Top 10 greatest players of all time

[Pickle85]

Messi is not only the most skillful player in the history of football. He is comfortably a level above anyone else in that regard. Close control, burst of pace, precision, reading and processing the game in fraction of a second... No one comes even close.

Maradona was more imaginative and expressive player that acquired a mythic status, with basic football skills on the level that was unseen before and was supposed never to be matched. But the strangest thing happened and the left footed player from the same country appeared, with those same fundamental football skills basically upgraded. Just look at ten random games of both of these players, or simply look at the numbers. Messi is on his own level.

And I think that the only player in history who was able to make it a contest for the crown of the best player in the world is Cristiano Ronaldo, who also happened to play at the same time. And he would not have been able to challenge Messi if he was only the super athlete with very good skills. He is indeed one of the most gifted footballers to ever play the game - only a different type of player with different set of skills in comparison with Maradona or Messi. In fact, he was rightfully proclaimed as such at the very beginning of his career, and from the on he has consistently improved and refined his game.

Not even a single mention of Pele then?!

 

[For My Sins]

Not even a single mention of Pele then?!

Pele surely has to be a contender for top place, I agree.

But the youngest player ever to win the Ballon D'Or, by some distance, is (fat) Ronaldo. Injuries etc might have hampered him, but he has to be nearer the top of any such list, than the bottom.

While the third youngest winner was a certain George Best - just a couple of months younger than when Messi on his first.
That should put George rather higher than some posters at least have allowed (not read the more recent posts). And if you want to put Messi top of your list, I couldn't really argue, even if he wouldn't be my choice.

As it happens, I've been lucky enough to see Best, Cruyff, Messi and C.Ronaldo live, some several times. But if I had to pick one player to win a game to save my life, it would be Maradona, who I first saw live as a 17 y.o. - absolutely, peerlessly, thrillingly phenomenal. While I don't think anyone has ever almost single-handedly dragged a team to win a World Cup quite like Maradona, whose teammates all agree he played for the team, rather than himself. In that respect, he's rather different from some of the other contenders ("Yes, I'm looking at you, Cristiano")

P.S. I was in Argentina last year. And yes, they adore Messi, but they absolutely worship Maradona. Which considering all the other issues in his off-field life, must say it all about his breathtaking performances on it.

 

[Red the Bear]

Pele surely has to be a contender for top place, I agree.

But the youngest player ever to win the Ballon D'Or, by some distance, is (fat) Ronaldo. Injuries etc might have hampered him, but he has to be nearer the top of any such list, than the bottom.

While the third youngest winner was a certain George Best - just a couple of months younger than when Messi on his first.
That should put George rather higher than some posters at least have allowed (not read the more recent posts). And if you want to put Messi top of your list, I couldn't really argue, even if he wouldn't be my choice.

As it happens, I've been lucky enough to see Best, Cruyff, Messi and C.Ronaldo live, some several times. But if I had to pick one player to win a game to save my life, it would be Maradona, who I first saw live as a 17 y.o. - absolutely, peerlessly, thrillingly phenomenal. While I don't think anyone has ever almost single-handedly dragged a team to win a World Cup quite like Maradona, whose teammates all agree he played for the team, rather than himself. In that respect, he's rather different from some of the other contenders ("Yes, I'm looking at you, Cristiano")

P.S. I was in Argentina last year. And yes, they adore Messi, but they absolutely worship Maradona. Which considering all the other issues in his off-field life, must say it all about his breathtaking performances on it.

I'm more partial to the Argentinian duo in all time debates but pele would have become the youngest Balon d'or winner were south Americans eligible to begin with.

 

[Stocar]

Not even a single mention of Pele then?!

I think there's no point comparing players from that time with players today. There's not many games one can watch from that era, and from what remains, it genuinely looks amateur level compared to today's game. And maybe it would be better if it stayed that way. Modern football really is somewhat soulless and empty.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Pele surely has to be a contender for top place, I agree.

But the youngest player ever to win the Ballon D'Or, by some distance, is (fat) Ronaldo. Injuries etc might have hampered him, but he has to be nearer the top of any such list, than the bottom.

While the third youngest winner was a certain George Best - just a couple of months younger than when Messi on his first.
That should put George rather higher than some posters at least have allowed (not read the more recent posts). And if you want to put Messi top of your list, I couldn't really argue, even if he wouldn't be my choice.

As it happens, I've been lucky enough to see Best, Cruyff, Messi and C.Ronaldo live, some several times. But if I had to pick one player to win a game to save my life, it would be Maradona, who I first saw live as a 17 y.o. - absolutely, peerlessly, thrillingly phenomenal. While I don't think anyone has ever almost single-handedly dragged a team to win a World Cup quite like Maradona, whose teammates all agree he played for the team, rather than himself. In that respect, he's rather different from some of the other contenders ("Yes, I'm looking at you, Cristiano")

P.S. I was in Argentina last year. And yes, they adore Messi, but they absolutely worship Maradona. Which considering all the other issues in his off-field life, must say it all about his breathtaking performances on it.

I was there too recently, I feel like a big part of it though was Maradona had 6 seasons in Argentina before moving to Europe, and coming back there at the end of his career, and maybe more importantly his link to Boca Juniors, the biggest club in Argentina. Local football is massive in Buenos Aires, it's everywhere, always in the media and even if it's diminished quality compared to the 1970s/80s, people are obsessed with it. Maradona was also from south Buenos Aires and was the working-class hero. He was one of theirs in a way that Messi wasn't spending most of his life in Barcelona.

Messi never played a game in Argentinian club football, his only link is with Newell's Old Boys who aren't in the Big Five Buenos Aires teams, in Rosario, Messi is from Rosario too, outside that Buenos Aires centre which is very influential in Argentina. They were seen pretty equally from what I saw since the 2022 World Cup, before that I wouldn't say they were, no matter what Messi had done at Barcelona, but that win put him on a similar pedestal.

 

[Kwabs]

Messi is not only the most skillful player in the history of football. He is comfortably a level above anyone else in that regard.

Disagree

Close control, burst of pace, precision, reading and processing the game in fraction of a second... No one comes even close.

Disagree. I'd say Pele had this. One thing I realised from watching the 1970 WC games was how great his football IQ was, at that time when his physicality had diminished somewhat.

Maradona was more imaginative and expressive player that acquired a mythic status, with basic football skills

Not sure what you mean by 'basic football skills'. If you go back and watch his peak games, they look like pretty advanced football skills to me. The main difference is that opposition players seem to be allowed to commint GBH on him with regularity and impunity.

on the level that was unseen before and was supposed never to be matched. But the strangest thing happened and the left footed player from the same country appeared, with those same fundamental football skills basically upgraded.

There used to be this phenomenon called 'the new Maradona', where every young Argentine who displayed the merest hint of ability was immediately anointed thus, and consequently put under loads of pressure. Happened to dozens of them. Aimar, Riquelme, Ortega, Saviola etc.

Of course, there was a belief that no one would ever come along that could ever actually be as good, because Maradona was untouchable. Then Messi came along. He was also tagged the New Maradona, but in his case, he went on to arguably match and surpass Maradona, rendering the 'new Maradona' tag obsolete.

So i get what you're saying, although i disagree with your assessment of Maradona's abilities. Of course you can say that Messi has surpassed Maradona, but the caveats i would have are the degree of difficulty in playing in Maradona's violent, defensive era, and the lack of all-time great teammates that Maradona has had, which i've spoken about before.

I'd also say that Maradona's performance in 1986 on the biggest stage supersedes anything that Messi has done in that particular arena, although this is obviously only a small part of a career.

Just look at ten random games of both of these players, or simply look at the numbers. Messi is on his own level.

The numbers are clearly in Messi's favour, but i do think it is easier now. Also, we have to factor in Maradona's lifestyle, which was compatable with a sporting career in the 1980s, but is probably not now. However, why would one choose 10 random games? What about a comparison of their 10 best games? Or their 10 most important games?

And I think that the only player in history who was able to make it a contest for the crown of the best player in the world is Cristiano Ronaldo,

Disagree

who also happened to play at the same time. And he would not have been able to challenge Messi if he was only the super athlete with very good skills. He is indeed one of the most gifted footballers to ever play the game -

Again, i go back to when he was starting out at Manchester United. He didn't look like one of the most gifted footballers to ever play the game back then. Footballing genius is apparent and obvious early on. Again, this is not the same as claiming that he wasn't extremely talented. He wouldn't have been bought for so much money if he wasn't. But then again, Kylian Mbappe and Joao Fleix were signed for big money as teens as well, and I don't think they are among the 'most gifted footballers to ever play the game' either. But they're both extremely talented. Maybe Ronaldo is more talented than both, but I've still seen quite a few more players that I'd deem more talented than him.

only a different type of player with different set of skills in comparison with Maradona or Messi. In fact, he was rightfully proclaimed as such at the very beginning of his career,

Proclaimed as what?

and from the on he has consistently improved and refined his game.

Well there's no debate there.

 

[Eriku]

Saying that Maradona’s technique was basic is crazy. That man and the ball had a mutual love affair.

 

[Stocar]

Saying that Maradona’s technique was basic is crazy.

Who ever said anything like that? The poster above quoted a part of the sentence and took it out of the context, not sure why.

What is meant by that are the fundamental skills. Basically, ball control and movement with the ball. (Also composure, sense for the game rhythm, vision and precision.) What makes someone a "natural footballer". Maradona was arguably the best natural footballer ever until Messi appeared.

 

[Kwabs]

Who ever said anything like that? The poster above quoted a part of the sentence and took it out of the context, not sure why.

What is meant by that are the fundamental skills. Basically, ball control and movement with the ball. (Also composure, sense for the game rhythm, vision and precision.) What makes someone a "natural footballer". Maradona was arguably the best natural footballer ever until Messi appeared.

Maybe I misread what you said, but you did claim that Messi had the same skills as Maradona, but 'basically upgraded'. Like Maradona was Windows 1.0 and Messi is Windows 11. or something. I don't think that's true. If you look at their ability to control the ball their ability to pass, their ability to dribble, their vision, IQ, reading of the game etc., I don't see how Messi is an upgrade.

 

[Eriku]

Who ever said anything like that? The poster above quoted a part of the sentence and took it out of the context, not sure why.

What is meant by that are the fundamental skills. Basically, ball control and movement with the ball. (Also composure, sense for the game rhythm, vision and precision.) What makes someone a "natural footballer". Maradona was arguably the best natural footballer ever until Messi appeared.

Sorry, that was indeed cut off at a point that misrepresented you a bit.

Anyway, I’d argue agains the idea that Messi’s technique is an upgrade on Maradona, he just applies it with an efficiency that is unprecedented. Also aided by better surfaces, better equipment, etc.

 

[Spoony]

Sorry, that was indeed cut off at a point that misrepresented you a bit.

Anyway, I’d argue agains the idea that Messi’s technique is an upgrade on Maradona, he just applies it with an efficiency that is unprecedented. Also aided by better surfaces, better equipment, etc.

Yep. No one else in the history of the game could've scored that second goal at the Azteca on that pitch. You only have to listen to Lineker on how bad the surface was.

 

[Stocar]

Maybe I misread what you said, but you did claim that Messi had the same skills as Maradona, but 'basically upgraded'. Like Maradona was Windows 1.0 and Messi is Windows 11. or something. I don't think that's true. If you look at their ability to control the ball their ability to pass, their ability to dribble, their vision, IQ, reading of the game etc., I don't see how Messi is an upgrade.

Yeah, I really do think it's something like that. The quickness, control and precision that Messi had at his peak were otherworldly. I thought I would never see a player like Maradona, let alone better, but there he was. I think only people that regularly watched all Barcelona matches while he was there really do get it. It was sheer, outrageous brilliance, game after game, season after season. Never seen anything like it.

With regards to Cristiano Ronaldo and his level of talent: at the beginning of career he was seen as a candidate for world's best player in the future by many, and potentially one of the greatest ever by some. And with a very good reason. Tall players can be technically gifted, but they usually lack pace. Even if they have pace, their feet are not as quick in comparison with shorter players, which allows defenders to dispossess them easier. Additionally, even the most technically gifted and naturally athletic footballers lack body stability at high speed if they don't have low center of gravity. Now, Cristiano Ronaldo had it all: height, athleticism, pace, technique, quick feet, and perfect stability at high pace. That's how he always managed to get that bit of distance on defenders, for example. Also, incredible spatial awareness, striking technique, scoring instinct, etc. That's quite unique skillset, I would say.

It stills seems unreal that these two players played at the same time. Not sure how soon we will see anyone like them.

 

[Kwabs]

Yeah, I really do think it's something like that. The quickness, control and precision that Messi had at his peak were otherworldly. I thought I would never see a player like Maradona, let alone better, but there he was. I think only people that regularly watched all Barcelona matches while he was there really do get it.

i watched him every week for 15 years, so I think I get it. Just not sure I agree.

It was sheer, outrageous brilliance, game after game, season after season. Never seen anything like it.

Indeed, but his circumstances were easier, if you're talking about a direct comparison with Maradona.

With regards to Cristiano Ronaldo and his level of talent: at the beginning of career he was seen as a candidate for world's best player in the future by many, and potentially one of the greatest ever by some.

i don't recall anyone saying that Cristiano Ronaldo was a candidate for greatest player of all time when he started playing.

And with a very good reason. Tall players can be technically gifted, but they usually lack pace. Even if they have pace, their feet are not as quick in comparison with shorter players, which allows defenders to dispossess them easier. Additionally, even the most technically gifted and naturally athletic footballers lack body stability at high speed if they don't have low center of gravity. Now, Cristiano Ronaldo had it all: height, athleticism, pace, technique, quick feet, and perfect stability at high pace.

He didn't though. That's why he was always falling over. He had great pace (with and without the ball) and quick feet though, that much is true.

Here is an article from the time, an interview with Gary Neville, where he talks about the challenge of facing Ronaldo in the Euros. He acknowledges the fact that Ronaldo has faced a lot of criticism for 'overplaying', but predicts that he will become a 'world class player.' Ronaldo was already 19 at this point.

if someone is 'among the most gifted players to have ever played the sport', they don't have people predicting that they will 'become world class', when they are already 19 (which is quite old, by wunderkind standards).

The truth is that Ronaldo was extremely talented, but not genius level talented. Maradona and Pele did not have people (especially teammates) 'predicting that they would become world class' when they were already 19. Those teammates would be more likely to say 'this kid's an alien.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/euro_2004/england/3831825.stm

That's how he always managed to get that bit of distance on defenders, for example. Also, incredible spatial awareness, striking technique, scoring instinct, etc. That's quite unique skillset, I would say.

It stills seems unreal that these two players played at the same time. Not sure how soon we will see anyone like them.

I think we've seen players like them before and we will see players like them again. It's just that when a new thing comes along, we forget all about what went before.

 

[Stocar]

When I'm talking about stability at high pace, that doesn't have anything to do with falling over when pushed by a defender. Of course taller players are more prone to fall over when tackled. I'm talking about something else: ability to maintain balance and composure when changing direction and moving at high speed. Tall players usually don't have it, and it was apparent from the start that Ronaldo did have that ability, including other skills.

Random instance of newspaper rhetoric from decades ago is not proof of anything. I remember that Ronaldo was universally recognized as incredibly talented, with all the usual predictions and comparisons that come along with it. There was (and apparently still exists) a line of thought that to be among the greatest, a player has to have the skillset of classic playmaker. I disagree with that.

 

[Fobal]

When I'm talking about stability at high pace, that doesn't have anything to do with falling over when pushed by a defender. Of course taller players are more prone to fall over when tackled. I'm talking about something else: ability to maintain balance and composure when changing direction and moving at high speed. Tall players usually don't have it, and it was apparent from the start that Ronaldo did have that ability, including other skills.

Random instance of newspaper rhetoric from decades ago is not proof of anything. I remember that Ronaldo was universally recognized as incredibly talented, with all the usual predictions and comparisons that come along with it. There was (and apparently still exists) a line of thought that to be among the greatest, a player has to have the skillset of classic playmaker. I disagree with that.

Cris for me never had in general a level of control/awarness (and balance) where he was heading in comparison with the ones regarded best ever or even with trully speciallists in dribbling, more when he started his runs from the midfield, further from the rival's net, harder for him.

His best asset always was when he received near the rival area and he already had in his head his move, like taking his marker (or two) with dribbling and slash some thunder.
His balance, extreme control of his whereabouts, etc never was on the same level of some of the ones that have been mentioned here and that's not a sthg bad per se, because he still was elite in his dribbling, pace and talent of course.

 

[Kwabs]

When I'm talking about stability at high pace, that doesn't have anything to do with falling over when pushed by a defender. Of course taller players are more prone to fall over when tackled. I'm talking about something else: ability to maintain balance and composure when changing direction and moving at high speed. Tall players usually don't have it, and it was apparent from the start that Ronaldo did have that ability, including other skills.

Random instance of newspaper rhetoric from decades ago is not proof of anything. I remember that Ronaldo was universally recognized as incredibly talented, with all the usual predictions and comparisons that come along with it. There was (and apparently still exists) a line of thought that to be among the greatest, a player has to have the skillset of classic playmaker. I disagree with that.

It's not 'random newspaper rhetoric,' it's his teammate talking directly about him and saying that he would become a world class player. Which suggests that he was arguably not. At age 19. Not sure what you mean here. No one claimed that he wasn't talented.

Maybe provide some similarly contemporary examples of people saying that Ronaldo was predicted to be the greatest player ever or whatever you think the belief was about his talent at the time?

 

[mertens]

When I'm talking about stability at high pace, that doesn't have anything to do with falling over when pushed by a defender. Of course taller players are more prone to fall over when tackled. I'm talking about something else: ability to maintain balance and composure when changing direction and moving at high speed. Tall players usually don't have it, and it was apparent from the start that Ronaldo did have that ability, including other skills.

Random instance of newspaper rhetoric from decades ago is not proof of anything. I remember that Ronaldo was universally recognized as incredibly talented, with all the usual predictions and comparisons that come along with it. There was (and apparently still exists) a line of thought that to be among the greatest, a player has to have the skillset of classic playmaker. I disagree with that.

Even Rooney was considered better than Ronaldo prior to 2007-08 with more potential as a young player (winning Golden Boy etc.).

Ronaldinho after he won Ballon D'or in 2005 said below for Messi who was 18 at that time in an interview: "Best in the world? I’m not even the best at Barça” and Messi was not even a regular starter at Barca.

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/feature...-best-player-he-told-us-wed-got-the-wrong-guy

different levels

 

[Wand of a right foot]

When I'm talking about stability at high pace, that doesn't have anything to do with falling over when pushed by a defender. Of course taller players are more prone to fall over when tackled. I'm talking about something else: ability to maintain balance and composure when changing direction and moving at high speed. Tall players usually don't have it, and it was apparent from the start that Ronaldo did have that ability, including other skills.

Random instance of newspaper rhetoric from decades ago is not proof of anything. I remember that Ronaldo was universally recognized as incredibly talented, with all the usual predictions and comparisons that come along with it. There was (and apparently still exists) a line of thought that to be among the greatest, a player has to have the skillset of classic playmaker. I disagree with that.

Ronaldo from 2003 to 2006 was really really frustrating. And no, his dribbling wasn’t great either.

Even Rooney was considered better than Ronaldo prior to 2007-08 with more potential as a young player (winning Golden Boy etc.).

Ronaldinho after he won Ballon D'or in 2005 said below for Messi who was 18 at that time in an interview: "Best in the world? I’m not even the best at Barça” and Messi was not even a regular starter at Barca.

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/feature...-best-player-he-told-us-wed-got-the-wrong-guy

different levels

Prior to 06/07 season.
07/08 is much hyped due to the number of goals and our ucl win but he was better the previous season.

 

[Wand of a right foot]

Maradona’s individual performances for Barcelona are available on youtube. My observations:

1. The pitches were dreadful. The tackling horrendous.
2. Quite obvious that Maradona, when fit and available, was the default bpitw throughoutthe 80s, like Messi from 2006 to the end of his time in Europe. Mexico 1986 really wasn’t a surprise. Others may have had more successful seasons but he was the best.
3. The ability and style is so similar to Messi, it is freakish. Both from the same country, both left footed, both with otherworldly close control and on the pitch intelligence.

 

[Stocar]

The argument about dreadful pitches makes no sense. Allegedly it made the game infinitely more difficult for talented players. But on the other hand the same people will claim that football was better back then because genuine football talent was able shine out more in comparison with industrial dullness of today's football.

The truth is that the conditions were same for everyone back then. Goals were scored about as often as today, and if anything, talented players were allowed more time on the ball. Defense was more physical, but on the other hand, defensive quality and organization were below standard compared to today. If anything, all this makes Messi's and Ronaldo's achievements even more impressive.

 

[Kwabs]

The argument about dreadful pitches makes no sense. Allegedly it made the game infinitely more difficult for talented players. But on the other hand the same people will claim that football was better back then because genuine football talent was able shine out more in comparison with industrial dullness of today's football.

The truth is that the conditions were same for everyone back then. Goals were scored about as often as today, and if anything, talented players were allowed more time on the ball. Defense was more physical, but on the other hand, defensive quality and organization were below standard compared to today. If anything, all this makes Messi's and Ronaldo's achievements even more impressive.

You could make this argument re defensive organization. I still think it's easier to not have to deal with the vicious assaults that Maradona suffered though. That's the reason he bulked up so much by the mid-80s.

It's really an era thing. Pele was the best of his era, Maradona was the best of his era and Messi and Ronaldo are the best of their era. Comparison across the eras is always going to be difficult because each period presents vastly different challenges.

I think Messi, Maradona and Pele are all about the same level, and it's just a matter of preference or bias between those three. People might want to drop Maradona out because he doesn't have the team success or numbers, but that ignores the lesser teammates that he had.

And even if you want to do that, and just make it about Pele and Messi, Messi has nothing over Pele. They are at the very least equal.

 

[Quagmaguire]

Whenever I look at highlights - even if the pitches are horrible; the space between players is crazy, it's almost like a Bundesliga defensive high line.

So much space and no defensive organisation. Anyone with great technical ability would look good with that amount of space. However tackling was much more physical, probably because there was much less defensive organisation in the first place.

 

[Demyanenko_square_jaw]

Whenever I look at highlights - even if the pitches are horrible; the space between players is crazy, it's almost like a Bundesliga defensive high line.

So much space and no defensive organisation. Anyone with great technical ability would look good with that amount of space. However tackling was much more physical, probably because there was much less defensive organisation in the first place.

And yet there were always plenty of players in any era with loads of technical ability that failed to look consistently great.

I'd say space in 80s games was more chaotic and inconsistent, with larger potential for big gaps and stretched games to appear, but certainly not always abundant. Plenty of intense games with congested areas to an extent you won't see now, and/or individual/smaller scale pressing and duels going on all over the place, even if the larger scale full-team positioning was not as sophisticated as it has become over the last 15 years.

It was probably easier in terms of space for someone with great technical ability and vision to carve open midfields/defence with individually inventive through balls and long passes a few times every game, but that was somewhat balanced out with the tougher offside rule, inconsistent pitch quality affecting delivery for even the most technical, and more individually brutal defending.

For short passing, I don't think it's ever been easier for players to maintain possession as a team because of the flawless pitches, far greater analysis going into team structure, and the rigidity/precision of holding shape and pressing schemes we see in modern football lending to greater predictability of movement, especially as executed by the non-elite teams...but that's been balanced out with newer challenges to being creative in terms of higher average tempo and better larger scale pressing in general.

 

[Gio]

The argument about dreadful pitches makes no sense. Allegedly it made the game infinitely more difficult for talented players. But on the other hand the same people will claim that football was better back then because genuine football talent was able shine out more in comparison with industrial dullness of today's football.

The truth is that the conditions were same for everyone back then. Goals were scored about as often as today, and if anything, talented players were allowed more time on the ball. Defense was more physical, but on the other hand, defensive quality and organization were below standard compared to today. If anything, all this makes Messi's and Ronaldo's achievements even more impressive.

It’s simpler than that. Bad pitches make it harder for technical players. They are a leveller where quality can be negated by physicality. When the ball bobbles up randomly, it means players have to take extra touches and time, allowing them to be pressed. It makes it difficult to carry the ball as it bobbles up randomly as you’re running at pace. That’s what makes many of Maradona’s dribbling exploits in Mexico ‘86 so impressive. That he could carry the ball as it bounced up to his shin, swerving past players, retaining control, scanning around, while lesser mortals would have to slow down or lose possession.

The poorer the pitch, the more likely good teams are caught out. Take Juventus on the final day of the 1999/00 season. Couldn’t beat Perugia because of heavy rainfall preventing them from moving the ball forward quickly enough to create the chances to win the title. Or West German players crediting the heavy pitch and not their own performance for squeezing past Poland and their talented midfield in the 1974 de facto World Cup semi-final. Basically, the pitches made it easier for players off the ball to recover possession, working against the more talented players.

 

[Stocar]

I agree that pitches are generally better today, but people will often exaggerate how bad they were. It was not prehistory, it was still possible to play decent football. And my points still stands. How come talented players had easier time standing out? Why were skill and flair more prominent in the games?

The answer is simple: defense and general organization were levels below compared to today's football. And that far outweighs the difference in quality of the pitches and tolerance for aggressive tackles. Messi didn't always play in perfect weather or conditions, and was tackled incessantly. And one can simply see how his close control, speed and precision are superior to any player that ever played before.

 

[Fortitude]

I agree that pitches are generally better today, but people will often exaggerate how bad they were. It was not prehistory, it was still possible to play decent football. And my points still stands. How come talented players had easier time standing out? Why were skill and flair more prominent in the games?

The answer is simple: defense and general organization were levels below compared to today's football. And that far outweighs the difference in quality of the pitches and tolerance for aggressive tackles. Messi didn't always play in perfect weather or conditions, and was tackled incessantly. And one can simply see how his close control, speed and precision are superior to any player that ever played before.

You’ve never seen a prime serie A game, have you?

 

[Stocar]

You’ve never seen a prime serie A game, have you?

I actually followed it regularly in the 90's. Basically every match day. It was the fun at the time, but in retrospect the football was often dire. Different times, and I'm simply not a fan of nostalgic exaggerations and haughty football mythology. I see that many are, so to each his own.

 

[Fortitude]

I actually followed it regularly in the 90's. Basically every match day. It was the fun at the time, but in retrospect the football was often dire. Different times, and I'm simply not a fan of nostalgic exaggerations and haughty football mythology. I see that many are, so to each his own.

The point is, it was actually mostly a godawful spectacle because of the defensive organisation and brilliance required to break it, so your whole summation is off. If football reverted back to that, it’d feel like hell to eyes very used to watching open spectacles relative to that unrelenting cynicism and attention to defensive detailing.

The football of that time in that league is the antithesis of what you’re saying.

 

[Stocar]

The point is, it was actually mostly a godawful spectacle because of the defensive organisation and brilliance required to break it, so your whole summation is off. If football reverted back to that, it’d feel like hell to eyes very used to watching open spectacles relative to that unrelenting cynicism and attention to defensive detailing.

The football of that time in that league is the antithesis of what you’re saying.

It was not like that because of brilliant organization. It was simply slower and risk averse football. Some players that were seen as brilliant defenders back then, arguably wouldn't play in the top level today. They were often either technically below standard or not really athletic. Maldini stood out like a world wonder because he was a complete defender by today's standards.

 

[Fortitude]

It was not like that because of brilliant organization. It was simply slower and risk averse football. Some players that were seen as brilliant defenders back then, arguably wouldn't play in the top level today. They were often either technically below standard or not really athletic. Maldini stood out like a world wonder because he was a complete defender by today's standards.

You’re way off.

 

[Fobal]

Everytime the same story with this type of threads, yet Maradona's technique being basic have reach new "heights"

 

[Malkovich]

Not enough people put Garrincha up there, he won 2 WCs being arguably the best player in both. One of the few guys who look like a modern player athletically when you watch old tape.

 

[Fobal]

Not enough people put Garrincha up there, he won 2 WCs being arguably the best player in both. One of the few guys who look like a modern player athletically when you watch old tape.

Abosulte gem of a player, one of the GOATS for sure

 

[Spoony]

You’re way off.

Yep.

 

[Stocar]

Everytime the same story with this type of threads, yet Maradona's technique being basic have reach new "heights"

It seems that inclination for haughty nostalgia is negatively correlated with reading comprehension. The poster that deliberately took my words out of context at least had decency to acknowledge he was misinterpreting what I had said. Nevertheless, I additionally explained what I mean by basic technique. (Basic as in: fundamental, essential). And yet, here we go again. Foolish of me to expect an honest and respectful discussion where resorting to arrogant one-liners is the way when pretentious delusions are challenged.

 

[Fobal]

It seems that inclination for haughty nostalgia is negatively correlated with reading comprehension. The poster that deliberately took my words out of context at least had decency to acknowledge he was misinterpreting what I had said. Nevertheless, I additionally explained what I mean by basic technique. (Basic as in: fundamental, essential). And yet, here we go again. Foolish of me to expect an honest and respectful discussion where resorting to arrogant one-liners is the way when pretentious delusions are challenged.

I'm far from a fan of nostalgia, yet I'm neither a fan of some sort of lineal line of thougth that everything would be better tomorrow either (I'm not implying that you think that way).
My bad if BTW I got confuse with a paragraph where after basics skills there was some remark that David Silva was a better player (or sthg in that line of thougth) than Diego, I might got confuse with some other thread (or even forum, old fart issues, my bad again).

Diego it's not a player that had skills that weren't seen before, neither nowadays or in the recent past there were/ are players that easily can be spotted as more talented than him. In any case Diego was a very rare specime that hardly can be duplicated in terms of phsyical atributes, style of play and approach.
Even if Messi has lots of points in common, and prior to him had for instance someone like Sivori, he was quite unique to think of him in terms of Messi as an evoultion of him.

In fact Messi is closer to Zico, Best mostly with a touch of Joahn and Diego than anything. And his approach close to these other 3 irish, dutch and brazilian fella.

At the end of the day it's not a question of nostalgia, it's a question of respect for every great in their respective periods and to not think that when we analyze those, specially regarding football, we can be as taxative as new = plain better.
Sports in generel regarding athletes, tend to improve no doubt, yet when we analyze particular players with special off the charts characteristics, things aren't that lineal.

 

[honirelandboy]

Roy Keane most certainly number one, argue all you want.

 

[Fobal]

Roy Keane most certainly number one, argue all you want.

He does his job!

 

[Stocar]

No problem. Anyway, to reiterate my point. Maradona was the most fundamentally talented football player until Messi appeared. They are incredibly similar in many ways, but each played in different contexts and faced different challenges. Maradona was more imaginative and inspirational. Messi's fundamental skills are off the charts though. The close control, speed of reaction, precision. It was all there from the start, and on a level that was unseen before, including even Maradona. That's just how I see it; others may have different opinions, but I won't disparage them.

 

[Pink Moon]

van Basten is always criminally underrated when it comes to these sort of discussions.

283 goals in 379 games and a 3 time Ballon d'Or winner and he played his last ever game at age 28.

The best centre forward of all time IMO.