It’s why I normally tend to shy away from comparing players from different eras.
If you took any of the great players of the 70s for example, and transformed them forward into a game today, they would be lost. The game is so fast and the players so much fitter that the game would just completely pass them by.
But I don’t think there’s any doubt that if those same players were magically transformed forward as kids and grew up in todays game, they would be as great now as they were then.
And the same applies to Kinkladze to a degree. With his skill and todays methods he probably would be 10 times fitter for a start. And obviously playing with better players will always positively affect your game.
The one thing about him I struggle to get away with though, when considering how good he actually was, is that he played his whole career at second rate ( at best ) clubs. You could argue that Ajax came into the category of ‘top club’ at the time. But he couldn’t get a game for them.
It’s hard to make a case that someone was a top player, when no top club was ever prepared to give him a go, for whatever reason.
I try to avoid comparing players from different eras, as well, as can be attested by my many posts arguing it is not a particularly useful (or viable) exercise.
Hence why I was not doing so with my post. My reference to David/Kev was to highlight his talent and the mention of Sterling was to more simply relate how I think he would be in our current side, versus how he was in our quite poor side.
In any case, though, discussing how a player from the mid-to-late 90s might perform in a current top team is a substantially different them comparing a player from the 70s. There are many players from 25 years ago that would do quite well in the league now without much change for them (and exceptionally well with it).
Whereas basically any player from the 70s, barring perhaps one or two all-time greats would struggle to play in the championship today, as I have argued on more than one occasion.
The era differences are much more pronounced the further back you go, and this comparison become less viable or useful.
Perhaps Kinky would struggle far more than I believe, but I think there is a stronger case for him to do well in our current team then, say, Francis Lee, even though Franny in his pomp, in his era, obviously achieved much more and was rightly more highly regarded.
A player of great moments, but not a great player unfortunately. Undoubtedly entertained and capable of the amazing, but also capable of just not turning up. Not helped by having the most incompetent managers in our history in charge of him obviously, and then Joe Royle who just wanted (maybe needed) a team of battlers
I try and remember the great moments, but by and large and remember his teammates not having a clue when to make a run for him, because they'd lost hope in him trying to make the pass.
Put him in a great side and we'll, it could be great, but he'd more than likely just frustrate.
Give me Benarbia over him any time. Benarbia lifted crap players around him and maybe them play better, Kinkladze just made them all look worse. Not all down to him though that obviously.
I agree with a lot of this.
But, barring the bit about Joe Royal and co [shiver] this could be written about Sterling, hence my allusion to him in my OP. ;-)