GatoLoco
Full Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2018
- Messages
- 3,296
- Supports
- Real Madrid
CR7?How many have played in England?
CR7?How many have played in England?
I guess his early decline and playing for a small NT prevented a more sustained hype elsewhere.George Best has never been rated by any other countries apart from the UK.
Can never understand that.
Its an interesting picture thats evolved and persisted. The early decline gets mentioned all the time but the early start isnt a factor for some. Being past his best at 27 does indicate an early decline but it ignores the length of time leading up to that where he was on top of his game. Two things to consider, for a period of 6 seasons he was Utds top goal scorer for 5 of them whilst playing on the wing, he also had a decent length career at Utd, 11 years in total, his decline began 3 before he left but the previous 8 years were pretty special. Sure the international side of things counts against him but for those who actually saw him play and followed him during his career its amusing to see people get things so wrong about him by not including context within his achievements and also failures.I guess his early decline and playing for a small NT prevented a more sustained hype elsewhere.
You seem to have understood my post as a judgement about Best's career, but it wasn't. My personal perception of him is certainly different to the one I've tried to describe. For example, I've watched him play for NI (there are two full games around), and he only went up in my estimation as a result.Its an interesting picture thats evolved and persisted. The early decline gets mentioned all the time but the early start isnt a factor for some. Being past his best at 27 does indicate an early decline but it ignores the length of time leading up to that where he was on top of his game. Two things to consider, for a period of 6 seasons he was Utds top goal scorer for 5 of them whilst playing on the wing, he also had a decent length career at Utd, 11 years in total, his decline began 3 before he left but the previous 8 years were pretty special. Sure the international side of things counts against him but for those who actually saw him play and followed him during his career its amusing to see people get things so wrong about him by not including context within his achievements and also failures.
I watched England v Brazil from 1970 last week and the quality of that game was as good if not better than you would see today, played in extreme heat at high intensity fewer subs and no water breaks either. I think your being slightly disingenuous by saying it wasn't even professional, it was tougher and a harder game to play with poorer equipment and pitches. Back then the best players got hacked down regularly. Remember in 1966 Portugal could only beat Brazil by hacking down Pele at every oppurtunity and amazingly the English referee allowed it. I wonder why that was.This post is so stupid I have to go outside and scream to the ocean. Recency bias?!? If anything, recency bias leaves out players like Ronaldo because of exactly that... the fear of it.... and hipster mentality that older players have to join the party. Football wasn’t even professional back in the day, but of course Pele is added to the list, every single list - from a time all defenders looked like they just stumbled out from the pub. Don’t you dare compare Gerd Müller to Ronaldo, it’s highly ignorant. Ronaldo has been active in developing the sport, everything from his early technique, to how players now shoot the ball, the heel flicks, you name it. On top of that, five ballon d’ors in the same era as the best player in history, records here there and everywhere, longevity, all trophies (even one with a smaller footballing nation), still scoring goals for fun at 35.... he checks every single box. You say your thing, I wager he would be on every single list fifty years from now.
The only one? La Liga biased rubbish. Scholes was better than Xavi. Xavi was the 2nd best midfielder at Barca most of the time.CR7?
For as much as I like Scholes he's not close to Xavi's level. Him and Iniesta were the key for, arguably, the best team in history with Barca and with Spain they won 2 euros and a world cup.The only one? La Liga biased rubbish. Scholes was better than Xavi. Xavi was the 2nd best midfielder at Barca most of the time.
I don't think Roberto Carlos gets anywhere near these kinds of lists if he doesn't score 'that' free kick.I don’t think Zidane or Carlos belong in the second XI either
That would be more true for United than Xavi at Barcelona. Keane was better than Scholes for years, then Carrick was better at the very end of his career.The only one? La Liga biased rubbish. Scholes was better than Xavi. Xavi was the 2nd best midfielder at Barca most of the time.
They wouldn't look out of place in the first XI.I don’t think Zidane or Carlos belong in the second XI either
Sorry no I was kind of agreeing with you in a way, just more pointing out the other thing.You seem to have understood my post as a judgement about Best's career, but it wasn't. My personal perception of him is certainly different to the one I've tried to describe. For example, I've watched him play for NI (there are two full games around), and he only went up in my estimation as a result.
Wow what a team that is. Amazing playersIt will sound controversial for some but Zidane is debatable in France best XI let alone an all time dream team. One could easily argue that this is the best french XI:
----------------Fontaine
Henry-------Platini--------Kopa
----------Giresse---TIgana
Liza---Trésor----Thuram--Amoros
-------------------Bats
I would say that all the positions where Zidane could fit are occupied by players that are better than him in those specific positions, you would have shoehorn him and that's questionable.
Zidane isn't even close to deserving a spot in first XI. First of all they put a ridiculous formation to accommodate as many offensive midfielders they could. Had they not done that he could have been 4th or even 5th team. That, along with Cruyff being placed as striker rather than offensive midfielder which would compete with Zidane is what got him a spot in tbe 2nd team. I've also always considered Platini the far superior player over Zidane, who imo is on his way to become the most overrated legend recently.The problem is, there are too many good players at this point in time. For Zidane to be left out of the first 11, imagine how much quality there is out there.
They wouldn't look out of place in the first XI.
They would. Laughable.They wouldn't look out of place in the first XI.
Understood, all's fine. A bit of an unfortunate case in terms of wider public awareness, like a few of other players left out of these three teams.Sorry no I was kind of agreeing with you in a way, just more pointing out the other thing.
I am very curious to know which players would deserve a spot way more than Roberto Carlos and Zidane in the second XI.They would. Laughable.
On his best day it's hard to put anyone else ahead of him. These lineups are supposed to be each player at his peak, not just evaluating their entire career in general.Might get shit for this but I think R9 being declared the greatest #9 of all time is overrating him.
I think it's reasonable to say it's only one of Zidane and Platini for a France XI. And I guess many have Platini ahead. Same for Brazil with Pele/Zico and R9/Romario, even if it means total legends missing out.It will sound controversial for some but Zidane is debatable in France best XI let alone an all time dream team. One could easily argue that this is the best french XI:
----------------Fontaine
Henry-------Platini--------Kopa
----------Giresse---TIgana
Liza---Trésor----Thuram--Amoros
-------------------Bats
I would say that all the positions where Zidane could fit are occupied by players that are better than him in those specific positions, you would have shoehorn him and that's questionable.
Given the amazing choices I think its now mostly down to personal preference. The only time it gets sticky for me is when people put up ludicrous arguments against other players that are just wrong.Am I overrating him but Ashley Cole would be my left back.
Yup, it's not that Zidane wasn't a great player but unfortunately he wasn't the best in his best role. And yes Desailly was left out on purpose, you could easily put him in that wouldn't be controversial.I think it's reasonable to say it's only one of Zidane and Platini for a France XI. And I guess many have Platini ahead. Same for Brazil with Pele/Zico and R9/Romario, even if it means total legends missing out.
Btw, Desailly is not left out on purpose?
I agree completely.Lahm Iniesta and Neuer in 2nd team.
I dont know how it was for you guys, but to me Pirlo was always underrated back in the days in my circle when I grew up. In forums, in my friend circle, in my family. But for some reason ever since he went to Juve I feel people overrate him. Maybe it is just me feeling that way.
Good player but he has no friends therefore no chemistryAm I overrating him but Ashley Cole would be my left back.
Roberto Carlos and Zidane in that XI? Instead of who??The problem is, there are too many good players at this point in time. For Zidane to be left out of the first 11, imagine how much quality there is out there.
They wouldn't look out of place in the first XI.
You read my mindBaresi is the one who is most robbed by the inclusion of this 3-2-2-3 formation with two full backs. Unfair on the many great centre backs in the history of the game to only include one in the dream team.
If you replace Baresi with Ronaldo and stick Pele number 9 then it’s a very respectable and balanced all-time XI.
I love R9 most but a better fit would be M van B.Team is shaping up nicely so far but it bothers me to see them trade a defenser just to fit in 5 offensive players.
Curious to see who will take the striker position. Muller? Van Basten? R9?
I agree with this. A phenomenal physical specimen and ruthlessly efficient. But what stands the test of time are players who are as artistic as they are brilliant.It's a hypothetical team of course, since it would never work in that setup.
I still think that including Cristiano, despite all his stats, is recency bias.
I'm 100% convinced that he won't be included in those lists 50 years down the road, just like they left out arguably the most lethal striker of all time, Gerd Müller. He had even better numbers than Cristiano, but he also lacked that kind of "extra magic/flair" that Cristiano doesn't possess either.
Nice team. My personal favourite would be something like:You read my mind
There’s no reason for both Pele and Ronaldo to be in the same team, other than to satisfy as many fanboys as possible. They function and play the same role, Pele was just better
Yashin
Cafu - Baresi - Beckenbauer - Maldini
Xavi - Matthaus
Messi - Maradona - CR7
Pele
Not bad team, i would probably switch to 4-4-2 diamond.It will sound controversial for some but Zidane is debatable in France best XI let alone an all time dream team. One could easily argue that this is the best french XI:
----------------Fontaine
Henry-------Platini--------Kopa
----------Giresse---TIgana
Liza---Trésor----Thuram--Amoros
-------------------Bats
I would say that all the positions where Zidane could fit are occupied by players that are better than him in those specific positions, you would have shoehorn him and that's questionable.
Ultimately though Platini and Zidane are France’s two greatest players of all time so you’d try to find a way to accommodate both. Arguably in a 4231 you need to ‘shoehorn’ somebody in the left sided role, be it Henry as above or Zidane who played there often enough in his career. Equally you could pair him and Platini in a 4222.It will sound controversial for some but Zidane is debatable in France best XI let alone an all time dream team. One could easily argue that this is the best french XI:
----------------Fontaine
Henry-------Platini--------Kopa
----------Giresse---TIgana
Liza---Trésor----Thuram--Amoros
-------------------Bats
I would say that all the positions where Zidane could fit are occupied by players that are better than him in those specific positions, you would have shoehorn him and that's questionable.
Haha. But both Xavi and Iniesta rate Scholes as a maestro.That would be more true for United than Xavi at Barcelona. Keane was better than Scholes for years, then Carrick was better at the very end of his career.
The average football fan rates Xavi well above Scholes for good reason. Xavi won it at all as the main midfielder.
Rijkaard gets in over Xavi for me as wellNice team. My personal favourite would be something like:
Schmeichel
Cafu - Beckenbaur - Baresi - Maldini
Rijkaard - Matthaus
Messi - Maradona - Ronaldinho
Ronaldo (R9)