Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by cesc's_mullet, Nov 14, 2008.
He's just one of the tier below Messi - Xavi, Fabregas, Rooney et al.
Best played for Northern Ireland.
that should not bar him from being at the level of Pele and Maradona.
Argentina not capable? You mean the 'Messi, Tevez, Aguero, Di Maria' Argentina? Well, Mr. Storey, you do live up to your reputation.
Indeed, it's always good seeing the point of view of someone who saw all 3.
I think if Messi is remembered as just sitting at the round table he'll be happy with his career. Losing out to Pele and Dona is no great shame. All I know if it's truly possible to be greater than this Argentine then my God, being such an avid fan of the game I would love to travel back in time.
Watching the videos aren't enough. I want to live it! Ah well, in 20 years time when people ask about Messi, I'll be able to tell them everything they need to know about someone who was 'argubally' the best to do it.
Of course, you didn't read the post.
"If player X has played for a national team CAPABLE OF WINNING THE WORLD CUP etc. etc."
Very good, though. Go again.
At the end of the day some still consider Cruyff in that very top bracket despite never winning a WC so it's not the be all and end all for everyone. I don't think he has to win a WC but he does have to make an impact on a WC, he has to do more on the international stage. He was good at the last WC but he didn't really make an impact I don't think. Even if the WC isn't the pinnacle of football any more (I think it still is, it still lasts longer in the memory and reaches more fans across the world, but it's undeniable there's increasing support to the opposing argument) it can't be completely disregarded. If he performed at the same level, in international and club football, I don't think there's much of an argument for him to be the 'GOAT'.
That's just a ridiculous acronym, by the way.
Meh. That maybe your definition of the "greatest ever". You are entitled to come up with your own metrics when judging a player. But I don't subscribe to it. Messi is doing some amazing things at the moment. His ludicrous stats are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of his overall play.
I've never really said he's better than Maradona, simply because I never watched Maradona.
But Messi is the greatest player I've seen. And this includes being better than Fat Ronaldo (who did win a world cup and did do very well in 98 and 02).
Absolutely, that is honourable company to be talked in the same breath as, and the fact (in my eyes) that Messi already sits at third behind those two is saying something. He has got the potential to break into the top bracket of those two, but for me he needs to win the World Cup with Argentina. Different demographics of fans have different criteria to suit - not uncommon, is it?
"Football" was in a better place for the average fan (obviously) 20/30 years ago. Having said that, once I'm gone, you'll be telling the next generations in 25 years that football now was in a better place - and you know the sad thing? You'll be right.
The thing about Messi is he does everything right for Argentina he does in his Barca colours, except score. He beats players with ease, does the passing, basically he shows everything people love about his football.
In the last world cup, he was denied by the post twice and some brilliant saves but he made some memorable dribbles and through balls.
If he does figure out how to find the net properly again, the floodgates could open. A part of me feels like that is how the story could develope for the Argentine, but it could also go the other way.
Everything seems to be conspiring against him, in the 2006 world cup he was briliant in all of his appearences and then Pekrman decides to leave him on the bench and go defensive against Germany. Maybe the story is being told like this for the ultimate climax, when it's looking unlikely.
He just needs somebody to set him through on goal for Argentina, one of their midfielders, (Masherano isn't doing that any time soon) then he could re-open his chapter of scoring for his national team, that he was doing under Riquelme.
I agree. Messi (for me) at this minute sits third behind Pele and Maradona, with every bit of the potential needed to break up that duopoly as the 'GOAT'. He needs to do "it" with Argentina, though.
What "it" is, is another matter. For me "it" is winning the World Cup, for you, "it" is an impact.
Different strokes for different folks.
Indeed, that is mine and no you do not have to subscribe. I agree, Messi is well ahead of "Fat" Ronaldo, no doubt. The World Cup that Maradona has and the World Cups that Pele has compliment their actual abilities. While undoubtedly brilliant, Messi has already gone ahead of "Fat" Ronaldo.
Nice list of midfielders and defenders you've got there.
Messi vs Atletico individual highlights
How about Banega? He looks a beast!
Time will tell R9. I still want them to bring back Roman. Argentina were beautiful to watch with him. Messi for all his ability isn't a true el capitan like Riquelme. That lad was a leader. When he was around everyone came to play their football.
The World Cup isn't the be all and end all like it used to be. The Champions League is played at just as higher a standard.
Honestly, he's played for about five years, maybe not quite yet in his prime which is frightening to consider, but how can people claim him as the third best player of all-time while discounting the likes of Best, Beckenbauer, Cruyff, et al?
I think I know the answer to this. Most people didn't see those players play and get to see Messi play every time out. In ten years, those internet polls that always pip Maradona and present-day players well above the old-timers, Messi (and Ronaldo and whomever else) will gobble up all the votes. The age of the internet and satellite TV allows fans across the world to see players that we weren't privy to see 10,20,30,40,50 years ago.
This is a very weak and unfounded argument.. In fact, it should be the other way around..
Old players get overhyped because they live on their reputation, and because people don't watch how they played anymore, they just resonate the going myths about their super-natural abilities.. When Messi has an off game, everybody on the planet knows it now. But when Maradona had one (or more), many less people knew, or talked about it, and when Best had an off game, nobody can even remember it now!
However, heroics will always live long in the memory (and the history books), and will be told from generation to generation, and with time, the good gets better, and the bad gets forgotten..
I'm not saying those old players aren't great players, but THEY are the ones who are overrated compared to today's stars, not the other way around..
Take Best for example, Best only peaked for United for a couple of years (1965-1968) winning two league titles and one European trophy, which is all what he won in his career.. And you want to make him ahead of Messi??!! Even Ronaldo did more! Should I also mention that he couldn't even get his country to World cup QUALIFICATION?!
Even Maradona, Maradona's medals and trophies are less than Messi's already.. All what Maradona won in his career was 4 league titles, 2 domestic cups, 2 supercups, and 1 UEFA Cup (which the mid English clubs apparently don't even care enough to play for) AND the world cup trophy that brought him all that fame, and the one that keeps the comparisons between him and Messi alive..
Yes all of those old player are great players, but if you want to claim that you know the history of football better than everybody else, and use that as an excuse to diminish what Messi has already achieved in his career then you are the one who needs to watch more football, and read more history..
I like how you write off Maradona because he didn't win enough.......despite him being pretty much the sole reason Napoli got into that position anyway, I mean they still had other important players clearly, you don't do shit in this sport with one legend and nothing else, but that team wasn't as stacked either of the two teams Ronaldo has played for or what Messi has had throughout his Barca career.
The game has changed so much that using team successes of yesteryear for this kind of debate is completely unfair.
Has anyone ever won 4 Balondors in a row?
If not I think Messi will be the first.
Its amusing that people see the need to belittle the likes of maradona to prove how good messi is.
People were probably saying the same in the 60s when no-one remembered Leonidas, or the 70s when no-one remembered Didi, or etc. etc....all the time exposure to football was on the up. And the only person who's actually said he's the third best ever has said he was a live to see Pele so...
I'm pretty sure Messi's going to be the first to win 4 Ballon D'ors never mind 4 in a row.
Is Messi already above Cruyff and several other legends in terms of 3rd best player ever?
And is Zidane's overall effect on the teams he's played for / games / tournaments at all levels now worth less than a couple of CLs and some easily won La Ligas? Or Fat Ronaldo's career for that matter?
The nouveau fan eh?
Well Messi still has to thank Cruyff for effectively being the brain behind the system his game naturally comes alive in. For pure understanding of the game, I don't think many match Cryuff, so ahead of his time it was unreal and the last world cup showed how huge his impact on the game was....considering both teams in the finals are really from the school fo cryuff.
For one thing Zidane was never as consistently good in almost every club match as Messi has been. Fat Ronaldo, was in his prime.
I would put it this way:
Going by their absolute best, be in it a single match, Fat ,Ronaldo is still the best.
Going by impact on international stage and in big matches, Zidane wins.
Going by consistent top performances over the course of 2-3 years, Messi wins.
I always thought Zidane was over-rated a little bit to be fair. People were going crazy over him in WC2006, but I thought Vieira played as good as him throughout the tournament but never got the credit.
I mean obviously he was a great player but from what I've seen from him(i.e his time with Madrid and France), Messi is far better than him.
I agree that Messi is better, but Zidane was never over rated. In 2006 that was kindve his last hurrah more than anything. He had been below par the previous 12-18 months and didnt start that WC very well, but once France got to the knockout stages I thought Zidane was amazing.
Zidane WC 1998 and EC 2000 is what you need to use as a basis of comparison. Although a different type of player, he hit heights that Messi hasn't hit yet around that time
If international football is weaker than club football then Messi should in theory be equally or even more dominant at international level, surely? The fact that he isn't (yet) has to be held against him when comparing him with the likes of Pele and Maradona, I think.
Not true. The way he owned Kaka and Ronaldinhio in 2006 WC QF is something Messi has never achieved in international stage and for me even in a big match for Barca. Without Zidane, France never reach that final, they were dismal before he started to turn it on.
And I'm too young to have seen Cruyff, but three European Footballer of the year awards, three European Cups with Ajax, a raft of domestic honours and two World Cup finals (he also won the European Golden shoe earlier in his career with 43 goals in one season) suggests that he shouldn't so easily be demoted in any 'Greatest player ever' lists
Zidane wasn't all that at the '98 WC.
He was amazing at Euro2000 though. Perhaps it was slightly overshadowed by the fact that it was the best tournament in the past 20 years and there were so many top players who found their best stuff, but that was the best I've seen from Zidane.
At club level, he is clearly inferior to Messi who has delivered more in big games and much much more on a weekly basis.
One way of looking at it is Zidane in 1998 only really made a telling contribution from the semi's onwards. I just can't understand why 98' is talked about as one of his career peaks as he had had much better performances in 00', in 06', or in club football. Ignore the final and it was a completely unspectacular tournament for him. That Baggio volley is just a couple of inches to the right and he'd have been regarded as having a disappointing tournament. Worth bearing in mind that Zidane hit those heights at the age of 26, the same age Messi will be at the next WC.
No because football is a team game. Pele and Maradona played in teams that were very good at a time when international football was the equal or better than the club game. If you play in a poor team it's difficult to perform consistently well.
There's no great difference in strength between the current Argentina squad and the 1986 squad. Man for man, the current squad may even be stronger, so I'm not buying this argument.
What underpins the "Messi must do it on the international stage" argument is that's an easier inter-generational comparison. The dynamics of club football have changed so much that it's not fair to compare today's Barcelona/Madrid with 1980s' Napoli or 1970s' Ajax. That Messi scores one in four for Argentina and a goal every game for Barcelona is almost entirely not his fault. It is however indicative of the extraordinary dominance of Barcelona. And that is couched in a more open era - 1980/1990s Serie A the goals-per-game average was often less than two. In contrast, you'll see 50% more goals-per-game in modern La Liga or Champions League.
International football on the other hand has remained fairly static. Teams cannot stockpile players thanks to burgeoning incomes or global scouting networks. And while it may not be the absolute pinnacle of football quality any more, because there has been a concentration of wealth and quality in half a dozen teams, it remains a good leveller to compare across time.
I'd say Ronaldo was just as consistant, his stats before he suffered his injury in November 1999:
Sao Cristovao: 15 / 15
Cruzeiro: 56 / 58
PSV: 55 / 57
Barcelona: 47 / 49
Inter: 41 / 55
Brazil squad: 39 / 47
Winning 2 Copa Americas and getting to World Cup Final.
Messi will obviously in the next few years rack up in even more impressive stats, its just a shame Ronaldo suffered his injuries because he was dominating at that time.
I'd take a look at that 86 team again (and the German team they beat in the final).
Not sure how the German team is relevant, but I wouldn't say the likes of Burruchaga and Valdano were vastly better than Aguero, Mascherano, di Maria etc, if at all.
Zidane did absolutely fuck all in that tournament apart from scoring 2 in the final. Perhaps the greatest myth perpetuated in football today is that he had an outstanding tournament in 98..he didn't. He got sent off in the group stages and was having a lousy tournament until the final. The watertight defence and physically dominant and athletic midfield was the reason France won that particular tournament.
Zidane was magnificent for France in Euro 2000, but his contribution at the 98 World Cup was indifferent and hardly merits the myth that surrounds it.
At the tournament itself perhaps - fuck all is too strong though, he was an effective component of a remarkable whole in the early stages then took off in the final and got the Golden ball - but his seasons for Juventus (a remarkable team between 96-98) had propelled him to being one of / the top European player at that time. , hence my original comment of the heights he was hitting during the period.
Separate names with a comma.