Brereton on loan .....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by i961pie

I think Alan Shearer turned down Utd. because he is a Newcastle lad thru' and thru'. Yes he could have won medals and trophies at Utd and he would have made far more money with them as time went on. But at the end of the day when you retire medals and trophies don't mean much whereas now he is a legend in Newcastle and always will be. Probably never as to pay for a drink or a meal again.
Haven't they named a stand after him and didn't Pearce turn down Utd. also?

---

Pearce never turned down Man U
Fergie and Edwards spent 4 hours in the CG car park trying to get in, but it took a certain Mr Clough hanging out of a window and telling them to **** off, that ended that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

Pearce never turned down Man U
Fergie and Edwards spent 4 hours in the CG car park trying to get in, but it took a certain Mr Clough hanging out of a window and telling them to **** off, that ended that.

---

Did Stan Collymore turn down a move?

Lars Bohinen didn't. He wanted a move to the champions of England. Mr Clough would have sold him to us. But we'd just broken the British transfer (yet again) buying Chris Sutton. Who came to form the best partnership in the Prem.
We also bought Le Saux who displaced Pearce (who didn't win a league title) in the England team. He did go on to win a league title.

We refused to sell Shearer to Many. Our rivals. So sold him to his boyhood club. I believe most clubs in planet earth wanted the best striker in Europe. Pearce was just a solid left back. Nobody in Italy knew him they knew Shearer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champs95

Did Stan Collymore turn down a move?

Lars Bohinen didn't. He wanted a move to the champions of England. Mr Clough would have sold him to us. But we'd just broken the British transfer (yet again) buying Chris Sutton. Who came to form the best partnership in the Prem.
We also bought Le Saux who displaced Pearce (who didn't win a league title) in the England team. He did go on to win a league title.

We refused to sell Shearer to Many. Our rivals. So sold him to his boyhood club. I believe most clubs in planet earth wanted the best striker in Europe. Pearce was just a solid left back. Nobody in Italy knew him they knew Shearer.

---

I'm afraid I have to disagree with your comparison of Pearce and Le Saux.
I think most neutrals would rate Pearce as the 'greater' player.
For sure Le Saux won a title, and maybe some other medals with Chelsea. But you must look at the clubs then.
Blackburn 1994 was a very strong side and deserved champions. As good as Le Saux may have been, I doubt he would be considered the 'star' of defense let alone the team (which would be Shearer, followed by Sutton and Sherwood0. The Forest side that Pearce played in, was good but never 'championship winning good'. But he did win a few medals there too. But Forest then were still behind the dominant teams of the era, Liverpool, Everton and Arsenal, and so a league title was beyond Pearce's reach.


And I bring you forward to Euro 2000, England v Romania, where Dan Petrescu, who was Le Saux's substitute at left back at Chelsea. Well Dan rang rings round Le saux in that match. I believe he even scored from 1 such move dribbling past Le Saux twice. I also remember another England match before this (maybe in the WC 1998) when again he was caught flat footed.

Of course I'm not saying he's a bad player on the basis of 2 matches, he was a reasonably good defender, but he won't be in any shortlist of the best ever England left backs. I would rate Ashley Cole higher than him as well. Kenny Sansom was another. Pearce was a dependable and at 1 stage, considered world class, of course not in the same vein as his contemporaries at the time, Maldini and Brehme, but not that far behind.

But by the time Le Saux played his 1st game for England in 1994, Pearce's career was already winding down and thus if you make the comparison that he's better, because we won something or displaced Pearce in the position, I think it would be unfair. A fairer comparison would be to examine both players at heir peak. If I'm not wrong, Le Saux only displayed Pearce after Euro 96. So even then (19941995), Pearce was ahead of Le Saux in the pecking order for country. But yeah, I'll agree he did enough to be Pearce's successor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Romanis

I'm afraid I have to disagree with your comparison of Pearce and Le Saux.
I think most neutrals would rate Pearce as the 'greater' player.
For sure Le Saux won a title, and maybe some other medals with Chelsea. But you must look at the clubs then.
Blackburn 1994 was a very strong side and deserved champions. As good as Le Saux may have been, I doubt he would be considered the 'star' of defense let alone the team (which would be Shearer, followed by Sutton and Sherwood0. The Forest side that Pearce played in, was good but never 'championship winning good'. But he did win a few medals there too. But Forest then were still behind the dominant teams of the era, Liverpool, Everton and Arsenal, and so a league title was beyond Pearce's reach.


And I bring you forward to Euro 2000, England v Romania, where Dan Petrescu, who was Le Saux's substitute at left back at Chelsea. Well Dan rang rings round Le saux in that match. I believe he even scored from 1 such move dribbling past Le Saux twice. I also remember another England match before this (maybe in the WC 1998) when again he was caught flat footed.

Of course I'm not saying he's a bad player on the basis of 2 matches, he was a reasonably good defender, but he won't be in any shortlist of the best ever England left backs. I would rate Ashley Cole higher than him as well. Kenny Sansom was another. Pearce was a dependable and at 1 stage, considered world class, of course not in the same vein as his contemporaries at the time, Maldini and Brehme, but not that far behind.

But by the time Le Saux played his 1st game for England in 1994, Pearce's career was already winding down and thus if you make the comparison that he's better, because we won something or displaced Pearce in the position, I think it would be unfair. A fairer comparison would be to examine both players at heir peak. If I'm not wrong, Le Saux only displayed Pearce after Euro 96. So even then (19941995), Pearce was ahead of Le Saux in the pecking order for country. But yeah, I'll agree he did enough to be Pearce's successor.

---

Again, I just found it comical that the daft racist was trying to compare a left back who had an ok career, and was solid, nothing more nothing less, to the best striker in the Premier League era. Who won his one and only title with little old Blackburn Rovers. But because you kept Pearce, and we refused to sell Al to Man United (our title rivals) that you are a much bigger club? I go back to the mentality of this person.

All you say, I totally agree with. I liked Pearce. I thought Des Walker was much better. And one you should have kept. But yes, Pearce was better than Le Saux. Also worth remembering, we bought Le Saux as a winger and turned him into an international full back. He didn't arrive as one. We created that.
We bought a Chelsea reserve team winger for £650k. We sold him back to Chelsea an international left back for £7.5m.

Yeah I think on the balance of probabilities Walker would be ahead of Pearce but then again slightly different roles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Romanis

I'm afraid I have to disagree with your comparison of Pearce and


Le Saux.
I think most neutrals would rate Pearce as the 'greater' player.
For sure Le Saux won a title, and maybe some other medals with Chelsea. But you must look at the clubs then.
Blackburn 1994 was a very strong side and deserved champions. As good as Le Saux may have been, I doubt he would be considered the 'star' of defense let alone the team (which would be Shearer, followed by Sutton and Sherwood0. The Forest side that Pearce played in, was good but never 'championship winning good'. But he did win a few medals there too. But Forest then were still behind the dominant teams of the era, Liverpool, Everton and Arsenal, and so a league title was beyond Pearce's reach.


And I bring you forward to Euro 2000, England v Romania, where Dan Petrescu, who was Le Saux's substitute at left back at Chelsea. Well Dan rang rings round Le saux in that match. I believe he even scored from 1 such move dribbling past Le Saux twice. I also remember another England match before this (maybe in the WC 1998) when again he was caught flat footed.

Of course I'm not saying he's a bad player on the basis of 2 matches, he was a reasonably good defender, but he won't be in any shortlist of the best ever England left backs. I would rate Ashley Cole higher than him as well. Kenny Sansom was another. Pearce was a dependable and at 1 stage, considered world class, of course not in the same vein as his contemporaries at the time, Maldini and Brehme, but not that far behind.

But by the time Le Saux played his 1st game for England in 1994, Pearce's career was already winding down and thus if you make the comparison that he's better, because we won something or displaced Pearce in the position, I think it would be unfair. A fairer comparison would be to examine both players at heir peak. If I'm not wrong, Le Saux only displayed Pearce after Euro 96. So even then (19941995), Pearce was ahead of Le Saux in the pecking order for country. But yeah, I'll agree he did enough to be Pearce's successor.

---

Sorry but Le saux not fit to even be mentioned in the same breath as Pearce One was a warrior a captain of his club and country with 78 England caps Le Saux was a good player But the comparison ends there any genuine foot fan will say the same

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistaram

Sorry but Le saux not fit to even be mentioned in the same breath as Pearce One was a warrior a captain of his club and country with 78 England caps Le Saux was a good player But the comparison ends there any genuine foot fan will say the same

---

Well, we did ok with him. Cost us very little. We won a league title, in which he played a massive part. Games under pressure going for a title. Not many show that form under massive pressure. Pearce a better player, but never won anything of real note. Other than s cup. Never got anywhere near a league title. So while he looked amazing for a mid table at best Forest side, he never had the pressure every week. Going for a league title.
Not saying Le Saux was the best. But sectioned him into the England full back he became. Not bad for a crappy little club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champs95

Well, we did ok with him. Cost us very little. We won a league title, in which he played a massive part. Games
under pressure going for a title. Not many show that form under massive pressure. Pearce a better player, but never won anything of real note. Other than s cup. Never got anywhere near a league title. So while he looked amazing for a mid table at best Forest side, he never had the pressure every week. Going for a league title.
Not saying Le Saux was the best. But sectioned him into the England full back he became. Not bad for a crappy little club.

---

I've already said Le Saux was good player But to try and put him ahead of Pearce is silly Your only judging it If somebody has played in a title winning side and another player has not they are inferior Some of the best players to grace the game have never won the title To say he's not had the pressure every week of winning a title There's a lot more pressure captaining your country than being a squad member in a title challenging team If you ask a 100 football fans who was the better left back In sure at least 99 would say Pearce

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mistaram

I've already said Le Saux was good player But to try and put him ahead of Pearce is silly Your only judging it If somebody has played in a title winning side and another player has not they are inferior Some of the best players to grace the game have never won the title To say he's not had the pressure every week of winning a title There's a lot more pressure captaining your country than being a squad member in a title challenging team If you ask a 100 football fans who was the better left back In sure at least 99 would say Pearce

---

Not even worth comparing. Total idiot for suggesting it.
Pearce would have won a lot more caps as well, but for the press pushing for Le Saux. He also didn't turn pro until he was 23. Went from non league to Coventry before Forest. Cost us 230k as a make weight in a deal involving Butterworth.
I think it's safe to say that the Muslim apologist and Corbynite / jew hater is way out his depth on this opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

Not even worth comparing. Total idiot for suggesting it.
Pearce would have won a lot more caps as
well, but for the press pushing for Le Saux. He also didn't turn pro until he was 23. Went from non league to Coventry before Forest. Cost us 230k as a make weight in a deal involving Butterworth.
I think it's safe to say that the Muslim apologist and Corbynite / jew hater is way out his depth on this opinion.

---

Yes doesn't matter to me who he played for players like Pearce don't come around very often