How good was Alfredo Di Stefano?

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
50,817
Location
London
From all the GOATs, this one is the most mysterios for me. While I have watched everything I have found (which is basically the highlights of European Cups finals) it is far less than for any other great player.

Still some stats for him:

He has scored more than 500 goals in his career.
He played in six European Cup finals, winning in five of them and scoring in all those five finals (all time record for both).
He still holds the record for most goals in the finals of European Cups (8 goals).
Won 2 Ballon D'Or in his career.
Won the Super Ballon D'Or which was an one of occassion award, beating Cruyff and Platini.
Despite his impressive goal scoring record, he wasn't exactly a striker in the modern sense. I don't think that position exists anymore, but I think it was quite similar to Sir Bobby Charlton position.

While Pele and Maradona (and recently Messi) with Cruyff as an outsider are mentioned as the best player of all time, both Pele and Maradona (who aren't known for being modest) claimed that Di Stefano is the best ever. Others who said so are Sir Bobby Charlton, Dennis Law and Gert Muller among others. Cruyff also said that he idolized Di Stefanno.

Some of the quotes from other all time greats talking for him:

Pele: People argue between Pele or Maradona. Di Stéfano is the best, much more complete

Platini: A great amongst the greats.

Bobby Charlton: Alfredo di Stéfano is maybe the greatest player I have ever seen. I watched him in a match when Manchester United played against Real in the semi-final of the European Cup in Madrid the year before the accident. In those days, there was no substitutes' bench; if you weren't playing, you were in the stand. I felt like I was looking down on what looked like a Subbuteo table—I was that high up—but I couldn't take my eyes off this midfield player and I thought, Who on earth is that?

He ran the whole show and had the ball almost all the time. I used to dream of that, and I used to hate it when anyone else got it. They beat us 3-1 and he dictated the whole game. I'd never seen anything like it before—someone who influenced the entire match. Everything went through him. The goalkeeper gave it to him, the full backs were giving it to him, the midfield players were linking up with him and the forwards were looking for him.

Bobby Charlton: He was simply the most intelligent football player I ever saw. If I had one player to choose, out of all of them, to save my life, he'd be the one.

Eusebio: The most complete footballer in the history of the game.

Sir Alex Ferguson: Di Stéfano was one of the greatest footballers ever. He had such great balance.

Helenio Herrera: Alfredo Di Stéfano was the greatest footballer of all time; much better even than Pelé. He was, simultaneously, the anchor on the defensive, the playmaker in midfield and the most dangerous sniper in the attack

Maradona: I really don’t know if I was better than Pele. Di Stefano was better than Pele.

Gento: Di Stefano was the first Galactico. In fact, he was worth as three of them combined.
Click to expand...

It is quite interesting then when France Football asked the 34 Ballo D'Or winners to make a list of 5 players as the best ever, in order to choose the best player of all time, both SBC and Dennis Law had Di Stefano in first position. Not Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, Best or someone else, but Di Stefano.

An another interesting note is that after the Munich tragedy, Santiago Bernabeu who really liked Sir Mat Busby, asked Di Stefano to go and play for United a season in loan in order to help us. Di Stefano was happy to do so, but FA sanctioned the move cause Di Stefano would get the place of a British footballer. How much that move would have helped United and English football in general, is something that we will never know.

Anyway, the reason for this thread is that I really don't know much from him bar a few videos and what other people have said. If other people @Brwned , @antohan , @Balu , @Invictus @Marcosdeto @Annahnomoss or others have more information for him (or other videos) it would be nice if you can share. Or at worst case, just have a healthy discussion for him.

I would be also interested to see where would you put him in all time greats. Same level as Pele/Maradona or below them together with likes of Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Eusebio, Platini, Best, Zidane etc?
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately there wasn't many clear footage during that time which could show us how he played... but with his outstanding club record with Real Madrid, he has to be one of the greatest. I would have him among one of the greatest ever, perhaps just behind Pele and Maradona, alongside with Cruyff and Beckenbauer.
 
He was 30 (or maybe 29) when he joined Madrid. Pretty incredible really, considering all of the goals he scored for them. He must have been like a super Robben, immune to aging.

Edit: I think he was 27 actually. I was thinking of Puskas.
 
RedRonaldo said:
Unfortunately there wasn't many clear footage during that time which could show us how he played... but with his outstanding club record with Real Madrid, he has to be one of the greatest. I would have him among one of the greatest ever, perhaps just behind Pele and Maradona, alongside with Cruyff and Beckenbauer.
Click to expand...
Which is basically, what this list says (somehow Platini ends in fifth place - above Beckenbauer - but that might be cause the young Ballon D'Or winners might have been slightly biased).

http://www.xtratime.org/forum/showthread.php?t=317745

It is the list of 30/34 Ballon D'Or winners who voted for the greatest players ever in 2000.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
He was 30 (or maybe 29) when he joined Madrid. Pretty incredible really, considering all of the goals he scored for them. He must have been like a super Robben, immune to aging.

Edit: I think he was 27 actually. I was thinking of Puskas.
Click to expand...
Yep, 27. Puskas was 30 or so when he joined Madrid, and then went to win 2-3 European Cups, scoring in finals a hattrick (despite losing) and a pocker (and winning). Interestingly, United were interested to sign him too but FA intervened again. Probably the recuperation process after Munich would have gone faster if we had signed Puskas and had Di Stefano for a season.
 
When discussing the old legends it is important to not get caught up in trying to numerically rate them. It leads to nothing and derails the discussion rather.

What Alfredo brought to the table was so different from Pele or Maradona, he was a team player of the highest order, had probably the best work rate about for his time and he constantly wanted the ball no matter where it was. If the ball was in the defense, Di Stefano found space in the defense received it, made a turn and either burst forward with it at his feet or played a simple pass.

Then he'd continue to try and get involved again, and again and again with a ruthless intensity and he was more often than not the one who finished the attacking sequence too scoring more or less as much as Messi and Ronaldo per game in the league during his peak.

To judge these very best players individual skill often becomes secondary as they all more or less possess world class talent and attributes, and influence on the teams performance is brought up as the key element to try and separate the greats. Di Stefano just epitomizes that, the influence of the entire teams performance level.

There are plenty of great sources for Di Stefano footage, which type of thing are you interested in? Full matches or documentaries with interviews, footage and Di Stefano himself talking?
 
Annahnomoss said:
When discussing the old legends it is important to not get caught up in trying to numerically rate them. It leads to nothing and derails the discussion rather.

What Alfredo brought to the table was so different from Pele or Maradona, he was a team player of the highest order, had probably the best work rate about for his time and he constantly wanted the ball no matter where it was. If the ball was in the defense, Di Stefano found space in the defense received it, made a turn and either burst forward with it at his feet or played a simple pass.

Then he'd continue to try and get involved again, and again and again with a ruthless intensity and he was more often than not the one who finished the attacking sequence too scoring more or less as much as Messi and Ronaldo per game in the league during his peak.

To judge these very best players individual skill often becomes secondary as they all more or less possess world class talent and attributes, and influence on the teams performance is brought up as the key element to try and separate the greats. Di Stefano just epitomizes that, the influence of the entire teams performance level.

There are plenty of great sources for Di Stefano footage, which type of thing are you interested in? Full matches or documentaries with interviews, footage and Di Stefano himself talking?
Click to expand...

I would prefer full matches, but also documentaries with interviews sounds nice. So far, I have only seen the highlights of European Cups finals.

Am I right in saying that Sir Bobby was a bit similar in style to him. Having scored insane number of goals, while basically playing like a midfielder and being in all parts of the pitch?
 
Revan said:
I would prefer full matches, but also documentaries with interviews sounds nice. So far, I have only seen the highlights of European Cups finals.

Am I right in saying that Sir Bobby was a bit similar in style to him. Having scored insane number of goals, while basically playing like a midfielder and being in all parts of the pitch?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. After the Munich disaster Charlton was still just 20 years old and at this period he scored for fun. He had been converted from being a winger and I believe he still played on the wing for England. He scored over 20 goals in 3 consecutive seasons which was a fantastic result. But then he grew as a player, become more of the box to box playmaker that we know and his goal tally was roughly 10 goals per season.

Still great figures for an attacking midfielder, but it reflects the fact that he wasn't quite the player who was supposed to finish chances for the team. Di Stefano's goalscoring figures is what is so surreal when you look at him playing. You will see someone fighting all over the pitch, dropping to the centre backs to receive a ball to start the offense and then you will see him finishing off the chance as well.

Charlton in his peak wasn't far behind in terms of abilities but Di Stefano is hard to understand without watching. The same goes for 5 European Cup wins in a row, it is so good that we have to somehow find a way to downplay it to be able to absorb it.

 
Last edited:
My father used to see him in Chamartín(Bernabeu)when was a kid. He said that was good in everything,the first modern footballer,some kind of orchestra director.
 
Annahnomoss said:
Yes and no. After the Munich disaster Charlton was still just 20 years old and at this period he scored for fun. He had been converted from being a winger and I believe he still played on the wing for England. He scored over 20 goals in 3 consecutive seasons which was a fantastic result. But then he grew as a player, become more of the box to box playmaker that we know and his goal tally was roughly 10 goals per season.

Still great figures for an attacking midfielder, but it reflects the fact that he wasn't quite the player who was supposed to finish chances for the team. Di Stefano's goalscoring figures is what is so surreal when you look at him playing. You will see someone fighting all over the pitch, dropping to the centre backs to receive a ball to start the offense and then you will see him finishing off the chance as well.

Charlton in his peak wasn't far behind in terms of abilities but Di Stefano is hard to understand without watching. The same goes for 5 European Cup wins in a row, it is so good that we have to somehow find a way to downplay it to be able to absorb it.

Click to expand...

Thanks for this. Great watching.

Considering how highly rated he is (well, before Messi happened he was regarded either as third or fourth best ever) I wonder if he had played in a World Cup (when the World Cup was even more important than us) and had a great showing (not neccesarily Maradona/Cruyff/Pele/Garrincha great), would he had been remembered as the greatest ever?

What likely is undebatable is that Don Alfredo was the greatest ever player in club level. 5 European Cups - playing and scoring in the finals of them all - (6 finals) and 8 Spanish titles is something that won't be ever matched.
 
A sensational player who was virtually flawless - a goalscorer, playmaker and a dynamic ubiquitous presence, whose influence extended to the entire pitch and he actively contributed to just about every phase of the game. Perhaps the most complete player of all time. It genuinely is hard to think of another player who is similar in playing style.

A top notch and in depth article on Don Alfredo for those interested.

http://spielverlagerung.com/2014/07/10/in-depth-analysis-alfredo-di-stefano/
 
A newbie (stress got my knees hurt) PM-ed me this:

This might be of some use to you. I still can't post in your thread. You were talking about the Super Ballon d'Or, this is the voting for the award from both the media and former Ballon d'Or winners.

http://i.imgur.com/Voql5ws.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/akeykU0.jpg

Also, this might interest you. A 1981 article from Eric Batty about the man himself.

http://i.imgur.com/caeCLrq.jpg

Hope this helps.
Click to expand...

The voting for Super Ballon D'Or winner looks quite interesting (8 Di Stefano, 6 Cruyff).
 
To fully appreciate the legend of Di Stefano, we have to consider two major aspects.

Firstly, the pseudo football element that cannot be quantified, and is often undermined in discussions of this nature. There a a lot of great footballers but very few have as indelible of an impact as Di Stefano because the fates of Real Madrid the club, Santiago Bernabeu and Di Stefano are eternally intertwined. When we look at Real Madrid today, they stand as the greatest club in the history of European football. Even as supporters of other clubs, objectively you cannot deny the fact that they are simply a notch above everyone else. But it wasn't always this way. After the Spanish Civil War ended in 1939, Real Madrid was essentially on the brink of dissolution and most of the directors had either died in the war, or defected. Progressively, Bernabeu started retooling the club and facilities. eg. the Cantera youth academy was established during his tenure, Estadio Chamartin was replaced by Nuevo Estadio Chamartin in 1947 (now known as Estadio Santiago Bernabeu). But they still could not compete with the best Spanish clubs of that era. Financially also, they were in a very poor state because unlike other government supported clubs, they didn't always receive the funds to rebuild and at times had to rely on private grants.

Meanwhile Football Club Barcelona, the former Athletic Club (later Athletic Bilbao), Valencia CF, the former Athletic Club Madrid (later named Athletic Aviacion de Madrid, now Atletico Madrid) had almost monopolized Liga titles; and Real Madrid hadn't won anything since 1932. The opponents had players like Telmo Zarra, German Gomez, Edmundo Suarez and Real Madrid didn't have an answer to that. Then Bernabeu devised a plan to acquire the best players from around the world and turn Real Madrid into one of the first cosmopolitan football clubs in Europe. Di Stefano was the pinnacle of that ideology. And all the others - Puskas, Kopa, Santamaria, Didi etc came later. Not only did they manage to land him from Millonarios for 4.5 million pesetas, he was stopped from joining FC Barcelona who declined the option of alternate season loan deals. The turnaround really started with that signing in earnest. At that time, Real were like United from Fergie's early years and despite some success, even finishing runner ups, hadn't won the Liga for 20 years. But signing Di Stefano had a Cantona-esque effect on the whole club. Straightway they won the Liga ahead of Barcelona, and Di Stefano was the Pichichi. The year after that they again won the Liga. Over a 6 year span, they won the Liga 4 times from 1953-1958 and Di Stefano was the Pichichi 5 times which was only a sign of things to come with 5 European Cups, 2 European Cup top scorer title and 2 Ballon D'Ors for Di Stefano. If it hadn't been for him, there would be no Decima or Galacticos.

Second the football aspect and this is where it becomes even more tricky because the footage for him is quite limited and you just cannot describe Di Stefano in words. But still, the footage is good enough to form an impression of how he was like as a footballer. If you were to describe him - some players have great defensive skill but are weaker in other areas, some have an for the pass as playmakers but aren't very mobile, some score loads of goals but stand still and don't contribute to the general play - and so forth. But very few in the history of football managed to combine all of that as an individual at the highest level in the spirit of totaalvoetbal. And Di Stefano was without doubt the greatest of them all, ahead of Cruyff and John Charles. In terms of a modern equivalent, the closest comparison would be maybe someone like Gullit or Rooney in terms of workrate and stamina, but with greater technique and immense skill, head always on the swivel and tacking/ distribution skill like Rijkaard, top notch playmaking and match controlling ability; combined with the productivity of Ronaldo, the leadership ability of Puyol, and the big match performances of Drogba. #9+10+6+8 kind of player.

Ok maybe that was a bit hyperbolic, but even if you leave aside the completeness of his game - Di Stefano would still rank among the greatest ever because he just won trophies and produced goals, assists, moments of magic where-ever he went. 2 goal in 3 game ratio for River Plate winning the Primera Division in 2 of 3 years and named league top scorer once. Joined Millonarios after the strike in Argentina with the likes of Rossi and Pedernera, scored with a ratio of 1 goal per game, won the Campeonato Di Mayor 3 times and top scorer 3 times. And the record at Madrid is well known - ratio of 3 goals in 4 games. The greatest club footballer ever IMO. Which kind of leads to his underachieving nature in international football, a reason why a lot of people haven't somehow heard of him. It's a real shame that after scoring at a ratio of a goal per game for Argentina, he never turned out for a national team for 10 years. By the time he started playing for Spain, Di Stefano was a bit old and played just 31 matches, scoring 23 goals. If we try to extrapolate it over the length of his career, he might've even had 100+ international goals. That and the absence of global television meant the likes of Maradona and Pele have an advantage, they both won World Cups seen by millions of people unlike Di Stefano who had a very short international career and didn't play at the World Cups in the 1940s because of World War II. 4th greatest footballer ever based on the little I've seen, but mostly heard from credible sources.

1. Pele.
2. Diego Maradona.
3. Lionel Messi,
4. Alfredo Di Stefano.
5. Johan Cruyff/ Franz Beckenbauer tossup.

We should probably tag @Vato and @Raul Madrid to get a Madrid fan's perspective on Di Stefano. Also, cool thread. We should have more of these on Meazza, Bican, Erico and other all time great footballers who aren't very well known but deserve recognition.


Joga Bonito said:
A sensational player who was virtually flawless - a goalscorer, playmaker and a dynamic ubiquitous presence, whose influence extended to the entire pitch and he actively contributed to just about every phase of the game. Perhaps the most complete player of all time. It genuinely is hard to think of another player who is similar in playing style.

A top notch and in depth article on Don Alfredo for those interested.

http://spielverlagerung.com/2014/07/10/in-depth-analysis-alfredo-di-stefano/
Click to expand...

Damn dude, I had work to do. Oh well, it can wait for 15 mins.. :D
 
By all accounts, the Rooney of 2003-2006 was the closest we ever got to a modern-day comparison with Di Stefano. Had the perfect blend of strength, technique and skill...
 
Revan said:
Thanks for this. Great watching.

Considering how highly rated he is (well, before Messi happened he was regarded either as third or fourth best ever) I wonder if he had played in a World Cup (when the World Cup was even more important than us) and had a great showing (not neccesarily Maradona/Cruyff/Pele/Garrincha great), would he had been remembered as the greatest ever?

What likely is undebatable is that Don Alfredo was the greatest ever player in club level. 5 European Cups - playing and scoring in the finals of them all - (6 finals) and 8 Spanish titles is something that won't be ever matched.
Click to expand...

It is impossible to say who was the greatest ever without first deciding together on how to define what makes someone great. Is it their peak ability, is it their overall career, is it their ability to prove themselves as the key members in winning sides at both international and club level etc.

It is hard to argue against the people who say Maradona/Pele were the greatest as they ticked every possible box and no matter which definition you go for they'd be more or less at the top.

So like for any player who is in the discussions as one of the all-time greats, the finest margins like performing to the top of their level Internationally will be a deciding factor. I wouldn't say Maradona/Pele had a higher peak than Di Stefano, or that Messi in his peak was a worse player than either.

Beckenbauer and Cruyff are also players who proved themselves at the highest level and Platini would probably be rated above Maradona if he hadn't had his magical '86 World Cup. However they are listed, it is important to know that it isn't necessarily based on skills as all that top tier were tremendous players.

Most legends didn't play the same role either, so it is completely impossible to try and separate them. How do you decide that Beckenbauer was worse libero than Messi is as a false-9?

Even in terms of players who are coined as false-9's like Cruyff and Messi it is more or less impossible to compare them as they don't play football even remotely the same. Cruyff probably had as much if not more in common with Di Stefano in his role than Messi.
 
Different player to Maradona and Pelé. More complete, twice the player you got with Sir Bobby and I don't mean that as a slight on him. Di Stefano basically did everything Charlton excelled at to a similar standard (playmaking), but also excelled at what Charlton was just good at (goals) AND also influenced the defensive side of the game in a way Sir Bobby didn't. By all accounts, it would be Sir Bobby with elements of Keane and Law, which is just as formidable a player as it sounds. A souped up Cruyff with better character, that's some player!

Differently from Pelé/Maradona, there's far less evidence of all this, but more than enough, and everything you see and read, plus his stats... it's all consistent and I for one can't justify placing him in a rung just below Pelé/Maradona when everything points to him being as good if not better.

You can't just slate a player as a notch below to be more comfortable with your own ignorance.

It doesn't surprise me one bit that the farther back we go the greater the praise. It's not romanticism, it's first hand experience. Kids today idolise Messi, are open-minded about Maradona, but start getting sceptical with Pelé. My generation idolises Maradona, doesn't think Messi has anything on him, is open minded about Pelé and less comfortable with Di Stefano. Go back further and Diego is the pretender, Pelé the real deal, Di Stefano the realistic contender... and so on. It's normal and entirely a reflection of our own ignorance, nothing to do with the players or how good they really were.
 
I think we have got to the point where we cant chose a single greatest player. Footballs long history has produced so many amazing players and so many of the very best of them have differing reasons why they were the best of their eras. Time has an effect on the memory and collective appreciation of players. GOAT for me is the domain of train spotters and boffins, the sort of people who lose perspective too easily.
 
Cheers @Annahnomoss and @antohan

@Invictus , very informative post, thanks a lot. I've heard before for this alternate yearly loan, and it is nice that it didn't happen. Imagine a player playing one year for Madrid, then going next year to Barca, then coming back to Madrid knowing that next season will play for Barca. It would be nightmare scenario for Don Alfredo (who interestingly, accepted it). It is a shame that he didn't play in a World Cup and so, more people would have heard for him. And we would have more footage to see from him.

@Stack , I partially agree with you here. Anyway, my reason for this thread was that probably until a decade ago I wouldn't know who was Di Stefano (or even Cruyff) but if someone would have asked me who is the best footballer ever I would have immediately said Pele or Maradona, despite that I didn't ever seen them playing. But the more I read about Di Stefano, the more I am convinced that he literally was the undisputed player of his generation. A true genius who could have done anything any other player did.

The GOAT discussions are at times tiresome, and generally pointless considering that sport evolves all the time, and there isn't a single person who has watched enough matches of all great players, but on the other side they aren't serious and to a lot of people are a bit of fun.

When it comes to Di Stefano it is a bit more interesting considering that he is always rated in top 5 despite not playing on the only competition which everybody watched back then. And pretty much everyone who has played with or against him has only sublime praise to say for him. Which makes me think that 'what if he had played and shined in a world cup'? Would have been him instead of Pele the undisputed best player of all time? We'll never know, obviously.

Anyway, I made the thread more with the point of people discussing for him and showing videos, or the very nice articles we posted. More like an appreciation thread for one of the greatest player of all time, but who unfortunately isn't as much remembered as the others cause he played one decade too early.
 
Revan said:
Anyway, I made the thread more with the point of people discussing for him and showing videos, or the very nice articles we posted. More like an appreciation thread for one of the greatest player of all time, but who unfortunately isn't as much remembered as the others cause he played one decade too early.
Click to expand...

Absolutely one of the all time greats and one who has fallen under the radar for many. There will be more from before WW2 as well
 
Reading Sid Lowe's book, he's cut football into two periods. Pre-Alfredo and Post-Alfredo. Di Stefano had remarkable stamina, that was perhaps his greatest attribute, he covered a ridiculous amount of ground. He wasn't just a striker. In a game he operated as a hybrid quarterback/attacking midfielder, genuinely two footed, he would collect the ball off the center halves, one-two it with the midfielders, slip players through or get on the ends of things. There is no comparable player. Even Messi isn't as all covering as he was, by all accounts.
 
Stack said:
Absolutely one of the all time greats and one who has fallen under the radar for many. There will be more from before WW2 as well
Click to expand...
Well, surely there are some as great footballers from pre WW2 era, but there is basically little to no informatin for them, and no footage at all. So hard to discuss about them.
 
Stack said:
Absolutely one of the all time greats and one who has fallen under the radar for many. There will be more from before WW2 as well
Click to expand...
Josef Bican is the most intriguing one for me. Highest goalscoring player in history. You also have some great teams that just vanished, Pro Vercelli went from being the greatest team in the world for a long period in the late 10's/20's, to being a minnow nowadays.
 
Lynk said:
Josef Bican is the most intriguing one for me. Highest goalscoring player in history. You also have some great teams that just vanished, Pro Vercelli went from being the greatest team in the world for a long period in the late 10's/20's, to being a minnow nowadays.
Click to expand...
Yep. I remember reading about him, and he had in one season something crazy like an average of 2 goals per match.

Anyway, hard to get any conclusions from that though. Just that he scored a lot in Austria/Czech leagues, but when it comes to him not that we don't have footage but we also don't have many people talking for him.

Stanley Matthews is another one which doesn't have footage but apparently was an all time great. I don't know nothing for him bar that he was an Englishman who played in England, played until his forties and won a Ballon D'Or when he was 41 (it was the first Ballon D'Or ever given, so no idea if it was on merit or more a honorary one for the most famous player of that era).
 
Revan said:
Yep. I remember reading about him, and he had in one season something crazy like an average of 2 goals per match.

Anyway, hard to get any conclusions from that though. Just that he scored a lot in Austria/Czech leagues, but when it comes to him not that we don't have footage but we also don't have many people talking for him.

Stanley Matthews is another one which doesn't have footage but apparently was an all time great. I don't know nothing for him bar that he was an Englishman who played in England, played until his forties and won a Ballon D'Or when he was 41 (it was the first Ballon D'Or ever given, so no idea if it was on merit or more a honorary one for the most famous player of that era).
Click to expand...


Will write more on Matthews when I get back from dinner.
 
Revan said:
Yep. I remember reading about him, and he had in one season something crazy like an average of 2 goals per match.

Anyway, hard to get any conclusions from that though. Just that he scored a lot in Austria/Czech leagues, but when it comes to him not that we don't have footage but we also don't have many people talking for him.

Stanley Matthews is another one which doesn't have footage but apparently was an all time great. I don't know nothing for him bar that he was an Englishman who played in England, played until his forties and won a Ballon D'Or when he was 41 (it was the first Ballon D'Or ever given, so no idea if it was on merit or more a honorary one for the most famous player of that era).
Click to expand...
In fairness to Bican he had a goal a game ratio at international level too.
 
Revan said:
Yep. I remember reading about him, and he had in one season something crazy like an average of 2 goals per match.

Anyway, hard to get any conclusions from that though. Just that he scored a lot in Austria/Czech leagues, but when it comes to him not that we don't have footage but we also don't have many people talking for him.

Stanley Matthews is another one which doesn't have footage but apparently was an all time great. I don't know nothing for him bar that he was an Englishman who played in England, played until his forties and won a Ballon D'Or when he was 41 (it was the first Ballon D'Or ever given, so no idea if it was on merit or more a honorary one for the most famous player of that era).
Click to expand...

Lots of footage available of Sir Stanley Mathews. Your problem is that you wont do proper research. So what you miss out on is the context of these old players and how the way they played and their ability impacted not only on football but also on the culture of the time. The quote of yours I have bolded just reinforces my view that you really have no idea of context or perspective.
I am not English, in fact I was born in a country which as a pass time loves to rubbish the English however you very clearly like to diminish and demean any player who was English (or British for that manner). You do it often. Your ignorance in this is clearly on display especially this about Sir Stanley Mathews.
 
Off topic, but a lot of the pre-1950 era footballing greats are incredibly mystifying, even for historians who have access to all kind of archives :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Friedenreich (God tier scorer)

Friedenreich retired while playing for Flamengo in 1935 at the age of 43. He died on September 6, 1969 at the age of 77. His exact number of games and goals is not known. Friedenreich is reported to have scored 1329 goals in 1239 games. However, Pele fans argue he scored 1239 in 1329 games.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernando_Peyroteo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imre_Schlosser

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leônidas

Leônidas is one of several possible players credited for inventing the "Bicycle Kick". The first time Leônidas used this technique was on 24 April 1932, in a match between Bonsucesso and Carioca. In Flamengo he used this move only once, in 1939, against the Argentinian team Independiente. The unusual volley gained huge fame at the time, propelling it into the football mainstream. For São Paulo he used the bicycle kick on two occasions: the first on 14 June 1942, in the defeat against Palestra Italia (currently Palmeiras. Most famously of all, he used it on 13 November 1948, in the massive 8–0 victory over Juventus. The play (and the goal) was captured in an image and is regarded as the most famous picture of the player. In the 1938 World Cup, he also used the bicycle kick, to the delight of the spectators. When he did it, the referee was so shocked by the volley that he was unsure whether it was within the rules or not.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ángel_Labruna

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferenc_Deák_(footballer)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenio_Erico
 
Stack said:
Lots of footage available of Sir Stanley Mathews. Your problem is that you wont do proper research. So what you miss out on is the context of these old players and how the way they played and their ability impacted not only on football but also on the culture of the time. The quote of yours I have bolded just reinforces my view that you really have no idea of context or perspective.
I am not English, in fact I was born in a country which as a pass time loves to rubbish the English however you very clearly like to diminish and demean any player who was English (or British for that manner). You do it often. Your ignorance in this is clearly on display especially this about Sir Stanley Mathews.
Click to expand...
Geez, I just haven't seen him ever playing and the footage on him is less impressive considering that it is when he's a bit older than other greats and isn't on attacking positions. It also came weird to me how a 41 years old player was chosen as the best player in the world. The second oldest - if I am not mistaken - is Di Stefano himself which was 33 (8 years youger than when Sir Stanley Matthews won it), so for that I made that mistake.

I am not sure when I clearly diminished or demeaned other English/British players. Unless you're talking for the likes of Lallanas, Clynes, Baines, Barkleys, Youngs or Carrolls of this world.
 
@Stack That was a bit harsh mate. He's not trying to portray Matthews in a negative way, it is a factoid often brought up and discussed whether Matthews really deserved it at that stage of his career. He was most likely given it as he was one of those who had dominated the era and should there have been Ballon's given out earlier he'd have picked up one or even more already.
 
Invictus said:
Off topic, but a lot of the pre-1950 era footballing greats are incredibly mystifying, even for historians who have access to all kind of archives :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Friedenreich (God tier scorer)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernando_Peyroteo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imre_Schlosser

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leônidas



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ángel_Labruna

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferenc_Deák_(footballer)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenio_Erico
Click to expand...
Fair to say that from all of them, the only one I have ever heard is Leonidas.

I think that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolfo_Pedernera

should be mentioned too.
 
Annahnomoss said:
@Stack That was a bit harsh mate. He's not trying to portray Matthews in a negative way, it is a factoid often brought up and discussed whether Matthews really deserved it at that stage of his career. He was most likely given it as he was one of those who had dominated the era and should there have been Ballon's given out earlier he'd have picked up one or even more already.
Click to expand...
Not really, its a constant theme with him.
 
He was total football before it was even invented.
 
Di Stefano, along with Duncan Edwards are the two players I went out of my way to find as much available footage and information about when trying to learn about all the greats of the game. The reason being is that from the 60's onward footage is relatively vast for the generation of players that followed them.

With the aforementioned two, you have to take the word of those who saw them, the reports and articles and then make your own evaluation/interpretation of the information. It's easier to do this with Di Stefano than Edwards because there's more footage of him and a much larger body of work.

Anyway, aside from the pure, unadulterated facts of his goal ratios and trophies won, it is quickly gleaned via multiple sources that the definition of completeness referred to with Di Stefano outstrips any other player who has played the game. The biggest reason for that is that Di Stefano worked equally well in all facets on either side of the ball, be it attacking or defending, to a degree. I have no evidence that Di Stefano could actually have played as an actual defender and be world class in that area of the pitch, but anywhere else through the centre of the pitch, Di Stefano could have made himself an all-timer exclusively in one lone position. So that's as a pure: defensive midfielder; box-to-box midfielder; attacking midfielder; support striker or striker. To actually comprehend that, it means in a discussion about pure strikers, Di Stefano would be in the conversation as the best amongst the likes of Muller, Van Basten, Eusebio, Ronaldo, Puskas and so on. In a discussion about support strikers, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Pele, Cruyff, Messi*, Schiaffino and so on. In a discussion about attacking midfielders, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Maradona, Platini, Zico, Gullit, Charlton*, Didi and so on and so forth. In a discussion about box-to-box midfielders, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Matthaus, Neeskens, Falcao, Keane and so on. In a discussion about holding midfielders, he would be in the conversation about being the best in the company of: Bozsik, Rijkaard, Edwards, Andrade, Ocwirk, Redondo and so on.

Basically, it matters not which bunch of players you want to throw into the positions as his competition; he would be par and absolutely worthy of discussion as a direct peer to these specialist players in their, well, speciality. So then, when we consider that he can be compared and contrasted to so many stellar names, and even that is not enough, it should become pretty clear why he is so exalted and how he is elevated clearly over all but a literal handful of players, absolutely. Those that have really taken the time out to study the history of the game and considered all of the aforementioned players (and hundreds more) start to piece together that this guy must've been an extraordinary and unique player.

There's a famous get together between Cruyff and Beckenbauer talking about the history of the game and great players. I read it a long time ago as an excerpt on another forum and someone like @Balu probably has, or knows of it. In their conversation, these two great players come to a unanimous agreement that they both modelled their games on Di Stefano and that he was unquestionably the most masterful and complete player they had ever seen. I hope someone does post the article as it isn't often you will see those two lauding a player to the heavens like they did with Di Stefano. There's a somewhat faux praise that players throw out about others, when asked, I feel, but to bring Di Stefano into their own discussion, unprompted and then praise him as they did, it really cemented all the information I had gathered about the Argentine to that point in time. As others have said in this thread, Law and Charlton did the same, but not to the same extent. I know there's a number of quotes from Maradona about Di Stefano's ability to mesh a team outstripping his own, too. I don't believe it was false humility, and in terms of the greatest nucleus the game has seen, I firmly believe Di Stefano is the #1 guy over even Maradona, Keane, Varela, Cruyff, Platini, Beckenbauer etc. in their pomp leading their teams to glory, in terms of his charisma, force of nature and ability to elevate others, and once again, this is not to denigrate others to elevate Di Stefano, but rather it's an effort to convey his presence and influence all over the pitch.

Another key difference with Di Stefano is that all of the others mentioned above 'came alive' in their key area of the pitch, the margins for each of them are huge, such was their ability, but they all relied on others doing their bit, before (the ball has to get to Maradona, Cruyff or Platini via the work of those behind them) or after (Varela, Keane or Beckenbauer worked from deeper before bringing others in or playing others in) whereas, as stated numerous times, Di Stefano would be the retriever, instigator, creator and/or goal-scorer as and when required. That means throughout his career he was renowned for being all of these things in one player - it wasn't some once in a blue moon occurrence; it was Di Stefano. I don't know of any other player that can be said about, not with the frequency it is stated for Di Stefano.

From the footage, and Di Stefano's own words, he admits he wasn't the greatest at any particular aspect of the game. He said he wasn't the greatest passer, shooter, dribbler or the fastest player but that he was quicker in the mind than others and could do everything he needed to to the standard he needed to play his game, and I think that is evidenced when you watch him. The first few times I saw him play, I was surprised at how little flash there was to his game. It's like watching somebody do everything a coach would want them to do to the highest degree possible. His fundamentals and execution combined with his intrinsic wit and endless stamina make it very clear, very quickly that this guy can outwork and combine with others as many times as required in 90 minutes. That's a very telling pressure to exert on the opposition, and the mental fatigue from being drilled and drilled over and over as your own stamina starts to drop and your tactical schematic gets stretched and falls into disarray is intimidating by itself. For his own team, it must've been so much easier to play their own game knowing there was a cog that would never stop turning constantly giving and taking the ball to them and opening up holes all over the pitch for them to exploit.

Even if you think of someone like Gento flying down the wing, how much must it have invigorated him to know he would always have his captain charging into open space ready and willing to receive the ball and make good use of it? For the older version of Puskas, he knew he just had to put himself into a good position and Di Stefano would do all the pre-requisite work to play him in or work with and off him. You can go through the whole team and Di Stefano's influence has the same knock-on effect. It must have been a magical time to be a fan of that club and I think it's obvious why Di Stefano's legend spread so far and wide after people all over Europe saw this dynamo playing the game in such a... complete.. and awe-inspiring manner before their very eyes. I also think what Di Stefano brought to the table is more of a once in a lifetime thing than other all-time greats whose plays and style can be directly compared and contrasted with one another endlessly to the finest micro detail. You can go through the annuls of the game and find hundreds of magical dribblers and/or passers or shot specialists, or what have you, but go ahead and find multiple players with Di Stefano's traits and characteristics and you will find the well runs dry very, very quickly.

The last thing I want to add is that I believe ranking and categorising others with Di Stefano, you have to separate categories. In terms of his style of completeness, he is in a company of one, but in the more general definition of what completeness is (left, right, head and being able to do everything required in a specialist position) there are others that best him. He wasn't a magician on the ball; he couldn't pass like the greatest passers; he couldn't dribble like the greatest dribblers, so if you were to look at him in that kind of cold, clinical fashion, he mightn't rank even top 20. But I think Di Stefano is the epitome of how footballers are the sum of parts working in harmony and proof that the mind can bridge gaps if all the other facets of what a good player is are of a high enough level. That is not to say Di Stefano was a donkey - he was far, far from that, but when you see players like Platini or Maradona pass the ball 50+ yards with utter mastery, or a L.Ronaldo or Messi scuttling through a team's defense in the blink of an eye, it's apparent Di Stefano could not match those players in those aspects, but then when you expand the game to include tactical nous, movement, positioning, timing, judgement and so on Di Stefano just goes further and further up the ranking to the point where whether he's ranked 1st. 2nd or 3rd of the 'Big 3,' it's totally understandable and very probably a generational matter.
 
rotherham_red said:
By all accounts, the Rooney of 2003-2006 was the closest we ever got to a modern-day comparison with Di Stefano. Had the perfect blend of strength, technique and skill...
Click to expand...
Rooney was just a second striker though.

Di Stefano was supposed to be the complete player. Playmaking and starting attacks and also contributing with goals and end product.
 
Invictus said:
To fully appreciate the legend of Di Stefano, we have to consider two major aspects.

Firstly, the pseudo football element that cannot be quantified, and is often undermined in discussions of this nature. There a a lot of great footballers but very few have as indelible of an impact as Di Stefano because the fates of Real Madrid the club, Santiago Bernabeu and Di Stefano are eternally intertwined. When we look at Real Madrid today, they stand as the greatest club in the history of European football. Even as supporters of other clubs, objectively you cannot deny the fact that they are simply a notch above everyone else. But it wasn't always this way. After the Spanish Civil War ended in 1939, Real Madrid was essentially on the brink of dissolution and most of the directors had either died in the war, or defected. Progressively, Bernabeu started retooling the club and facilities. eg. the Cantera youth academy was established during his tenure, Estadio Chamartin was replaced by Nuevo Estadio Chamartin in 1947 (now known as Estadio Santiago Bernabeu). But they still could not compete with the best Spanish clubs of that era. Financially also, they were in a very poor state because unlike other government supported clubs, they didn't always receive the funds to rebuild and at times had to rely on private grants.

Meanwhile Football Club Barcelona, the former Athletic Club (later Athletic Bilbao), Valencia CF, the former Athletic Club Madrid (later named Athletic Aviacion de Madrid, now Atletico Madrid) had almost monopolized Liga titles; and Real Madrid hadn't won anything since 1932. The opponents had players like Telmo Zarra, German Gomez, Edmundo Suarez and Real Madrid didn't have an answer to that. Then Bernabeu devised a plan to acquire the best players from around the world and turn Real Madrid into one of the first cosmopolitan football clubs in Europe. Di Stefano was the pinnacle of that ideology. And all the others - Puskas, Kopa, Santamaria, Didi etc came later. Not only did they manage to land him from Millonarios for 4.5 million pesetas, he was stopped from joining FC Barcelona who declined the option of alternate season loan deals. The turnaround really started with that signing in earnest. At that time, Real were like United from Fergie's early years and despite some success, even finishing runner ups, hadn't won the Liga for 20 years. But signing Di Stefano had a Cantona-esque effect on the whole club. Straightway they won the Liga ahead of Barcelona, and Di Stefano was the Pichichi. The year after that they again won the Liga. Over a 6 year span, they won the Liga 4 times from 1953-1958 and Di Stefano was the Pichichi 5 times which was only a sign of things to come with 5 European Cups, 2 European Cup top scorer title and 2 Ballon D'Ors for Di Stefano. If it hadn't been for him, there would be no Decima or Galacticos.

Second the football aspect and this is where it becomes even more tricky because the footage for him is quite limited and you just cannot describe Di Stefano in words. But still, the footage is good enough to form an impression of how he was like as a footballer. If you were to describe him - some players have great defensive skill but are weaker in other areas, some have an for the pass as playmakers but aren't very mobile, some score loads of goals but stand still and don't contribute to the general play - and so forth. But very few in the history of football managed to combine all of that as an individual at the highest level in the spirit of totaalvoetbal. And Di Stefano was without doubt the greatest of them all, ahead of Cruyff and John Charles. In terms of a modern equivalent, the closest comparison would be maybe someone like Gullit or Rooney in terms of workrate and stamina, but with greater technique and immense skill, head always on the swivel and tacking/ distribution skill like Rijkaard, top notch playmaking and match controlling ability; combined with the productivity of Ronaldo, the leadership ability of Puyol, and the big match performances of Drogba. #9+10+6+8 kind of player.

Ok maybe that was a bit hyperbolic, but even if you leave aside the completeness of his game - Di Stefano would still rank among the greatest ever because he just won trophies and produced goals, assists, moments of magic where-ever he went. 2 goal in 3 game ratio for River Plate winning the Primera Division in 2 of 3 years and named league top scorer once. Joined Millonarios after the strike in Argentina with the likes of Rossi and Pedernera, scored with a ratio of 1 goal per game, won the Campeonato Di Mayor 3 times and top scorer 3 times. And the record at Madrid is well known - ratio of 3 goals in 4 games. The greatest club footballer ever IMO. Which kind of leads to his underachieving nature in international football, a reason why a lot of people haven't somehow heard of him. It's a real shame that after scoring at a ratio of a goal per game for Argentina, he never turned out for a national team for 10 years. By the time he started playing for Spain, Di Stefano was a bit old and played just 31 matches, scoring 23 goals. If we try to extrapolate it over the length of his career, he might've even had 100+ international goals. That and the absence of global television meant the likes of Maradona and Pele have an advantage, they both won World Cups seen by millions of people unlike Di Stefano who had a very short international career and didn't play at the World Cups in the 1940s because of World War II. 4th greatest footballer ever based on the little I've seen, but mostly heard from credible sources.

1. Pele.
2. Diego Maradona.
3. Lionel Messi,
4. Alfredo Di Stefano.
5. Johan Cruyff/ Franz Beckenbauer tossup.

We should probably tag @Vato and @Raul Madrid to get a Madrid fan's perspective on Di Stefano. Also, cool thread. We should have more of these on Meazza, Bican, Erico and other all time great footballers who aren't very well known but deserve recognition.




Damn dude, I had work to do. Oh well, it can wait for 15 mins.. :D
Click to expand...
You are a football freak sir. If you think you'll learn anything new from me, you have vastly overestimated my football knpwledge. I don't know shit. I haven't even seen a full match with Di Stefano. :lol:

Seriously, I can't be arsed and just don't like watching games from past times. All I know about how good Di Stefano was is from my old man's stories about him.
 
Great post @Fortitude

Re: the cog in it all. My take on it has always been Di Stéfano was the ultimate total footballer but not in a total football team. That is, it heightens his role that he was this force of nature moving up and down the spine making it all work.

On the other hand you have Cruyff at the centre of that classic total football team with insane pressing in packs and everyone capable to swap roles with others. It revolutionised football, not least because the classic man-marking details seemed to go to pot with it. Somewhat unfairly, Cruyff's standing gets watered down by the system, which blurs where the credit belongs (team? manager? Cruyff?, clearly all!).

What I've always wondered though is, which is harder? Being the orchestrator in a team with others playing conventional roles, or in a team with the complexity of that Dutch side, a complexity that baffled rivals but which Cruyff needed to be one step ahead of?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.