understand what the person you're trying to arg against wanted to mean by some points he made.

So instead of surfing on an interminable debate of who is right or who is wrong, let's just enjoy and respect each other opinion and choice. I back the 2008 side to murder the 1999, anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side. You think I'm wrong or young, right for you, that's not my problem. So enjoy the thread and just ignore my choice.

 

[rcoobc]

Van Der sar

Brown
Ferdinand
Vidic
Evra

Carrick
Fletcher
Scholes

Tevez
Rooney
Ronaldo

How often did we actually play that?

No Giggs or Park on the left?

Who is marking Beckham in the lineup?

 

[P-Nut]

Here's the thing, in the context of a one-off contest I'd be more afraid of Solksjaer and Sheringham coming off the bench during the dying minutes of a big game than final season Louis Saha, especially with prime Beckham pinging quality balls into the box. It's also worth factoring in how often 07/08 Rooney was shunted out on the left against tough opposition nullifying some of his potency as an attacking force.

The front 3 was totally interchangable in that 08 side. Sure Teddy and Ole are better than Saha but Johnsen would be spinning in circles with that front 3 swapping all over the park.

 

[Eckers99]

"talking rubish...", "emoji", ...."you're having an absolute nightmare here..." ..... It really hard to have a good debate with someone when he's talking like this, almost like arguing with a teenager.

You highlighted and perfectly selected point that suit your arguments and ignore the rest.
I'd avoid to go too far in that debate as people choices on this thread are more driven by sentiment then fact (hence the whole premise of "older people prefer the 09 side and younger one opt for 2008); this thread will go on the same way than the CR7 vs Messi debate where all side would fight to defend their choice ignoring fact and circumstances (like the 2008 was facing a super opponent in Chelsea with unlimited fund and with a squad assembled with some great players of that era) which will result in what you have already done in selecting some point to suit your arguments and responding to some point without pushing your brain a little bit far to try to understand what the person you're trying to arg against wanted to mean by some points he made.

So instead of surfing on an interminable debate of who is right or who is wrong, let's just enjoy and respect each other opinion and choice. I back the 2008 side to murder the 1999, anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side. You think I'm wrong or young, right for you, that's not my problem. So enjoy the thread and just ignore my choice.

Good luck finding someone who'll refrain from mocking that opinion, let alone respect it.

 

[Pughnichi]

D- Rooney-Tevez is basically an upgrade of York and Cole

Nooooooooo! I’d take Yorke and Cole every day of the week

 

[2cents]

Why is Ronny Johnsen taking so much stick here? I don't remember any problems with him, he was the perfect foil for Stam as I recall.

 

[Pughnichi]

'99 team wins. Midfield is just too strong. Keane alone would tear the '08 midfield to shreds.

I don't agree the '08 defence is better, Brown was a makeshift right back and VDS was great but he's no Schmeichel.

For longevity Neville would be ahead of Brown. But Brown went in to beast mode for that one season. He was immense. Arguably the best Fullback on the planet that year.

 

[Eckers99]

Why is Ronny Johnsen taking so much stick here? I don't remember any problems with him, he was the perfect foil for Stam as I recall.

He was a very good defender but wasn't as good as any of Stam, Ferdinand or Vidic. You'd think he was William Prunier the way some are talking though. I'd take him in a heartbeat today!

 

[P-Nut]

Why is Ronny Johnsen taking so much stick here? I don't remember any problems with him, he was the perfect foil for Stam as I recall.

It's definitely who he is having to be compared to here. 3 of the greatest CBs to ever play for United and then Johnsen.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Ronny Johnsen sticks out like a sore thumb there, thank god for Stam.

Played quite a few games tho and a lot of the key/tougher ones ... FA Cup semi (Arsenal) and final. In Europe, the QF (Ronaldo et al), SF (Zidane et al) and final v Bayern.

I love Stam (he's in my AT XI) but four of those opponents had several of the greatest players of the day. Johnsen definitely played his part.

 

[TsuWave]

On paper yes. Historically im not so sure.
People fail to remember that we only really played two strong teams in 2008.
One who we had to park the bus for our dear lives against, Barcelona and the other we were a kick away from losing to, Chelsea.

Compare that to 99 where we had to play Barcelona twice, Bayern Munich three times, Inter Milan twice and Juventus twice.That 2008 team would literally get suffocated by 99s high press and intensity.

The core of that 2008 team got to 3 CL finals in the space of 4 years. all the while dominating the league, I think it won 3 in 4 years as well, at arguably the time the Premier League was at its strongest, if we were to infer that by the progression of English teams in the CL.

I’m sure we picked up a couple domestic leagues on the way as well (can’t check as I’m in a hotel with spotty WiFi)

2008 team was monstrous and was really only stopped by a Barcelona which ended up being the GOAT club side.

That team would have washed most teams any day. It’s the strongest Manchester United team.

 

[SCP]

Depends. I was a big fan of the 1999 team because they were exciting to watch. That duo Cole and Yorke, then the midfield duo with Scholes and Keane with Beckham or Giggs on the wings, probably one of the last great teams playing at a high level on a classic 4x4x2 if we can say this. Excluding Atletico Madrid who plays differently.

On the other hand, if that team had to face the 2008 team lets say on 2 legs on a knockout stage I don't know if the 1999 team would be able to go through. Particularly because they wouldn't have numerical advantage on the midfield and probably would be more exposed to counter attacking football, particularly if they had to take with peak Cristiano, Tevez and Rooney together.

So I would say the balance mixed with explosion from the 2008 would knock the classic 1999, only because they sometimes were more naive, less cynical than the 2008, probably Queiroz influenced a bit the defensive part of that side, it was more controled against the big opponents, particularly on that semifinal vs Barcelona if my memory isn't failing.

 

[Red_Ramirez]

Why is Ronny Johnsen taking so much stick here? I don't remember any problems with him, he was the perfect foil for Stam as I recall.

Johnsen was a very very good centre-back. He was a good footballer and quite versatile. In his first season with us (1996-97) he filled in at left-back and defensive midfield and made it look easy he was that good.

But yeah the Treble season he formed an excellent partnership at the back with Jaap Stam. It's just a shame he suffered from dodgy knees. His career at United was cut short after the Treble season...he barely played for the next two seasons

So yeah a very good defender and should be appreciated more...Stam, Ferdinand and Vidic were just World Class

 

[Red_Ramirez]

I love the 1999 Treble team. I was 19yrs old and grew up watching that group of players so I have great affection for them, That season was the best ride ever.

In all 31 years of watching Manchester Unired however the 2008 team is the strongest I have ever seen

 

[12OunceEpilogue]

I've gone 08 but Lord it's close. 99's midfield is ridiculous while I give 08 attack and defence overall. Those who see 99 dominating the midfield and therefore the match raise a good point but I see the likes of Carrick, Scholes 08 and Hargreaves holding their own and being helped by an on-his-way-to GOAT Ronaldo dropping deep where necessary and the insane industry of Tevez/Rooney just ahead of them. The fluidity of that 08 forward line, both laterally and up and down the pitch, would for me be a key factor in this game given the strength of 99's midfield.

I do feel I'm selling 99 short (Cole/Yorke with Ole/Teddy off the bench, that back four with Pete behind ) but it's just about 08 for me. What a privilege it was to experience both of these teams though, not ten years apart.

 

[Schneckerl]

'99 if they play a KO round
'08 would get more points over a whole season

 

[Oneunited26]

Depends. I was a big fan of the 1999 team because they were exciting to watch. That duo Cole and Yorke, then the midfield duo with Scholes and Keane with Beckham or Giggs on the wings, probably one of the last great teams playing at a high level on a classic 4x4x2 if we can say this. Excluding Atletico Madrid who plays differently.

On the other hand, if that team had to face the 2008 team lets say on 2 legs on a knockout stage I don't know if the 1999 team would be able to go through. Particularly because they wouldn't have numerical advantage on the midfield and probably would be more exposed to counter attacking football, particularly if they had to take with peak Cristiano, Tevez and Rooney together.

So I would say the balance mixed with explosion from the 2008 would knock the classic 1999, only because they sometimes were more naive, less cynical than the 2008, probably Queiroz influenced a bit the defensive part of that side, it was more controled against the big opponents, particularly on that semifinal vs Barcelona if my memory isn't failing.

Really? Consider united faced Bayern three times, Barcelona, inter, juventus, United faced some incredible players that are some of the greatest of all time. Two teams I find more powerful than 2008 united side, arsenal and Bayern 99 through their far superior midfield to 08 united. So it’s not has if united had not faced this kind of opponent, 2008 united were not impressive against the big sides, even avram grant’s Chelsea took united to the very end. If united can beat 99 Bayern without Keane and scholes, they can beat anyone if it’s that same set of hungry players. I would not put Rooney and tevez in the same bracket has some of the players united faced like rivaldo, zidane, to name just a few

 

[MrPooni]

"talking rubish...", "emoji", ...."you're having an absolute nightmare here..." ..... It really hard to have a good debate with someone when he's talking like this, almost like arguing with a teenager.

It's hard to have a good debate with someone who keeps contradicting themselves and then ignoring you when you point it out. Admittedly my tone changed a little after your "internet warrior" aside but that doesn't make all the rubbish you're talking any less rubbish. You said 99 would get dicked by 08 "4-0 every day of the year" which started this all off, then after being weird about your age for a couple of posts you decided to get back to football and said 99 "could beat anyone on any day" which completely goes against what you said before. Now you're back to arguing "anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side" which is more than worthy of the emoji.

You highlighted and perfectly selected point that suit your arguments and ignore the rest.

I highlighted every thing you said that can be disproven by simple fast-checking, the rest of it was just a bunch of superlatives and noise listing the names of players you liked, including one that wasn't even a member of the 07/08 squad – how do you expect anyone to "debate" that? Plus you haven't addressed anything I've said on a footballing level, you keep deflecting and trying to frame me as overly emotional when you're one who keeps losing their shit over silly things like emoji use.

I'd avoid to go too far in that debate as people choices on this thread are more driven by sentiment then fact (hence the whole premise of "older people prefer the 09 side and younger one opt for 2008);

Yes, some people's choices in this thread are driven by sentiment but not mine. If I was being sentimental, I would have picked 07/08 seeing as I was in the stand behind the goal when Terry missed that penalty in Moscow.

this thread will go on the same way than the CR7 vs Messi debate where all side would fight to defend their choice ignoring fact and circumstances (like the 2008 was facing a super opponent in Chelsea with unlimited fund and with a squad assembled with some great players of that era) which will result in what you have already done in selecting some point to suit your arguments and responding to some point without pushing your brain a little bit far to try to understand what the person you're trying to arg against wanted to mean by some points he made.

The only thing this has in common with the Messi vs. Ronaldo debate is that there is no right or wrong answer, it's purely subjective which is why I'm not trying to prove you or anyone else "wrong" about their overall choice – you're just feeling personally attacked because I keep pointing out how ridiculous and contradictory your reasoning has been. And unlike Messi vs. Ronaldo, nobody here has been particularly tribal, aggressive or defensive except for yourself. No one else has made any absurd statements worthy of mockery except yourself. And on a separate but important note, no one else has gotten weird about age except for yourself. Beyond our petty bickering, this has been a throughly enjoyable thread.

So instead of surfing on an interminable debate of who is right or who is wrong, let's just enjoy and respect each other opinion and choice. I back the 2008 side to murder the 1999, anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side. You think I'm wrong or young, right for you, that's not my problem. So enjoy the thread and just ignore my choice.

As @Eckers99 quite rightly pointed out, there's nothing to enjoy or respect about the assertion that 08 would beat 99 "4-0 every day of the year" or "anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side" – it's too insane not to mock, especially on a United forum. There's a reason why literally no other person in this thread has agreed with you or even shared a similar sentiment and the sooner you accept that, the better.

 

[Josh 76]

Just want to make some points about the 2008 team.

1. Owen Hargreaves was probably one of the best holding/man marking/box to box midfielder in the world during that short time. He was England's best player in the 2006 world cup. Very underrated at Utd, probably due to his injuries.

2. Wes Brown was on fire that season. He was up and down the right side and was also menace in defending set pieces for us. He even scored against the Scousers from a corner that season

3. The 2008 team should have won the FA cup that season had it not been for a awful ref in that quarter final against Portsmouth. (The eventual winners).

4. Our subs. Nani, Anderson (yes he was awesome that year). Park, Fletcher, Giggs, Gary Nev, Oshea , Saha.
Squad was so strong.

5. The 2008 team had the best player in the world.

I loved the 1999 team. But for me the 2008 team had the magic.

 

[DanClancy]

There's only 3 players from both sides who are guaranteed to make a combined side in Keane, Ronaldo & Scholes.

Big Pete was the better keeper but perhaps not by 99.
Gary Neville was the better right back wasn't at his peak then.
We had 3 world class centre backs in Stam, Rio & Vidic. Rio for me is the best I've seen at United.
Irwin was the better left back but past his peak by 99.


My front 6 would be Beckham, Keane, Scholes, Giggs, Ronaldo & Rooney but you could easily make a case for Yorke & Tevez to be included.
2008 was the better squad, United may never have a squad like that with such a brilliant age profile too. Such a shame it was allowed to age without adequate replacements been bought due to owners.

 

[Minimalist]

Just want to make some points about the 2008 team.

1. Owen Hargreaves was probably one of the best holding/man marking/box to box midfielder in the world during that short time. He was England's best player in the 2006 world cup. Very underrated at Utd, probably due to his injuries.

Yes but unfortunately for him, his match-up in this discussion is Roy fecking Keane.

 

[Red_Ramirez]

Just want to make some points about the 2008 team.

1. Owen Hargreaves was probably one of the best holding/man marking/box to box midfielder in the world during that short time. He was England's best player in the 2006 world cup. Very underrated at Utd, probably due to his injuries.

2. Wes Brown was on fire that season. He was up and down the right side and was also menace in defending set pieces for us. He even scored against the Scousers from a corner that season

3. The 2008 team should have won the FA cup that season had it not been for a awful ref in that quarter final against Portsmouth. (The eventual winners).

4. Our subs. Nani, Anderson (yes he was awesome that year). Park, Fletcher, Giggs, Gary Nev, Oshea , Saha.
Squad was so strong.

5. The 2008 team had the best player in the world.

I loved the 1999 team. But for me the 2008 team had the magic.

He was quality.His crossing on the run was world class imo. His concentration and determination was spot on game in game out. Such a shame he suffered so many injuries though

 

[Oneunited26]

It's hard to have a good debate with someone who keeps contradicting themselves and then ignoring you when you point it out. Admittedly my tone changed a little after your "internet warrior" aside but that doesn't make all the rubbish you're talking any less rubbish. You said 99 would get dicked by 08 "4-0 every day of the year" which started this all off, then after being weird about your age for a couple of posts you decided to get back to football and said 99 "could beat anyone on any day" which completely goes against what you said before. Now you're back to arguing "anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side" which is more than worthy of the emoji.
I highlighted every thing you said that can be disproven by simple fast-checking, the rest of it was just a bunch of superlatives and noise listing the names of players you liked, including one that wasn't even a member of the 07/08 squad – how do you expect anyone to "debate" that? Plus you haven't addressed anything I've said on a footballing level, you keep deflecting and trying to frame me as overly emotional when you're one who keeps losing their shit over silly things like emoji use.
Yes, some people's choices in this thread are driven by sentiment but not mine. If I was being sentimental, I would have picked 07/08 seeing as I was in the stand behind the goal when Terry missed that penalty in Moscow.
The only thing this has in common with the Messi vs. Ronaldo debate is that there is no right or wrong answer, it's purely subjective which is why I'm not trying to prove you or anyone else "wrong" about their overall choice – you're just feeling personally attacked because I keep pointing out how ridiculous and contradictory your reasoning has been. And unlike Messi vs. Ronaldo, nobody here has been particularly tribal, aggressive or defensive except for yourself. No one else has made any absurd statements worthy of mockery except yourself. And on a separate but important note, no one else has gotten weird about age except for yourself. Beyond our petty bickering, this has been a throughly enjoyable thread.
As @Eckers99 quite rightly pointed out, there's nothing to enjoy or respect about the assertion that 08 would beat 99 "4-0 every day of the year" or "anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side" – it's too insane not to mock, especially on a United forum. There's a reason why literally no other person in this thread has agreed with you or even shared a similar sentiment and the sooner you accept that, the better.

You hit the nail on the head really, if I look at the two teams only players in the 2008 side that would get into the 99 side would be Ferdinand, Ronaldo and maybe evra, but Irwin can score penalty’s and I still like Irwin over evra. Rooney and tevez I wouldn’t have over York and Cole the latter were just too good

My 11 would be
Pete
Neville Ferdinand Stam irwin
Beckham Keane scholes Ronaldo
York Cole

Tevez and Rooney never clicked week in week out and always missed games, York and cole ripped up the league that year that they cannot be dropped. Becks can’t

 

[LoveFootball]

Good luck finding someone who'll refrain from mocking that opinion, let alone respect it.

Yeah like many United fans who can't refrain from mocking the opinion that Messi is better player than Ronaldo because of nostalgia; or when SAF himself said that he only coached 4 world class players during his time here, an opinion that many people share apart from some United fans on redcafe. When it comes to sentimentalism and nostalgia I know you can't arg against our fans especially when it comes to defending the legendary team that did the legendary exploit of winning the treble. No no, I'm aware that many will mock that opinion even if the poll shows that many on here are not too far away from my view.

It's hard to have a good debate with someone who keeps contradicting themselves and then ignoring you when you point it out. Admittedly my tone changed a little after your "internet warrior" aside but that doesn't make all the rubbish you're talking any less rubbish. You said 99 would get dicked by 08 "4-0 every day of the year" which started this all off, then after being weird about your age for a couple of posts you decided to get back to football and said 99 "could beat anyone on any day" which completely goes against what you said before. Now you're back to arguing "anything less than a 4-0 win would flatter the 99 side" which is more than worthy of the emoji.
.

That's called constructive contradiction dude.

I highlighted every thing you said that can be disproven by simple fast-checking, the rest of it was just a bunch of superlatives and noise listing the names of players you liked, including one that wasn't even a member of the 07/08 squad – how do you expect anyone to "debate" that? Plus you haven't addressed anything I've said on a footballing level, you keep deflecting and trying to frame me as overly emotional when you're one who keeps losing their shit over silly things like emoji use.
Yes, some people's choices in this thread are driven by sentiment but not mine. If I was being sentimental, I would have picked 07/08 seeing as I was in the stand behind the goal when Terry missed that penalty in Moscow.

That's the reason why I told you to push your brain a little bit far and try to analyze things using context. Like when you said that the 99 team scored the same number of goals in the league then the 2008 side, does this prove anything other than the 2 sides had amazing attacks? Does Mourinho Madrid scoring more goals than Pep's Barcelona prove anything other than the 2 teams had great attackers? does it tell you which side was far superior to the other? will you say that Jose's Madrid were better than Pep Barca?
Or the fact that the 2008 side had to face too much competition against a great Chelsea side plus Arsenal and Chelsea and the fact that PL was becoming more competitive than it used to be?
For Berbatov, I'll give it to you, it was a mistake to include him in.

Then you said nobody has been aggressive, did you read your replies? And I don't care about anyone's else opinion, I'm not here to win opinion or make people accept my point of view; I give my opinion, if you don't agree with it and find it ridiculous good for you, that's not my problem.
And I don't get your problem with age, does it really matter?

Anyway, the reason why I said that the 2008 can win 4-0 against the 99 side is because the 2008 had better individuals especially in defense and attack. That side was more mature and pragmatic; they could punish you on counter if you were that naive and openly attack them (see Arsenal 8-2, Arsenal CL 3-0 or Roma 7-1); knowing the 99 side I presume they'd come and go all attack but the mature version of SAF would know better how to contain them and punish them on counter with an amazing Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez. I think it fair to picture the outcome of that game, and I can calmly predict a 4-0
scoreline.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

@LoveFootball predicting that the 1999 team wouldn't score at all is blasphemy against our club.

 

[Eckers99]

Yeah like many United fans who can't refrain from mocking the opinion that Messi is better player than Ronaldo because of nostalgia; or when SAF himself said that he only coached 4 world class players during his time here, an opinion that many people share apart from some United fans on redcafe. When it comes to sentimentalism and nostalgia I know you can't arg against our fans especially when it comes to defending the legendary team that did the legendary exploit of winning the treble. No no, I'm aware that many will mock that opinion even if the poll shows that many on here are not too far away from my view.


That's called constructive contradiction dude.


That's the reason why I told you to push your brain a little bit far and try to analyze things using context. Like when you said that the 99 team scored the same number of goals in the league then the 2008 side, does this prove anything other than the 2 sides had amazing attacks? Does Mourinho Madrid scoring more goals than Pep's Barcelona prove anything other than the 2 teams had great attackers? does it tell you which side was far superior to the other? will you say that Jose's Madrid were better than Pep Barca?
Or the fact that the 2008 side had to face too much competition against a great Chelsea side plus Arsenal and Chelsea and the fact that PL was becoming more competitive than it used to be?
For Berbatov, I'll give it to you, it was a mistake to include him in.

Then you said nobody has been aggressive, did you read your replies? And I don't care about anyone's else opinion, I'm not here to win opinion or make people accept my point of view; I give my opinion, if you don't agree with it and find it ridiculous good for you, that's not my problem.
And I don't get your problem with age, does it really matter?

Anyway, the reason why I said that the 2008 can win 4-0 against the 99 side is because the 2008 had better individuals especially in defense and attack. That side was more mature and pragmatic; they could punish you on counter if you were that naive and openly attack them (see Arsenal 8-2, Arsenal CL 3-0 or Roma 7-1); knowing the 99 side I presume they'd come and go all attack but the mature version of SAF would know better how to contain them and punish them on counter with an amazing Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez. I think it fair to picture the outcome of that game, and I can calmly predict a 4-0
scoreline.

The difference is, those debates are marginal, so making an argument depends very much on personal opinion. Anyone could make a compelling argument for either Messi or Ronaldo, nobody other than you has attempted to make a compelling argument for the '08 side being astronomically better than the '99 side. You've gone beyond a personal opinion and have just made a wildly exaggerated statement that has quite rightly been contested by other posters. If someone said that Messi was the greatest player of all time and that Ronaldo would struggle to make the top 50, they would be slapped down. And, the chances are, it would be someone like you making that kind of ludicrous comment.

The poll doesn't show posters who think the '08 team would win by a huge margin, it shows who they think would win. A lot of those posters would say it would be very, very close. If you don't believe me, why don't you start a new thread with a poll asking 'would the '08 team beat the '99 team by at least 4 goals'? You won't, because it would be a total waste of time and you already know what the result would be.

 

[LoveFootball]

@LoveFootball predicting that the 1999 team wouldn't score at all is blasphemy against our club.

Hahaha, I know it's blasphemous to even think so, but in my view I'm pretty sure that 99 side would struggle to score against the defense and tactical organisation of the 08 side. That 08 team was a machine built to win and concede less; I think they hold the record for more clean shit in the league (not sure about this); it was a challenge for other team to score against them let alone win a game. Even Pep's Barcelona struggled to score against that team.

The difference is, those debates are marginal, so making an argument depends very much on personal opinion. Anyone could make a compelling argument for either Messi or Ronaldo, nobody other than you has attempted to make a compelling argument for the '08 side being astronomically better than the '99 side. You've gone beyond a personal opinion and have just made a wildly exaggerated statement that has quite rightly been contested by other posters. If someone said that Messi was the greatest player of all time and that Ronaldo would struggle to make the top 50, they would be slapped down. And, the chances are, it would be someone like you making that kind of ludicrous comment.

The poll doesn't show posters who think the '08 team would win by a huge margin, it shows who they think would win. A lot of those posters would say it would be very, very close. If you don't believe me, why don't you start a new thread with a poll asking 'would the '08 team beat the '99 team by at least 4 goals'? You won't, because it would be a total waste of time and you already know what the result would be.

And this would be rightly laughed at as Ronaldo have been fighting with Messi for the best player the last decade. Ronaldo has proven to be at least in the top 10 of best players in the history of football.

But this is different from my view on the outcome of an hypothetical confrontation between the 1999 and 2008 sides. I think few hours before the 2011 CL final you would not agree with someone who would have told you that Barcelona would play us over the park; everyone was sure about it apart from United fans who opted to ignore the fact that that Barca team was something apart. The same is happening on here; people are blinded by sentiments and nostalgia and failed to see the evidences that tactically and individually the 2008 side was far superior than the 1999 team, in attack alone we had 3 amazing players who were able of scoring 20+ goals each with a Ronaldo capable of monstrous numbers; we had a defense that was rock solid and modern and was leaking very few goals and when you add to this the tactical maturity of SAF you had a machine that was unplayable; many great sides struggled to score against , even Pep Barca couldn't put 1 past that team

I can't start such a thread because I don't have the privilege to do so i the main forum, but I can picture the kind of responses I'd be getting as sentiments will drive many people's view. And when I was taking about the poll, I didn't say they are agreeing with my view, I said they are not far way from it as most predict a victory of the 2008 side.

 

[Oneunited26]

Hahaha, I know it's blasphemous to even think so, but in my view I'm pretty sure that 99 side would struggle to score against the defense and tactical organisation of the 08 side. That 08 team was a machine built to win and concede less; I think they hold the record for more clean shit in the league (not sure about this); it was a challenge for other team to score against them let alone win a game. Even Pep's Barcelona struggled to score against that team.


And this would be rightly laughed at as Ronaldo have been fighting with Messi for the best player the last decade. Ronaldo has proven to be at least in the top 10 of best players in the history of football.

But this is different from my view on the outcome of an hypothetical confrontation between the 1999 and 2008 sides. I think few hours before the 2011 CL final you would not agree with someone who would have told you that Barcelona would play us over the park; everyone was sure about it apart from United fans who opted to ignore the fact that that Barca team was something apart. The same is happening on here; people are blinded by sentiments and nostalgia and failed to see the evidences that tactically and individually the 2008 side was far superior than the 1999 team, in attack alone we had 3 amazing players who were able of scoring 20+ goals each with a Ronaldo capable of monstrous numbers; we had a defense that was rock solid and modern and was leaking very few goals and when you add to this the tactical maturity of SAF you had a machine that was unplayable; many great sides struggled to score against , even Pep Barca couldn't put 1 past that team

I can't start such a thread because I don't have the privilege to do so i the main forum, but I can picture the kind of responses I'd be getting as sentiments will drive many people's view. And when I was taking about the poll, I didn't say they are agreeing with my view, I said they are not far way from it as most predict a victory of the 2008 side.

You know what makes that argument null and void that the 99 united side would struggle to score against the 2008 side, give you two sides who were has well drilled has the 2008 side, the arsenal and Bayern Munich sides of 1999, better midfields than the 2008 side, and has strong at the back. The 2008 side struggled against all the big sides, we even struggled to beat a Barcelona side in 2008, rudderless and were destroyed by a very mediocre Real Madrid team, so already you get the picture 1999 have faced that kind of well drilled opponents and they beat them. Hell 1999 went 120 minutes against arsenal, with 10 men beat them, then went to Turin 4 days later and beat juve with prime Zidane and David’s let’s not forget, and juve were the best side in Europe at the time

Has for the so called attaching trio of ronaldo Rooney and tevez, Rooney and Tevez didn’t even score 20 goals. You using peps Barcelona and why people couldn’t see that the final peps Barcelona were better, you telling me the fact the 2008 united side who never played a three man midfield they played a 442 flued with an ageing scholes and giggs, Carrick who is no Alonzo, could overrun Keane, with either butt or Scholes next to him, with beckham and giggs stretching the play. You telling me the 2008 united midfield could dominate? They never dominated games like peps Barca could, you could beat that united team, Chelsea did it, city twice beat united, Avram grant not only beat united but a penalty kick away from winning the CL final, 99 united beat one of the strongest Bayern sides without Keane and Scholes in the final which is a freak of nature in itself

It’s not sentiments, 99 united faced everyone, Barcelona twice, Bayern three times, inter twice, juventus twice. If united could beat Bayern Munich who I argue could dominate that 2008 united side through power of their midfield, 99 could take them on. Like I say if the 99 side can best juve, Bayern, Arsenal, barca, that’s just four I named, they faced all sorts of styles of sides, even overcoming sides that the united 99 mentally had to overcome has juve, arsenal and Bayern were their bad luck teams. So no that 99 side faced the greatest teams I have seen, faced all the acid tests. So don’t tell everyone they couldn’t do it, because that 99 side could they proved it

 

[LoveFootball]

You know what makes that argument null and void that the 99 united side would struggle to score against the 2008 side, give you two sides who were has well drilled has the 2008 side, the arsenal and Bayern Munich sides of 1999, better midfields than the 2008 side, and has strong at the back. The 2008 side struggled against all the big sides, we even struggled to beat a Barcelona side in 2008, rudderless and were destroyed by a very mediocre Real Madrid team, so already you get the picture 1999 have faced that kind of well drilled opponents and they beat them. Hell 1999 went 120 minutes against arsenal, with 10 men beat them, then went to Turin 4 days later and beat juve with prime Zidane and David’s let’s not forget, and juve were the best side in Europe at the time

I don't want to lack respect or downplay the achievement of that 1999 side but I think that triumph against Bayern was a peace of lack and good fortune. Like our recent win against Juventus, it was a smash and grab win and if that final was to be replayed, 9 times out of 10 Bayern win that game. They dominated the whole game and we were lucky to reach last minutes with a 1 goal deficit. I never recall the 2008 team being dominated like that apart from the time we met those Spanish cheaters. No team dominated the 2008 side the way Bayern dominated that 1999 side. We struggled to beat Barcelona because they were a very good team with talents such as Iniesta, Xavi, Messi, Eto and went on to become one of the best team of the history of football, and that team struggled to put 1 past our 2008 team.

And what Real Madrid are you talking about? Are you living in a parallel universe where we faced and got destroyed by Madrid in 2008?

Has for the so called attaching trio of ronaldo Rooney and tevez, Rooney and Tevez didn’t even score 20 goals. You using peps Barcelona and why people couldn’t see that the final peps Barcelona were better, you telling me the fact the 2008 united side who never played a three man midfield they played a 442 flued with an ageing scholes and giggs, Carrick who is no Alonzo, could overrun Keane, with either butt or Scholes next to him, with beckham and giggs stretching the play. You telling me the 2008 united midfield could dominate? They never dominated games like peps Barca could, you could beat that united team, Chelsea did it, city twice beat united, Avram grant not only beat united but a penalty kick away from winning the CL final, 99 united beat one of the strongest Bayern sides without Keane and Scholes in the final which is a freak of nature in itself

That trio scored 80%(not quiet sure about the real % here) of the 80 goals we scored in the league that season with Rooney scoring 12 and assistant 10, Tevez 14 goals and 6 assists and Ronaldo with 31 goals and 6 assists. They were an amazing trio which could interchange position and create havoc in the the attack.
The 442 United played was just on paper as in reality during games it'd change into 433 with one winger droping back in midfielder, or into 451. Yes Scholes was getting old but he transform himself into a midfielder maestro and coupled with another Maestro like Carrick, they could cause damage with their incisive passes and could control games with their intelligent. Pretty sure that midfielder could go toe to toe with a midfielder of bulldog in Keane and however was associated to him. Yes they never dominated that Pep Barca, who did? Yes they could be beaten, like every team, even prime Pep Barca could be beaten; Chelsea didn't beat us in the final, what are you talking about? It was a tough game against a great Chelsea team build with great players.

And Don't forget, the 99 side were at their prime with many players reaching their prime years, but that 88 side was still raw and didn't really reach their maximum.

It’s not sentiments, 99 united faced everyone, Barcelona twice, Bayern three times, inter twice, juventus twice. If united could beat Bayern Munich who I argue could dominate that 2008 united side through power of their midfield, 99 could take them on. Like I say if the 99 side can best juve, Bayern, Arsenal, barca, that’s just four I named, they faced all sorts of styles of sides, even overcoming sides that the united 99 mentally had to overcome has juve, arsenal and Bayern were their bad luck teams. So no that 99 side faced the greatest teams I have seen, faced all the acid tests. So don’t tell everyone they couldn’t do it, because that 99 side could they proved it

You can only beat what is in front of you, isn't it? That 2008 beat any team and didn't shy against any opponent.

And the reason why I fancy the 2008 is because, like SAF said one day, attack wins you games but defense wins you titles, and that side had an amazing attack and very strong solid defense. That attacking trio is one of the best in the history of PL and I'm pretty sure they could put 4 past Peter and cause more troubles to Stam and Ronny, and I fancy Rio and Vidic to deal and contain York and Cole easily.
One of the strongest point of that 99 side was his wingers but that is exactly what the 08 side were trained to deal against, the tactic was based on essentially trying to overload the midfield when defend forcing the opponent to go through wings where he'd struggle to beat the FB and put crosses and he succeed to do so, no problem Rio and Vidic were their to deal against any aerial ball.

 

[2cents]

No team dominated the 2008 side the way Bayern dominated that 1999 side.

We played Bayern twice in the group stage that season, and they didn't come close to dominating us in either tie - they were very lucky Schmeichel fecked up in Munich. The key difference in the final was obviously our central midfield had been gutted.

 

[GifLord]

I don't want to lack respect or downplay the achievement of that 1999 side but I think that triumph against Bayern was a peace of lack and good fortune. Like our recent win against Juventus, it was a smash and grab win and if that final was to be replayed, 9 times out of 10 Bayern win that game. They dominated the whole game and we were lucky to reach last minutes with a 1 goal deficit. I never recall the 2008 team being dominated like that apart from the time we met those Spanish cheaters. No team dominated the 2008 side the way Bayern dominated that 1999 side. We struggled to beat Barcelona because they were a very good team with talents such as Iniesta, Xavi, Messi, Eto and went on to become one of the best team of the history of football, and that team struggled to put 1 past our 2008 team.

And what Real Madrid are you talking about? Are you living in a parallel universe where we faced and got destroyed by Madrid in 2008?


That trio scored 80%(not quiet sure about the real % here) of the 80 goals we scored in the league that season with Rooney scoring 12 and assistant 10, Tevez 14 goals and 6 assists and Ronaldo with 31 goals and 6 assists. They were an amazing trio which could interchange position and create havoc in the the attack.
The 442 United played was just on paper as in reality during games it'd change into 433 with one winger droping back in midfielder, or into 451. Yes Scholes was getting old but he transform himself into a midfielder maestro and coupled with another Maestro like Carrick, they could cause damage with their incisive passes and could control games with their intelligent. Pretty sure that midfielder could go toe to toe with a midfielder of bulldog in Keane and however was associated to him. Yes they never dominated that Pep Barca, who did? Yes they could be beaten, like every team, even prime Pep Barca could be beaten; Chelsea didn't beat us in the final, what are you talking about? It was a tough game against a great Chelsea team build with great players.

And Don't forget, the 99 side were at their prime with many players reaching their prime years, but that 88 side was still raw and didn't really reach their maximum.


You can only beat what is in front of you, isn't it? That 2008 beat any team and didn't shy against any opponent.

And the reason why I fancy the 2008 is because, like SAF said one day, attack wins you games but defense wins you titles, and that side had an amazing attack and very strong solid defense. That attacking trio is one of the best in the history of PL and I'm pretty sure they could put 4 past Peter and cause more troubles to Stam and Ronny, and I fancy Rio and Vidic to deal and contain York and Cole easily.
One of the strongest point of that 99 side was his wingers but that is exactly what the 08 side were trained to deal against, the tactic was based on essentially trying to overload the midfield when defend forcing the opponent to go through wings where he'd struggle to beat the FB and put crosses and he succeed to do so, no problem Rio and Vidic were their to deal against any aerial ball.

I think you need to watch the 2008 final again. Because both finals are pretty similar when ti comes to chances both of the opponents wasted

 

[LoveFootball]

We played Bayern twice in the group stage that season, and they didn't come close to dominating us in either tie - they were very lucky Schmeichel fecked up in Munich. The key difference in the final was obviously our central midfield had been gutted.

They didn't dominate us in the group stage yes but we weren't the better side neither, but like most teams at that level of competition they weren't playing at their full potential. Yes we lost Scholes and keane in the final but no one know if their presence would have changed anything in that final.

I think you need to watch the 2008 final again. Because both finals are pretty similar when ti comes to chances both of the opponents wasted

No they aren't the same. The 2008 side was a game of 2 halfs. United dominated the 1st half and Chelsea were much better in the 2nd half with United missing 2 great opportunities to win the game. In the 99 final, bayern were the better team from the start till the end.