Well that was a dreadful performance. Bergkamp rated as some pass master and he misplacing easy passes all day. Absolutely no goal threat. Me thinks he was overrated a fair bit.
00:07 00:17 00:27 literally his first 3 interactions he misplaced passes what you mean you didn't see any? Then his play in general 00:48 doesn't beat the first man, a poor cross 01:04 his pass is missed. Not exactly his fault but he is involved 01:15 loses the ball in tight space and gives up 01:31 let's the ball run in front of him and loses it when he should have taken a touch initally 02:09 poor shot but was under pressure 02:19 but more time on the ball but he skies it completely, expect better 03:03 plays it off the ref almost losing possession 03:21 first touch is awful which loses possession. Expect better from someone who is lauded as the greatest ever first touch. 03:26 closes down but doesn't make a tackle. Lacking a little effort 05:10 basic ball in, could have played a better ball in was good but wasn't outstanding had no pace to get to the attacker so made it difficult 05:22 again just another mediocre ball 06:23 I expect way better. What a missed opportunity. That is a pathetic attempt at a through ball 06:54 done absolutely brilliant to get that far then ruins it with another poor ball. Maybe the attacker could have run faster but he did play it too far ahead 07:45 i can only assume that is bergkamp who plays the balll into the box. Obviously the game is won and they are winding down the clock but poor decision and a better ball I'd expect anyway. I'm just trying to get a sense of what he was like and honeslty it's disappointing. He had 2 or 3 good moments of smart touches but If this was havertz he would be absolutely crucified in today's game. Giving away possession and completely wasting chances more often then not. Maybe it was an off day or this was the standard. I'm going to keep watching his individual highlights anyway to get a sense of him
I kinda understand what you are trying to say. I think it's a good point that nobody points out or somewhat ignore. Although we can blame that he is 34~35 by that time of this match, and the number of the game he played kept declining because of age, (He retires 1-2years later) still he seems to lack some kind of fighting spirit compared to his prime days. Probably it's his tactical off-the-ball move or some subtle things that only teammates can feel, which old bergkamp contributes to his team.(I don't know exactly) Still I think Wenger chose old bergkamp in this rival match for some reason. Thanks for watching.
I kinda think It is also meaningful to post a video of dreadful performance of star players. All of his best matches are already posted. Highlights or some few best matches can't tell everything about the player.
quite elegant. Its that sort of ball movement and dynamic team structure why I still love watching...for those moments of synchronous beauty. I see a lot of that in Japan with almost clinical precision and a very high degree of aggressive motivation. To me it feels like an expression of solidarity, like a well-tuned jazz quartet a la Wayne Shorter. The structure is mainly the one they create (eg, vs baseball or american football which have much higher degrees of extrinsic structure. Indoor soccer, basketball and hockey are similar but fewer teammates so less complexity to manage horizontally with greater chronic intensity which gives in to a narrower range of expression in the development of the team dynamic in situ)
Loco porque? Bergkamp es de lo mejor que ha tenido el futbol mundial. Claro, no le alcanza para estar en un top 15, pero en una lista mas amplia seguro estara. Ahora, yo tampoco coincido con Henry, pero llamarlo de "loco".....nah tampoco. Bergkamp es todo una leyenda.
Henry never said he was better than Zidane. All he said that he was his best teammate to play with because they had a perfect striker assister partnership at Arsenal.
Unfortunately, a few of the Bergkamp skills were omitted including the assist of the fifth goal, due to the copyright problem. Hope you guys consider that problem.
The Goals are chosen based on not only Beautification, but also Significance and how Iconic it is based on my opinion. Ex) Arie Haan's Goal in 1978 WC against West Germany was excluded because it was the first equalizer(1:1, Game Score 2:2) in the 2nd Group Stage. Feedback is always welcome.
The Goals are chosen based on not only Beautification, but also Significance. Ex)Nelinho's outstanding Goal in 1978 WC against Italy was excluded because it was the 3rd place match.
He's my favourite of all time and I'd like to thank you because I think the analysis is pretty accurate. Today's players could learn a bit from these kind of players
Great video. Loved that you highlighted Bergkamp's physique, which is often overlooked. There's a clip from a podcast or something where Kevin Kilbane talks about what an absolute specimen Bergkamp was.
Thanks for the upload mate, very excited for the upcoming euros, which starts today 😀, been watching all the goals from all the previous euro tournaments. Who do you have to win euro 2020?
I think it will be either Italy or Belgium winning this year. Belgian team has been on fire! Netherlands doing okay, but not as good as the cup in 2000 though.
Nice video, you are clearly an appreciator of bergkamp. I would recommend looking to find a copy of sony vegas or a similar editing software as it will help you edit these together abit tighter, but very nice video nonetheless!
@@silversurfer2977 I use it on my PC. I would have a look at any free editing software available, or look for an older version of sony vegas like 13, you should be able to find a tutorial online on how to get it
Bergkamp for Cruyff, Van Gaal and Wenger Whatever Van Gaal is, he has always wanted his team to play great football. Ajax football. He will probably never admit it, but the football he plays is the same as Cruyff's and Wenger's. It's just that their methods are different. Cruyff's football philosophy is based on the qualities of the player - take risks, attack, play beautifully, be unpredictable. Johan relies on his instinct, he is not a cold analyst. Van Gaal gives tasks to his players and they are obliged to perform them unconditionally in order for the system to work. The system is sacred to him. Wenger is somewhere in the middle. He is a very good tactician, but he is even better at creating balance in the team. Wenger does not think about systems, he thinks about players, about intelligent players who then form a system on the field. Like Cruyff, he likes technical players who instinctively feel the game. As can be seen from Van Gaal's achievements, he prefers to work with younger players who want to prove themselves and win. It is more difficult for him when his players do not obey unquestioningly. In Barcelona he clashed with Rivaldo's temperament, in Bayern with Luca Tony and Ribery. For Van Gaal, all players are equal, there are no stars. Everyone's job is to serve the team, and the team's job is to strictly follow Van Gaal's system. Cruyff is completely different. He relies on great players, individualists who can decide the match at any time. Johan stimulates good players, constantly challenges them, including creating conflicts sometimes. Under Van Gaal, even for the biggest stars, the team and the system come first. Imagine you have ten banal artists and one Rembrandt. What will you do, tell him that he is nothing special than the others or tell him that he is special and let him create masterpieces. Wenger has a different approach. He does his best not to create conflicts and his calmness and serious attitude, intelligence and professionalism seem to be passed on to the team. At the same time, it gives freedom to the players and leaves them to create beautiful things on the field. From a philosophical point of view, Van Gaal has the same playing principles as Cruyff, but he believes that the team needs him to apply them. If football was chess, Van Gaal sees himself as a grandmaster and the players as pawns. Cruyff wants to show intelligent and talented players how to become self-thinking individuals who instinctively make the right decisions on the field and benefit their teammates. While Lewis sees the role of the coach as supreme, Cruyff wants to develop players who at some point do not need a coach. ----------------------- Wenger: I am a big fan of the Dutch vision of football. Their philosophy is positive and their ability to build the game is proverbial. The Dutch always put the most constructive players in the center, those who think on the field, the most technical. They always put them in the heart of the team. Denis is the best symbol of Dutch football philosophy because it is based on technical excellence, imagination and thought. A coach can develop this type of football only if there is such a type of leader on the field and he is respected by the whole team. Dennis's great strength was in the deep respect and esteem that everyone felt for him. He was remarkable, he was much more than a good footballer. It radiated class and confidence. -------------------------------------------- "Cruyff's whole concept, in fact for the development of Ajax, can be presented as the creation of a new generation of players like Dennis Bergkamp." David Wiener, a popular sports book author, worked with Dennis to write the book Cold Blood and Speed.
@@matiobg Thank you so much!🙂It is very useful! I heard that his arsenal teammates was stunned for his skills in training. Is that mentioned in the book?
@@silversurfer2977 I'm Dutch living close to Amsterdam and although I was not there myself I've heard stories from old die hard Ajax supporters who used to go watch training sessions that Dennis would often improvise, show and even invent sublime skills and rare goals that left everyone in awe. Apparently he would try out more outrageous things than he'd normally do in-game when he preferred efficiency, simplicity and quick thinking, but still never just to show off how good he really was, it always had a purpose. He was quite fast and agile in his younger years too and a good dribbler when he wanted too, but dribbling was not his natural playing style. They also said that his ball striking technique and 'effect/spin' he could give to the ball was remarkable, as well as his one touch football and volleying. I asked them a lot on Bergkamp, because ever since I was 6 or 7 I saw him do crazy stuff in the Dutch league that had everyone excited, so I was always fascinated. Remember he grew up trying to emulate Cruijff and van Basten, and he did get to their level. The man is a true technical genius. I remember watching him play and just shaking my head and laughing. Some of the stuff is out of this world. Maybe only a handful of players in history could have pulled off the variety of skills he showed. Has to be in the top 10 offensive players of all time, possibly even top 5. He could do it all offensively. Matrix football.
