Forrest or mcgeady

Also has to be taken into account that Forrest has played with us in his peak years, McGeady had to be sold to overhaul a squad as it was a shambles and we never got to see him in his peak years.

I've had to eat humble pie in regards to Forrest as I was never a fan, but he has turned out to be a very important player for us over the past few years, he is a lucky boy to still be here I my opinion though as he got chances a plenty to finally prove himself, more chances than he probably deserved I feel. It's worked out for both us and him now though, that's can't be argued.

Neither will go down as Celtic legends I don't think though. Larsson, McNeill, Brown, they are legends, neither McGeady or Forrest are in that bracket.

 

Stats may say/look better for Forrest who has been here ten years, but I'd rather mcgeady in my team.

No disrespect to Forrest at all.


Imagine a team with both in it though, and nakamura in the number ten!!!!
Dembele up top!


Sent from my Nokia 6.2 using Tapatalk

 

McGeady had more flair but wee James has more end product.

 

Forrest all day long. He can at least pass a ball.

For all the trickery in the world McGeady had, his passing/crossing/overall decision making at times was awful.

No doubt that McGeady has the most talent with the ball at his feet that has arguably ever been produced at celtic but in the end Forrest has a better overall game and I'd have him in the team without hesitation over McGeady

 

That's true but I think that is in part down to length of service and also the completely dominant period that Forrest has had the good fortune to be part of. After the expensive Mowbray fiasco, Lennon was told that any incomings had to be funded by outgoings and McGeady was the obvious choice being our most sellable asset. He did Celtic a turn by leaving his boyhood club for the greater good and that shouldn't be forgotten.

He also left at the age of 24 with his best years still ahead of him

I love Forrest but that's a bit of doey-eyed analysis of the last decade. He struggled with injuries for a good part of it and had completely lost his way under Deila, to the point he had become a whipping boy for a fair part of the support that wanted him gone. When the rat came everything fell into place for Forrest in terms of the medical side, players around him and he grasped it brilliantly and has been outstanding for 3 seasons now. It's also came during peak years for a winger 25-28, years that we didn't see of McGeady

I think for those statistics you've also got to take into account other factors. Firstly the opposition, we were up against a hun team that matched us and sometimes surpassed us in spending, Forrest has only had that in 2012 before they were liquidated. You also had much stronger Hibs and Hearts teams and we had automatic qualification for the Champions League, so his European stats are against teams like Barcelona, AC Milan, Benfica, Shakhtar rather than Linfield, Astana, Rosenborg.

Secondly I think you have to take into account the team and playing style they played in. Strachan wanted solid 4-4-2 with basically a back 6 and the wingers back into position when we were out of possession. Rodgers and Lennon went with far more attacking systems in the 4-2-3-1, where Forrest is left high up the field to press or break on the counter. That's always going to lead to more favourable statistics for a winger.

You could argue that Forrest has played with a higher standard of striker in his time than McGeady did: Hooper, Stokes, Griffiths, Dembele, Edouard, Guidetti, Scepovic v Hartson, Beattie, Zurawski, Miller, JVoH, McDonald, Samaras

I think both of those points of team-mates and playing style is reflected in the statisics of average goals per game:

McGeady's time:
Strachan 1.95
Mowbray 1.73

Forrest's time:
Lennon 2.26
Rat 2.22
Delia 2.19

As I pointed above, the standard of opposition was far superior due to our greater coefficient. We weren't playing the likes of Linfield, Rosenborg, Elfsborg, Sarajevo, Clug. McGeady's team had to play v Spartak, Dynamo Moscow, Arsenal and Braga in high pressure play-offs.

Comparing the 2 aren't realistic.

McGeady did it plenty for us in the Champions League group stages, when we were competing against top, top teams. He also turned up more often v the huns...and a stronger one at that.

 

Both outstanding players with different attributes and skill sets, personally id rather have McGeady

 

Forrest for me 100000%. Cannae stand McGeady.

 

And for a whoever said Forrest has done fuckall for us in the CL, that’s just plain wrong. He’s been an outball against the big teams for us since Lennys first stint as manager, the campaign we beat Barca he was outstanding.

 

McGeady's style is more easy on the eye. I loved his flair, tricks and pace. But the guy never fulfilled his potential. His face * me off and he should have had a far better career than he did with his talent, if he had done it would be an easy poll.. But he didn't

Forrest for me.

 

I think I would take James Forrest. Big games at Hampden and in European games I feel like Forrest has shown up a lot more often than McGeady did.

 

For me McGeady at his absolutely best had a bit more ability then Forrest does but he did not sustain that level consistently or close to it over a long period. For me Forrest has achieved at a very high level for quite a few years now and he scores a lot of goals in the biggest of games. So for me Forrest gets the nod given how long he has maintained a very high level and there is the fact he is still only 28 so arguably his best years sill to come.

 

I would be surprised if Forrest's best years are still to come. There are players who mainly rely on pace, one person that immediately springs to mind is Theo Walcott, and when that pace starts to go then they become far less effective. I think Forrest will be like that. He doesn't really have a trick or great technique, but he does have pace to burn. Once that goes, and at almost 29 you would imagine that pace will begin to go, I think he will be far less effective.

 

Took a while to win the fans over but Forrest like McGregor is a very good, intelligent football player

 

I hear what your saying and no question Forrest depends on his pace a lot. However at the professional level the peak career years are between 28-31 roughly and with Forrest 28 now we still have 2-3 more years hopefully of seeing him at his best.

 

Forrest is 29 in July and has suffered from a lot of injuries in his playing career. I would be very surprised if we are going to see Forrest any better than he was under Rodgers. He was very good in his time in charge, no doubt about that.

 

Surprised McGeady got any votes tbh

 

Mcgeady was a great player for us , like Forrest in his earlier days his final ball always let him down , Forrest improved on this and added goals to his game, tracks back better now too.

Forrest for me

Disclaimer- I wasnt his biggest fan , last few years hes proved me wrong

 

Some crazy posts on here. McGeady is by far the better player.

Single handedly won us games at points and regularly played well in big games against Rangers and against elite opposition in the Champions League.

Baffling how so many people can claim Forrest is better.

 

Well if we can get say 3 more seasons of Forrest at the least at the level he has been the past few that would be good with me as he has been such a key player for us during this incredible recent run especially coming up with big goals in the biggest of games again and again.