I was going to defend Frank De Boer, notwithstanding his problems in Europe (which were not all his fault), but I wouldn't stand up for either Overmars or Kluivert as being other than relative flops.

The Overmars/Petit transfer remains for me Exhibit A in support of the theory that Wenger is a master at knowing exactly when to sell players. Paddy Vieira is probably Exhibit B.

The Purple Cow wrote:

QUOTE:
No I don't think he is, H.B.

You need to look at your own prejudices.

Get off the stage, will you. You're the guy who thinks Winston Bogarde was a fantastic player.

I perhaps wonder if Johan Cruyff is in fact the greatest Ajax player ever. Either way, I always liked Litmanen. I think Liverpool criminally underused him during his time in England.

He's still in England. Or at least, getting paid by an English club.

If he decides to sign for FC Lahti this summer I think I might well wet myself with excitement.

dotmund wrote:

QUOTE:
I perhaps wonder if Johan Cruyff is in fact the greatest Ajax player ever. Either way, I always liked Litmanen. I think Liverpool criminally underused him during his time in England.

I could be wrong, but the impression I've gotten from Ajax fans--mostly on here--is that Cruyff was never really loved as an Ajax player like Litmanen was.

Why should the amount of cash paid for Overmars have anything to do with him being a successful player or not? He went to Barca and held down a first team place during his entire time there. If he had spent most of his time on the bench, then maybe you could call him a flop. Overpriced, yes. Flop, no.

Kluivert was one of the better strikers in Europe for about three seasons at Barca, averaging at least a goal every two games. His form was nearly exactly the same as it was at Ajax, where he was always in the shadow of much better players. To flop means that you haven't lived up to expectations, but Kluivert knocked in the goals just as he did at Ajax.

He went to Barca and held down a first team place during his entire time there.

Overmars made 39 league starts for Barcelona in four years. That might be your definition of holding down a first team place, but it ain't mine.

His overall form for them was also pretty unimpressive compared to the way he played for Ajax and, to a slightly lesser extent, Arsenal. I remember watching him against Atletico Madrid one night in 2001 or so and wondering had he taken a load of drugs beforehand.

Arsenal were very lucky to get two good seasons out of Overmars after his injury, but in his last season at arsenal he was a joke. at £25 million he must be the worst value for money barcelona ever had (except for maybe the £29 million for saviola)

frank de boer was far too slow to play at centre half for barcelona. To be honest you basically need to be uperman to play at centre half for them I think.

Kluivert did score a good few goals for barcelona, but I could have done that playing alongside Figo and rivaldo. Kluivert didn't score any important goals. He just got paid an outrageous sum of money, partied and generally took the piss.

QUOTE:
Overmars made 39 league starts for Barcelona in four years. That might be your definition of holding down a first team place, but it ain't mine.

Was Henrik Larsson a flop at Barcelona?

hmm, free transfer, first sub, set up both goals in cl final. He was ok.

And I am the Life wrote:

QUOTE:
Kluivert did score a good few goals for barcelona, but I could have done that playing alongside Figo and rivaldo.

That's just what he did at Ajax, scored goals alongside Kanu, Finidi, Litmanen and Ronald de Boer. Kluivert was never the star at Ajax.

At Milan, when he was stuck up front all by himself in the typical Italian striker role, he failed.

He wasn't any better or worse at Barcelona than he was at Ajax, so could hardly be judged to have been a flop. He did exactly what any scout worth his salt would have predicted he would do. Until, that is, he started getting this ridiculous idea about becoming a playmaker.

Frank de Boer is probably one of the best centre/fullbacks in European football of the past 15 years. I don't like him, but he was good.

hmm, free transfer, first sub, set up both goals in cl final. He was ok.

Plus Larsson was 33 by the time he went out there. Overmars was 27 and supposed to be in his prime.

De Boer (I initially typed De Bore) was a very good player in the 1990s who disimproved sharply when he went to Spain. Some of Barcelona's worst ever European defeats happened with him in the team. It wasn't all his fault, Barca had some really bad defenders around that time (Okunowo, Christanval, Bogarde, a massively over-the-hill Nadal), but in general he did not do his stuff for that club. His chronic lack of pace didn't help, though it didn't seem to do him much harm while at Ajax.

Overmars had the knees of a 33 year old by the time he got to Barca, yet he didn't do too badly for himself.

I forgot Super Edwin van der Saar. He turned out OK -- perhaps by avoiding the career-killing trip to the Catalan?

My daughter says he bears a striking resemblance to the cast of "Meerkat Manor."

van der saar was a disaster at juventus. They sent him to the optician to see if there was something seriously wrong with his eyes. there was a reason why he wound up at fulham.

Here, in Italy, most of the people I speak to don't rate VDS, due to his difficult time at Juve. He seems to have chosen Turin to have his post-Ajax angst.

I think he has been, is, a top keeper, as do some of more enlightened ones who think there is a world outide their window.

Some still refuse to rate Rush highly, for the same reason.