Two greats

[fpowl]

Been think about the class that bannan brings to the team and how he makes us tick and the way he goes about it

it reminds me of a certain Sheridan there are obvious differences in the divisions players they played with and of course the modern game to what it was 25-30 years ago but here’s the controversial question bannan or Sheridan? 

 

Both class 

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

Bannan's a great Championship player; Sheridan was a great player.

[alanharper]

Different playing styles and you can't put Bannan at Shez's level yet. Sheridan did it in the top flight and in the one season he was outside it got promoted and scored the winner in a cup final. 

 

Bannan gets all over the pitch and gets stuck in, whereas Sheridan was more of a cultured playmaker who had Carlton Palmer alongside him to do all the running. 

 

 

.

Edited September 23, 2018 by alanharper
typo

[should know better]

No comparison. Sheridan better in the air and  much more aggressive in the tackle. Sheridan a destructive passer of the ball and the better goal scorer.

 

I'm afraid Bannan gets away with being one of the worst midfielders out of possession, constantly loses or lets his man drift off him. He gets a lot of touches by coming back to play with and between the centre backs but this often drags a man with him which then puts Lees in an uncomfortable position. 

 

You cannot compare Sheridans more creative incisive plays to a lot of Bannan's punt and hope balls. Bannan needs to operate in a more forward (less comfortable) areas of the pitch and not encourage the long ball when teams press us.

[bigash_swfc]

Football in general has changed alot since the days of John Sheridan...

 

Players are better athletes these days. Obviously Bannan's physically limited but lets not use this thread to bash bannan, They've got different attributes, Bannan is a special player, just like most modern day businesses, it's not about what you've done for us in the past, it's what you can do for us in the future. So lets not put him down.

 

Getting to the premier league will see all the "legends" turn up, show interest and want to be reaffiliated with the club again.

[MartinOwlMan]

Bannan is exceptional. Really happy he is at the club and has extended his stay. 

 

Sheridan is for me the stand out Wednesday player of my lifetime, so I can't put someone even as good as Bannan ahead of him.

[torryowl]

both very good  for the era they played/play in ……

[Mystic Neg]

Sheridan was better but that's not to say Bannan isn't class at this level. That said, I'm not sure whether Bannan could cut it in the Prem, he's outstanding at this level though.

 

He's Barry Bannan, not the new Sheridan but love him all the same.

[pgmetcalf]

Why do people always try and make comparisons? 

[lukestheman82]

10 hours ago, fpowl said:

Been think about the class that bannan brings to the team and how he makes us tick and the way he goes about it

it reminds me of a certain Sheridan there are obvious differences in the divisions players they played with and of course the modern game to what it was 25-30 years ago but here’s the controversial question bannan or Sheridan? 

 

Both class 

Thanks, like I needed a reminder that I'm getting old. 

 

I'd say Sheridan. 

[hasthagotanycheese]

34 minutes ago, pgmetcalf said:

Why do people always try and make comparisons? 

You better get yourself to TC Harrisons as there are no comparisons

[FreshOwl]

10 hours ago, alanharper said:

Different playing styles and you can't put Bannan at Shez's level yet. Sheridan did it in the top flight and in the one season he was outside it got promoted and scored the winner in a cup final. 

 

Bannan gets all over the pitch and gets stuck in, whereas Sheridan was more of a cultured playmaker who had Carlton Palmer alongside him to do all the running. 

 

 

.

Sheridan did it at a higher level, but the modern game has improved tenfold compared to 25 years ago 

[Ever the pessimist]

38 minutes ago, pgmetcalf said:

Why do people always try and make comparisons? 

 

Why do people always make generalisations?

[Inspector Lestrade]

Just now, Ever the pessimist said:

 

Why do people always make generalisations?

 

Ahem

[peacock1961]

if he was as good as Sheridan, then he'd be in the top league. He isn't.

[Owl At Risk]

If the Sheridan of then played now he would be way off the pace of premier level. He'd probably even struggle to make waves in the championship.

 

However a player of Sheridan's ability playing today, with the advanced level of sports science and (hopefully) abstinence from 6 pint post training refreshers, certainly wouldn't be playing for us.

[peacock1961]

its all about time and place, if Sheridan was about today and had to adhere to the improvements in training and responsibility he would be one of the best in the premier league, likewise George Best would be head and shoulders above Messi and Ronaldo, but thats another argument.

[archieswfc]

Nice positive debate but it's not even a close one. Shez by an absolute country mile. Totally different class.

[bobness]

1 hour ago, pgmetcalf said:

Why do people always try and make comparisons? 

It's only blasphemous when it comes to our lord and saviour Megson, so carry on I say.

 

 

[sternlad]

Being predominantly left footed, would it be better to compare Baz to Tommy Craig? Not sure Baz would match Tommo’s power of shot, but their passing ability is very similar. Tommo’s first touch was sublime, but Baz has such a low centre of gravity his turns are much sharper. Difficult to compare players from such different eras, as good footballers in the 70’s and 80’s were inevitably hacked to the turf sharpish by the likes of Hunter, Reaney, Madeley, Bremner in fact most of the L***s team, most of the Arsenal team and a good smattering of others an all were littered with what we lovingly referred to as “hatchet men”. Given this, Baz probably has a bit more time than Craig ever had before he was chopped from behind, and I would say Baz has better players around him now than Craig did in his time.