One more example of modern supporter nonsense. Although this one probably has its roots in generations past.
Can there really be someone better than Messi in modern football?
- Thread starter VorZakone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are joined by special guest Anders (@Lyng) to celebrate the news that ETH is staying put! They also talk about the Euros so far, with special attention on England, Scotland and Denmark. They then finish with some transfer talk and the potential comings and outgoings at Old Trafford.
You really don't think people revise their perception over time? My point is very clear. There is no objective 'best player' specially across positions. It's subjective and people change opinions over time and Zidane, due to his recent successes, will enjoy an enhanced reputation.
While people do revise their opinions over time @Everest Red, sane people will not revise their opinions on a player based on how they perform as a manager.
Nobody says SAF was anything other than a decent striker, just because he went on to be a great manager. I dont think anybody changed their opinion about Cruyff either - he was one of the greats, much like Zidane, but he wasnt on Pele's or Maradona's level. He went on to be a successful manager with Barca but that did not elevate him alongside their level.
They are two different things.
Nobody says SAF was anything other than a decent striker, just because he went on to be a great manager. I dont think anybody changed their opinion about Cruyff either - he was one of the greats, much like Zidane, but he wasnt on Pele's or Maradona's level. He went on to be a successful manager with Barca but that did not elevate him alongside their level.
They are two different things.
See, this is odd, Cryuff was a greater player than Pele/Maradona, but managing diminished his reputation. Sadly. It varies.
I still can't understand how Cristiano is even as equal as Messi.
Those Spanish squads included Real Madrid players as well. Casillas, Ramos, Xabi Alonso in the 2010 final. In the 2012 final: Casillas, Ramos, Alonso, Arbeloa. 4 Real Madrid players.
It's obviously ridiculous if it's treated like an absolute requirement. You only have to mention George Best or any number of undoubtedly great players who had no realistic chance of winning the thing.
It isn't really treated as such in the particular case of Messi, though. The fact that he hasn't won the World Cup is normally used to support the idea that he has never properly delivered the goods for Argentina – which has some truth to it: He has been far less impressive as a national team player than either Pelé or Maradona, the two players he's most frequently compared to in GOAT discussions.
It isn't simply a matter of not winning it – much more a question of him not properly putting his stamp on a World Cup tournament. He hasn't done that in a way that is comparable to his rivals.
How relevant is it? Depends on all sorts of things. To many fans the World Cup is still a big deal, though. It's not completely random that people focus on his lack of success (again, compared to his rivals) in that tournament: Many will argue that he's had a good enough platform (to truly shine from, if you will), and that his performances – consequently – have to be called underwhelming.
Are you seriously going to contest the point that those Spain sides are mainly made up of Barca players? That's Xavi & Iniesta particularly made them tick?
Even excluding quotes from Argentinians or people that are or were involved with Barcelona at some stage, there are still far more quotes from people saying that Messi is the best than there are saying Ronaldo is the best.
What a car crash of a thread.
It's only about the number of goals scored. Obviously scoring goals is the most difficult thing in football but it's the only reason they're even mentioned in the same sentences.
And Messi holds the record for both most goals in a calendar year and season...
Yeah but in recent years Ronaldo has outscored him rather consistently.
Wait a minute...
I thought the undisputed greatest ever player was George Best?
I thought the undisputed greatest ever player was George Best?
Because Messi has been more involved in playmaking rather than him getting worse at scoring.
I didn't say there was an official list. It's only my opinion about Maradona. That's the simple bit. People say Pele, Zidane, I say Maradona.
I don't see how anyone who's watched Ronaldo and Messi in La Liga for the last 6/7 years could claim Ronnie is better.
Cristiano is himself a great player, but Messi is in a class of his own. The only area where they're comparable is goal-scoring.
Cristiano is himself a great player, but Messi is in a class of his own. The only area where they're comparable is goal-scoring.
Cal, great point well made.
What about int football, champions league? I've been far more impressed with Ronaldo in these competitions than Messi in the last few years.
Also, Ronaldo played in two leagues and he's been dominant in both, Messi only ever played in one team, remember when he played for Argentina and couldn't score one goal in that world cup?
Always with the same thing...it's kinda boring.
I guess Tevez is better than both since he's proven in England, Italy, Brazil & Argentina
So if Ronaldo is better than Messi because of that, why hasn't he been outperforming Messi in La Liga? Messi would tear apart the PL just like Ronaldo did.
I can't honestly claim to have seen a lot of Argentina and Portugal on the international stage, but I figure performing against some of the world's best in La Liga week in week out is a good measure.
That's the thing, to some people that's exactly how it's treated. I've lost count of the number of people saying he 'hasn't delivered on the biggest stage' as if the quality level of the World Cup is somehow higher than the CL.
So? It's a knockout tournament held once every 4 years. In terms of prestige sure it's a great achievement, but the long list of crappy so-so players who have won the thing, show that it's basically an irrelevance in terms of ranking a players talent. I basically never fanboy about players, and I don't even like Barca, but Messi does things regularly with a football that are simply unbelievable. I just don't understand how anyone can not think the guy is the greatest player we've ever seen.
Then they're being ridiculous, as stated above.
It's more than that to many people. It's still considered the biggest prize in the business by a significant number of both fans and players. That "crappy" players have won it is neither here nor there. The only significance the tournament has in this particular context is that Messi is perceived as a relative under-performer in it compared to his rivals. The basis of the argument is that Messi should have done better, given what he had to work with (the overall strength of the team, in other words).
Well, others disagree. They don't think it's clear cut and consider Messi part of a small group of Greats rather than the stand-out candidate. That he is not part of said group is something very few will claim - just as only a minority will claim there's a debate to be had about Messi versus Ronaldo. It's Messi versus Pelé (or Maradona, or Di Stefano) - that's where it's at for most people. Given this, it isn't all that odd that the World Cup business keeps coming up: It's a weak point of his. The other candidates may have weak points of their own.
Such as none of the other (with the possible exception of Di Stefano) having had anything like as consistently brilliant club careers or having produced the kind of beyond world class performances week in week out over many many years?
Sure, whatever you like. Weak points, relatively speaking. Maradona didn't win the biggest European club trophy, for instance. Some may consider that a weak point.
Whether any of them can match Messi's consistency over a similar interval is hard to nail down. Messi's career is documented in detail to a far greater extent.
Anyway, I'm not interested in debating Messi's greatness with you. While you claim not to be a "fanboy" your stance nevertheless seems to be that he is unquestionable - which is fine by me, people will invariably have different opinions on the subject. I have no dog in the fight, to put it like that, I was merely making a point about the World Cup being a legitimate (in my opinion) thing to bring up, just as it's legitimate to point out possible chinks in the other GOAT players' armours.
Pele didnt even play club football in Europe did he? Surely he cant be considered the greatest if he didnt test hinsel in the stronge club continent, let alone league.
Pelé's era was different. European football wasn't the be all, and end all of club football in those days. The Campeonato Brasileiro was much stronger 50 years ago, than it is now. Before the trend of almost every big South American talent leaving the continent began (late 80s-early 90s), the Brazilian domestic leagues had the likes of Zizinho, Guia, Ademir, Djalma, Nilton, Falcão, Jairzinho, Carlos Alberto, Garrincha, Jorginho, Gérson, Vava, Bellini, Júnior, Zagallo, Zico, Tostão, Socrates, Rivellino, Sócrates playing in Brazil at a level that was close to to, or coincided with their peak; apart from foreign stars.
And Pelé did test himself against the best Europe had to offer. eg. Benfica was probably the strongest team in Europe when he met Santos (or Top 3 at worst) - with players like Simões, Germano, Augusto, Coluna, and a certain 20 year old named Eusébio, who was scoring at the rate of a goal per game. Pelé's Santos tonked them 8-4 over 2 legs (including a 2-5 rout in Lisbon where Pelé scored 3 against the European champions):
Limited sample size, but others vs European teams:
Real Madrid when they had Di Stéfano:
Inter Milan at the height of Catenaccio
2 goals vs Barcelona when they had Czibor and Kocsis
vs Stade de Reims
IIRC, something like 35%+ of Santos' goal vs European teams were scored by Pelé. So he was tested by European clubs.
And Pelé did test himself against the best Europe had to offer. eg. Benfica was probably the strongest team in Europe when he met Santos (or Top 3 at worst) - with players like Simões, Germano, Augusto, Coluna, and a certain 20 year old named Eusébio, who was scoring at the rate of a goal per game. Pelé's Santos tonked them 8-4 over 2 legs (including a 2-5 rout in Lisbon where Pelé scored 3 against the European champions):
Limited sample size, but others vs European teams:
Real Madrid when they had Di Stéfano:
Inter Milan at the height of Catenaccio
2 goals vs Barcelona when they had Czibor and Kocsis
vs Stade de Reims
IIRC, something like 35%+ of Santos' goal vs European teams were scored by Pelé. So he was tested by European clubs.
Argentina are not very good though
Aguero and Di Maria are always underpar for them.
It's really strange why their form goes out the window...maybe it's tactics
fella dont like upsetting full members but thats bollox maradonna turned a less than average argentina into world champions and napoli who have done jackshite since into double serie a champions and uefa cupwinners an absolute genius
I remember his debut pretty well still, it was still early in Ronaldinho's ascendency yet from the first few touches the feeling was palpable, something special that we hadn't seen before. I turned to my wife, then girlfriend, and actually laughed when I said 'I think he's better than Ronaldinho'.
Messi is a generational talent that leaves you speechless, the fact he's such a virtuous footballer and exudes such humility buggers belief. It's always possible of course but I can scarcely imagine someone impacting any sport the way Messi does in football. It's magical, and while the game will eventually go on & produce a variety of amazing talents, football will never quite be the same when he calls it quits
Messi is a generational talent that leaves you speechless, the fact he's such a virtuous footballer and exudes such humility buggers belief. It's always possible of course but I can scarcely imagine someone impacting any sport the way Messi does in football. It's magical, and while the game will eventually go on & produce a variety of amazing talents, football will never quite be the same when he calls it quits
You're talking like if they were all just a bunch of amateurs (Napoli and Argentina) apart from Maradona. As amazing as the achievements were, they are certainly also talked in a quite romantic fashion with a bit of revisionism in it. Napoli invested in a good squad by then (Ferrara for example) and Maradona was not the only top footballer in it. Heck, they managed to break the world transfer record for him, so they certainly were not minnows.
Another aspect that is overlooked is that in that time Serie A was fairly balanced and the title was kind of up for grabs. Napoli wasn't the only team to impress, Verona and Sampdoria also managed to win their only Scudettos in that era, and they didn't need to have the best player in the world in their squad to do it. I was too young to follow football myself, but looking with a bit of depth into it and it's clear that a team like Napoli winning the Scudetto isn't something to be seen under the light of a unique achievement unable to be replicated by others. Again, other "average" teams did it.
Bold move watching a game with your wife and girlfriend at the same time. You must be quite the ladies man.
It's certainly way more unique than beating Las Palmas and Elche in La Liga with 200mil worth of attacking duo around you and once-in-history youth products of Iniesta and to a smaller degree cnut Busquets. Oh, yes, I forgot 40mil Rakitic and the best attacking full-back of the generation. People can talk all day about Messi not having enough support with Argentina, but Di Maria, Higuain, Aguero, etc. beat anything Maradona had around him in both international and club football. Messi at international stage is just another player.
Fanboy delusion overload. You sure you're married?
Tautology at work. Data and beauty are not the same thing. 1s and 0s are data but they are not beauty.
Dictionary.com defines "beautiful" as possessing qualities that give great pleasure or satisfaction to see, hear, think about, etc.; delighting the senses or mind.
What gives one great pleasure or delights the senses or mind will differ from person to person. Kate Upton's beauty has been famously criticized for excessive weight and curves. Those critics prefer the more anexoric look of many professional models, such as Kate Moss.
Who is more beautiful than the other, Upton or Moss? It's a purely eye-of-the-beholder matter. The answer cannot be generated by an algorithm of 1s and 0s. If you cannot comprehend this, you cannot comprehend what beauty is.
Taking this back to Messi v Pele v Maradona, a compelling case can be made for all three as to who is the greatest. All three put up staggering numbers and won numerous individual and team awards, but we can very safely say that all three were a cut above most other footballers and that the fact they played in different eras does not make it difficult for us to confidently assert that they among the greatest footballers to ever play the game.
Yes, of course, the likes of Di Maria or Higuain are incomparably better than Valdano, Burruchaga, or Ruggeri
Por Maradona won the World Cup surrounded by a bunch of amateurs. Such bullshit.
Di Maria and Aguero, whom you have funnily failed to mention, are better than the three you mentioned.Yes, of course, the likes of Di Maria or Higuain are incomparably better than Valdano, Burruchaga, or Ruggeri
Por Maradona won the World Cup surrounded by a bunch of amateurs. Such bullshit.