As pointed out before, I said scorers can be dribblers and vice versa, I stand by my view he's more a scorer than a dribbler.
You had him down as a scorer in your original assessment. You should have put both. You know that now but you’re struggling to concede the point.
He was excluded from the count as he was a bit of everything, but certainly wasn't more of a dribbler.
Disagree. He scored very few goals, like one in eight. He was chiefly a playmaker, but that included dribbling.
It was your view that made it 5-3, not mine. I had it 8-4.
You had 4 dribblers (of course there are more than that), I told you the 5 players that were scorers. So I gently corrected some of your wilder notions.
Yes, but remembered more for his dribbling skills.
ONE example? Must try harder
There are many examples as you well know. He’s one of the most petulant players going. And as a Madrid player he used to get routinely humiliated by Barca before Zidane walked in the door. I’m surprised you even conceded that it has happpened though, given your all consuming stanhood of him
Ignore the 70s because it doesn't suit your argument?
No, for the reasons that I outlined. What team is dominant for 15-20 years? Don’t be dumb, I’ve credited you with a reasonable amount of intelligence.
Even based on YOUR count, ignoring those 2 years Brazilians didn't take part:
Argentina 4
Uruguay & Brazil 2
Actually no, because Brazil didn’t take part in 2 and Santos didn’t take part in 4. So it’s silly to just add up which countries won more when Brazil were not properly represented half the time.
England's top coefficient as of now is based on 17/18 onwards (inc 2 all England finals in 18/19 & 20/21), no one ever claimed England dominated the CL in the 10s.
It would be utterly idiotic with Spain having won 6 CLs in 10 years.
The point is not that England dominated the CL. Try and keep up. I’m well aware that Spain (thanks mainly to 2 teams) have done better. The point is that England has by common consensus the strongest, most competitive league. The best league in the world no less. This notion didn’t begin in 2017, I’m here to tell you. I was showing you the results of the Champions League for the ‘deepest and most competitive league’ so that you understand that counting continental cup wins won’t necessarily show you which the strongest league is. Do you believe that La Liga has been a stronger and more competitive league than the Premier League over the last 10 years? Has Messi in fact been playing in the strongest, deepest and toughest league for the bulk of his career? Cos that’s not what I heard.
No one has disputed Brazil dominated world football in the 60s, but that doesn't equate to Brazilian club sides being better than everyone else.
Why doesn’t it? I mean in terms of the strength of the nation’s football as a whole? Please give me examples
of times in history where the contrary is true?
In 1963, Santos faced Botafogo in the semis of the Copa Lib. The latter had Garrincha,Didi, Zagallo, Nilton Santos, Jairzinho, Amarildo, Gerson and Quarentinha. On paper an even better side than the mighty Santos. But Pele made all the difference, as per.
They only won 2 out of 8 Copa Libs they played in, and generally SA sides didn't really have that great a record against European sides when they faced each other.
By your own metrics, SA teams won six out of the 10 intercontinental cups in that decade and Santos were the only team to win 2 apart from Inter. And Santos destroyed Inter when they faced them. I’m sure Santos were capable of winning more had they participated throughout the decade.
Santos in fact had a terrific record against European teams and Pele scored 205 goals in 196 games against European opposition, including all the top clubs: the Madrids, Barcelona, the Milans, Juventus, Valencia, Sevilla, Roma, Napoli, Lazio, Benfica, Lyon etc. Just against those I’ve named he scored 47 goals in 39 games.
