I think the reality is that we do all question these goals and whether or not they were meant because even great goals that end with not so great finishes are still judged as great goals, ones that finish off great passing moves that are packed full of precision for instance. You wouldn't say 'thats a great finish' but you would still call it a 'great goal'. Whereas with these individual strikes from distance they could be construed as overhit crosses rather than lobs, it is really difficult to decipher if the player actually meant it or not given the fact that players (even the most cultured) are prone to overhitting a cross from time to time, not everything they touch ends in precision. If I am honest my instinct is to say that Hagi goal and more so that Ronaldinho goal were both flukes, that is my initial impression of them, and like that article suggests if those goals had come from the foot of a Nigel Winterburn then they would be written off as wayward crosses that got lucky as opposed to being hailed as a great goal.
The Bergkamp goal is a bit different in terms of even if he did not intend to do exactly what he ended up doing, his quick thinking in the moment deserves credit either way, in terms of improvisation whether he intended what he executed 100% from start to finish, or he mistimed his original touch and then improvised, you can still respect the quick thinking and level of improvsation, it's a great goal either way, it is elevated to potentially the best goal of all time if you believe he intented exactly what he executed from the moment the ball is in his vicinity. The thing with Bergkamp is the way he instantaneously reacts moving in sync with the ball and understanding what is required in the moment, making several quick decisions in succession as opposed to just one motion as in shooting or crossing towards goal (like the Hagi or Ronaldinho goals). As that article insinuates I can not deny that I am much more inclined to believing he meant it from start to finish because of the cerebral player he was, but that's not because I think everything he touched is gold, it's just because I want to believe he meant it, despite my critical mind doubting it. That Van Basten volley against USSR in Euro 88, did he mean that? I guess he did, and he had the ability to pull it off but try it 100 times how many times would he execute it? Same thing for the Bergkamp goal is true, except his intention is not as apparent as Van Basten's, which arguably means it is better as it was so unexpected. The enigmatic nature of a discussion like this is as frustrating as it is indulgent due to the fact that we will never know for sure.
That all said, at the time I was very sceptical about whehter Bergkamp meant it or not, the truth is we will never know, but I think as cynical as I am, to some degree you have to recognise that Hagi, Ronaldinho and Bergkamp did show time and time again that they were capable of great feats on the football pitch and therefore if they say they meant it, then we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, because if we can't trust these type of players who conclusively down the years proved their ability to produce sublime moments that exuded a masterful level of panache, then who the hell can we trust? Cos we sure as shit would not trust Nigel Winterburn despite that bizzaro world goal he scored against Chelsea that time, so through (admittedly) gritted teeth I have accepted that Ronaldinho goal and that Hagi goal and that Bergkamp goal as goals that were meant.
On the subject of commentators we were blessed in the 90's, for me it's in order Brian Moore, Peter Brackley, Barry Davies, marks me out as a child of the 90's i suppose. I'm not a fan of Motson. I heard ITV have promoted Matterface to be their prime time commentator over Tyldesley, not that I am a big fan of Clive but I think he surpasses Matterface by a country mile. Talking of Peter Drury and his mawkish shtick that Manolas goal for Roma against Barca a couple years back was something else, for some reason that was credited in certain places as great commentary, to me it was pretty cringeworthy, to each their own i guess.