It's the right answer though.These players such as Pele, Maradonna and Messi are just seem to be so far beyond their peers that I dont know how you can compare them against each other without them having played at the same time. Boring answer I know.
Yeah, we could.If we move beyond what they did on the pitch though then you could argue that Cruyff is even better. Obviously a legend in his own country and arguably had more influence on modern football than any other single person.
I personally think Maradonna's legacy of the WC win in 86 trumps everyone else. It was a solo effort at times by him on the journey to lifting the WC.Ability - Messi
Legacy - Pele
So yeah, I'd be Pele for me, I think in those GOAT debates the most important point is the relative strength of the player compared to the level of his era and while Messi is great, Pele was better in that sense (+had more success, 3 WC is just unbelievable).
Yeah that' the one, thanks man forgot the name. Loved that show and I watched around 20 shows.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football's_Greatest
This?
I've seen quite a lot of them too, they are pretty good. They name Pele as the best followed by Maradona
The league he played in was arguably more competitive than the two horse drab la liga over the last decade or so. If doing it in a competitive league is the reason then Maradona comes ahead of anyone, he played in the toughest league of all time and won it without playing for one of the top teams.Maradona or Messi.
Pele didn't do it in a proper league.
Black Rooney.
From the OP:Its probably best not to choose a greatest footballer of all time - all the players who get discussed shouldn't have to come in 2nd to others who mostly played in different eras. Instead there should be a pantheon of the best - maybe 10 or 12 players who are regarded as among the greatest for different reasons.
I completely realise that in a truly global sport that has run for more than a century there are numerous factors that would contribute to one's greatness and it is always difficult to point out just one name, which is why this is nothing but a light-hearted casual exercise to observe the spread across the forum. It's basically if you had to take one name as the greatest ever, who would it be. Doesn't need to go extremely academic in the explanation of justification of it.
Cool - my answer is I don't have one name as choosing one would undermine the accomplishments of the others. That's why I proposed a pantheon of all time greats instead.From the OP:
I refer you to my classic thread, "Tiers of Greatness".Its probably best not to choose a greatest footballer of all time - all the players who get discussed shouldn't have to come in 2nd to others who mostly played in different eras. Instead there should be a pantheon of the best - maybe 10 or 12 players who are regarded as among the greatest for different reasons.
I suppose because the ability he showed in his prime, or rather before his injuries, was ahead of anything Cristiano Ronaldo displayed.I will never understand why fat Ronaldo is rated above C. Ronaldo in these discussions.
That is what is normally done and in theory comparisons across any players make no sense let alone the greatest ones which is why this is not a serious thread where naming one player would mean you are holding him ahead of others or undermining the others, just the name you'd pick if you had to pick one, based on personal preferences, whatever you value in football or anything else. Fair enough if some are still reluctant.Cool - my answer is I don't have one name as choosing one would undermine the accomplishments of the others. That's why I proposed a pantheon of all time greats instead.
I think the first point is debatable. I think C. Ronaldo's longevity has made people forget how devastating he was at his best.I suppose because the ability he showed in his prime, or rather before his injuries, was ahead of anything Cristiano Ronaldo displayed.
Cristiano's longevity and consistency over the course of his career will put him ahead of his namesake for most or many though.
I may have to check it out.I refer you to my classic thread, "Tiers of Greatness".
None of the above should also be an option.That is what is normally done and in theory comparisons across any players make no sense let alone the greatest ones which is why this is not a serious thread where naming one player would mean you are holding him ahead of others or undermining the others, just the name you'd pick if you had to pick one, based on personal preferences, whatever you value in football or anything else. Fair enough if some are still reluctant.
What? There are no names, everyone is free to name whoever they want. This isn't a vote.None of the above should also be an option.
This would hold more weight if Gareth bale hadn't just appeared in a euro semi final with WalesOn board with Bestie's name. Would be my 'hipster' pick if you wanna call it that. Obviously there's United bias in it but there was nothing he couldn't do and at club level he did it against the best, unfortunate to be born in a country that had no chance at International success.
It isn't, but why not allow that as an option. Some people may not have a greatest ever.What? There are no names, everyone is free to name whoever they want. This isn't a vote.
Firstly, Bestie played for Northern Ireland. Their international team at the time in comparison to the rest of the national teams were further behind than Wales was to the other European teams this year. Lastly, Wales wouldn't have a chance of winning the World Cup even now, just like N. Ireland didn't have a chance to win a WC then. What I meant was had Bestie played for a stronger team like the rest of the names in this thread have (mostly Brazil, Argentina) then he would have a better standing in the game. There have been several underdog successes over the years which have nothing to do with the fact that N. Ireland back then were not in contention for any success. Their rest of the squad was not as good as one you'd want for a star player to carry, as is seen with most underdog teams who may not have a star studded line up but still have credible players who would give enough support to the one or two top players in the team for them to reach anywhere. Either ways, there's no question that Best would have had a bigger reputation had he played for a stronger nation that regularly challenged for international honours, regardless of what Wales did.This would hold more weight if Gareth bale hadn't just appeared in a euro semi final with Wales