Has Americano actually seen Messi?
That isn't a bloke on HGH
This one is.
That isn't a bloke on HGH
This one is.
Last edited:
Lionel Messi - Performances
- Thread starter Rado_N
- Start date
HGH has a lot of athletic benefits. It's the same HGH that baseball players (used to?) take to decrease recovery time, improve durability, improve eyesight, improve sprinting speed, metabolism, etc, etc. They say it lets you train longer and harder than ever before without the soreness or wear on your body. There aren't a lot of scientific studies because of ethical and legal limitations, but anecdotally athletes have been abusing the very same HGH that Messi took (still takes?) to improve performance at the highest levels of pro sports for decades. It's hardly beyond the realm of imagination, since he had access to the drug, that he took more of it than he should have or for a longer period, or more frequent intervals. Abuse instead of use. Did he really have a hormone deficiency or was he just a short kid? I want to know more.
By "cover" I mean he had a great excuse to be getting injections of the stuff.
It sounds like you've been watching me play. My little team went 3-5 last season and I let in too many goals, I'm getting slower and the younger guys (most of them wearing Messi shirts) are getting faster. My tactical ideas didn't work either. My recovery time from injury is worse than ever. But I did not take any drugs. Maybe I should have
History has made me suspicous of any player so far outside the statistical norm. I really would like to know more about his history with HGH... maybe it's nothing, but I've heard every single excuse at this point. Remeber Tyler Hamilton and his "twin"? http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...s-best-excuses-for-failing-a-dope-test-150145
By "cover" I mean he had a great excuse to be getting injections of the stuff.
It sounds like you've been watching me play. My little team went 3-5 last season and I let in too many goals, I'm getting slower and the younger guys (most of them wearing Messi shirts) are getting faster. My tactical ideas didn't work either. My recovery time from injury is worse than ever. But I did not take any drugs. Maybe I should have
History has made me suspicous of any player so far outside the statistical norm. I really would like to know more about his history with HGH... maybe it's nothing, but I've heard every single excuse at this point. Remeber Tyler Hamilton and his "twin"? http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...s-best-excuses-for-failing-a-dope-test-150145
In an Argentina shirt???? At this point, to make this claim is beyond absurd. Messi is now 28 years old, and his chances for glory with Argentina are slipping by.
What really ticks me off (and probably many Argentines) is the attitude he has displayed in these last 2 finals. Yesterday I saw him stop running several times after the first half. He was clearly frustrated and he simply stopped trying. He did the same against Germany last year. He stopped playing and started sulking. Maradona NEVER did that - he had the passion and the energy and it inspired the others around him.
After seeing these international tournaments I am more and more convinced of what I've been saying for years now. The problem with comparing players like Messi and Ronaldo to Maradona and Pele is that today's top players are so concentrated in a handful of big clubs that it makes it easier for them to excel. Imagine Maradona playing in today's Barcelona, or Pele in today's Real Madrid. These are teams full of superstars built around one superstar. They score ridiculous amounts of goals against teams with 1% of the budget. But then when they play with their national teams, reality sets in. The reality is that Messi is probably the 2nd best player Argentina has ever produced along with Di Stefano, because on the international level, in which the relative talent of national teams is by and large similar to what it has always been, he hasn't been able to deliver what Maradona did.
You can take all the HGH in the world. Its not going to make you play like Messi.
Very true. HGH can't make Jerome Boateng disappear into a hole.
HGH has a lot of athletic benefits. It's the same HGH that baseball players (used to?) take to decrease recovery time, improve durability, improve eyesight, improve sprinting speed, metabolism, etc, etc. They say it lets you train longer and harder than ever before without the soreness or wear on your body. There aren't a lot of scientific studies because of ethical and legal limitations, but anecdotally athletes have been abusing the very same HGH that Messi took (still takes?) to improve performance at the highest levels of pro sports for decades. It's hardly beyond the realm of imagination, since he had access to the drug, that he took more of it than he should have or for a longer period, or more frequent intervals. Abuse instead of use. Did he really have a hormone deficiency or was he just a short kid? I want to know more.
By "cover" I mean he had a great excuse to be getting injections of the stuff.
It sounds like you've been watching me play. My little team went 3-5 last season and I let in too many goals, I'm getting slower and the younger guys (most of them wearing Messi shirts) are getting faster. My tactical ideas didn't work either. My recovery time from injury is worse than ever. But I did not take any drugs. Maybe I should have
History has made me suspicous of any player so far outside the statistical norm. I really would like to know more about his history with HGH... maybe it's nothing, but I've heard every single excuse at this point. Remeber Tyler Hamilton and his "twin"? http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...s-best-excuses-for-failing-a-dope-test-150145
There is very very limited evidence that HGH is a PED except for bodybuilders and the like, despite the widespread misconception that it is. Messi also plainly isn't building muscle so your whole argument is irrelevant as there is no way he is taking it now. Messi also hasn't seen a massively sudden improvement in speed/endurance at any time, as is the case when you can spot cyclists and the like who are doping. Messi has been brilliant at football since he was a fetus and any HGH was to treat a medical condition in his teens. He is now a massive 5ft 7in and muscled no better than my Aunt Gertrude. Piss poor doping regime
Lance Armstrong does like this -1
Barry Bonds was the greatest natural hitter baseball had seen in decades and he amplified that talent with all different kinds of drugs. It took him from great to "throw out the record book".
Talent plus drugs = GOAT.
You are right, there is not a lot of scientific evidence in the same way we know that antibiotics kill certain infections. Because it is illegal to take that way. But there are players risking their careers and their health to take the drug. And as someone else has pointed out, Stallone.
Footballers are some of the richest athletes on earth. If they want to do steroids they will do it. They will have access to the latest engineered drugs and masking agents. HGH is a poor man's PED compared to some of that stuff.
We don't know how antibiotics work? Really? Even if true (it isn't unless you are talking in very minor isolated biochemical ways) we do know in what circumstances they do and don't work. HGH has been the subject of a large number of studies and it's performance enhancing properties are very dubious indeed. It does seem to help build muscle (well muscle bulk anyway) but it doesn't seem to help muscle strength in adults and it is thought that it merely promotes the muscle cells to retain more water. So it "works" for body builders like Stallone but that doesn't make it a PED in any way for footballers.
I'd also like to point out that saying that Messi is taking HGH and/or PED with zero evidence is legally defamatory.
I'd also like to point out that saying that Messi is taking HGH and/or PED with zero evidence is legally defamatory.
This is purely on stats vs greatness debate. if Messi>another other great players in past based on some record stats, so is Ronaldo. But I do think Messi is the greatest player in this era.
I'm sorry for not being clear.
a) We know a lot about antibiotics through double-blind, peer-reviewed clinical trials done over decades. Studying the perfromance enhancing properties of HGH is a very different proposition for obvious reasons.
b) I have a high index of suspicion for any player to abuse a drug they are using therapeutically. I have a high index of suspicion for any "once in a generation" type player. I would like to learn more about Messi's use of HGH.
What the cover you of him actually needing it.
A quote's from Messi
Messi Father
There's no reason not to believe these quotes. Messi was having treatment(And his family paying it themselves) purely for heath reasons and long before anyone thought he going to a footballing god.
Also just quickly on a few other points.Since I know a little bit about HGH(Although my brother's experience will be different as is everyone's)I'll point a few things out
.You can't simply take more than you need because it's(Well in my brothers case but I image it's the same in Spain)delivered to you monthly by a drug company at your home address and you have to sign off on it.
.You have to regularly hospital check ups as well to see how the treatment is going.
. These improvements you've mentioned (decrease recovery time, improve durability, improve eyesight, improve sprinting speed, metabolism, etc, etc.) aren't really improvements when you take into account the reason the person having treament is for growth hormone disorder. It's not a improvement rather a boosting of a person to a normal healthy level. Also I've never heard some of the improvements you've listed.
Still this is just my personal experience(Well my brother's experience) but it really does seem some people trying to make something out of nothing .
It's obviously not just based on record stats.
The Dr Fuentes doping scandal in Spain. Remember that? The Spanish judge ordered that the blood bags be destroyed. Fuentes allegedly had clients not just from cycling, but football, tennis, athletics etc. It was said some of his clients included Real Madrid and Barcelona players. The point is, there's a lot of money in football - too many have a vested interest, so it is entirely possible that drug use would be covered up. Same with tennis - love the sport, but almost certain there's PED use in there - sadly. But again, tennis is a massive money maker like football.
Same reason you are.
Why is this guy tolerated on this forum?
That is why there is even less of a chance of it being covered up. There would be a big payday for anyone willing to expose rampant PED use. You can not keep everyone quiet in that situation.
There amount of effort people end up putting to put Messi down...
By the time his career is done and dusted, he'll rightly be regarded as the greatest player of all time. World cup or no cup. You don't need to compare any stats or achievements, you just need to watch him play. I've seen a few Maradona games and tons of videos. There's absolutely no basis for any argument that Maradona was better than Messi in pure footballing terms. When people even question whether Messi has had a better club career than Maradona...it just stinks of agenda posting.
By the time his career is done and dusted, he'll rightly be regarded as the greatest player of all time. World cup or no cup. You don't need to compare any stats or achievements, you just need to watch him play. I've seen a few Maradona games and tons of videos. There's absolutely no basis for any argument that Maradona was better than Messi in pure footballing terms. When people even question whether Messi has had a better club career than Maradona...it just stinks of agenda posting.
Boo. Let me take a pop in peace, pops.
In terms of footballing both are pretty much at same level really, in terms of skills, balance, pace, technique, first touch, shooting, dribbling, passing, flair, vision, playmaking, freekicks etc (Messi probably plays better one-twos, better finishing/composure and more efficient, while Maradona probably scored better freekicks, more explosive and more flair etc)
The main difference here is, Messi basically has better end-products (much more goals and probably similar assists numbers?*), more consistent, better discipline, and performs better at club level.
Maradona is more influential (much better leadership, always pose big presence on the pitch despite small body size, and can carrying team on his own), big game player, and performs better at international stage.
(*I've read somewhere Maradona has over 300 assists, giving him over 1 goal/assist per game over his career)
Lets enjoy watching both.
The main difference here is, Messi basically has better end-products (much more goals and probably similar assists numbers?*), more consistent, better discipline, and performs better at club level.
Maradona is more influential (much better leadership, always pose big presence on the pitch despite small body size, and can carrying team on his own), big game player, and performs better at international stage.
(*I've read somewhere Maradona has over 300 assists, giving him over 1 goal/assist per game over his career)
Lets enjoy watching both.
Last edited:
i really don't know what you tried to prove those clubs were not giants in italian football by just extracting few years of results. a more comprehensive picture during their golden days of the league:
1976–77 Juventus (17)
1977–78 Juventus (18)
1978–79 Milan (10)
1979–80 Internazionale (12)
1980–81 Juventus (19)
1981–82 Juventus (20)
1982–83 Roma (2)
1983–84 Juventus (21)
1984–85 Verona (1)
1985–86 Juventus (22)
1986–87 Napoli (1)
1987–88 Milan (11)
1988–89 Internazionale (13)
1989–90 Napoli (2)
1990–91 Sampdoria (1)
1991–92 Milan (12)
1992–93 Milan (13)
1993–94 Milan (14)
1994–95 Juventus (23)
1995–96 Milan (15)
1996–97 Juventus (24)
1997–98 Juventus (25)
1998–99 Milan (16)
trying to justify an own claim by fabricating data do not alter the whole truth. maybe you have your own definition of giants that no one would understand
sort of
no doubt messi has a much longer period of prolonged success than maradona. i would say the difference is one from an well established academy hence a more easier path to walk through while the other one was pretty much a street footballer so a much more rough road to comprehend. the generation gap may play a role in such difference also.
despite maradona didn't have such a long period of success as messi does, but i think messi has not yet met the height maradona had once ever reached. and personally i see the touches of maradona are much joyful to watch. he just did it so easy and natural
if messi is a very very talented hardworking footballer then maradona is a lazy bastard but true genius.
1. there is no fabrication, the time scale used (1984-1991) coincided with Maradona's career in Italy.
2. his point was that the traditional powerhouses weren't dominant in said period (hardly a controversial claim?), as you can see from your own post which indicates that not only Maradona's Napoli won their first (and second) ever league title, but Hellas Verona and Sampdoria did as well -- a fact which instantly puts into a more nuanced context the uniqueness of Maradona's achievement, wouldn't you say?
@Marcosdeto didn't explain it very well, but that's what I think he was alluding to.
Dr Fuentes was threatened - doubt any money would be of use to him when he's dead.
@Skorenzy,
if i'm not wrong during the early 80's the italian clubs were experiencing some match fixing scandals and had the powers rank distorted during that period. but it doesn't diminish the giants status of the milan clubs & juventus even a few other clubs took up the opportunities to seize their chances. it's just like blackburn & leeds took their chances to win their ever premier leagues but liverpool & newcastle & united were the giants of that time being. so telling me juventus & the milan clubs were not giant during that period is just silly.
the debate derived from whether if maradona carried napoli to their historical league titles. and i'm sure the answer is a definitely yes.
in contrast sampdoria & verona were very similar to blackburn & leeds in a way that they won their titles by assembling an expensive squad to be a one-off winner. both verona & sampdoria experienced different levels of financial stress afterward if i'm not wrong. so similar cases to blackburn & leeds as well. so coincident.
EDIT: and the whole debate derived from a dispute whether if serie a was a bigger than la liga in those days since i made a claim barcelona was only a feeder club to the italian giants when we dated back decades ago. so just looking at the years when maradona played in serie a is imcomplete. it requires to look further apart before he came there and after he left to obtain the whole picture of what the league could look alike. that's why i called it of fabricating data to support a prejudice
if i'm not wrong during the early 80's the italian clubs were experiencing some match fixing scandals and had the powers rank distorted during that period. but it doesn't diminish the giants status of the milan clubs & juventus even a few other clubs took up the opportunities to seize their chances. it's just like blackburn & leeds took their chances to win their ever premier leagues but liverpool & newcastle & united were the giants of that time being. so telling me juventus & the milan clubs were not giant during that period is just silly.
the debate derived from whether if maradona carried napoli to their historical league titles. and i'm sure the answer is a definitely yes.
in contrast sampdoria & verona were very similar to blackburn & leeds in a way that they won their titles by assembling an expensive squad to be a one-off winner. both verona & sampdoria experienced different levels of financial stress afterward if i'm not wrong. so similar cases to blackburn & leeds as well. so coincident.
EDIT: and the whole debate derived from a dispute whether if serie a was a bigger than la liga in those days since i made a claim barcelona was only a feeder club to the italian giants when we dated back decades ago. so just looking at the years when maradona played in serie a is imcomplete. it requires to look further apart before he came there and after he left to obtain the whole picture of what the league could look alike. that's why i called it of fabricating data to support a prejudice
Last edited:
Hey, there's a thought...
To some it's seemingly impossible, though.
The X versus Y debates in threads like this one are getting more tedious by the minute. People comparing apples and oranges, utter ignorants chipping in with their nonsense, stat nutters going mental with irrelevant data, insanely biased loons claiming to actually being perfectly objective...and all in an effort to establish something which is bound to be both generational and subjective in the extreme.
As far as facts go, it's dubious at best to simply compare the trophy hauls of players from different eras, given that the internal characteristics of the big leagues were very different and the nature of the old EC was significantly different from the present-day CL tournament (and its importance for the major clubs). Internationally, the nature - if not the status as such - of the World Cup has changed as well.
Just throwing Messi's and Maradona's respective achievements and pure stats on the table isn't particularly enlightening.
I feel that Maradona spoiled us by winning a world cup and then going on to a 'small' club and elevating them beyond belief.
As a result I can't fully enjoy Messi (though boy do I enjoy watching him) as the nagging voice in my head keeps saying "Come on Messi, join another club". Imagine if he decided to come to Southampton and won them a PL while dazzling everyone with his undoubted skills. I would cry with joy.
As a result I can't fully enjoy Messi (though boy do I enjoy watching him) as the nagging voice in my head keeps saying "Come on Messi, join another club". Imagine if he decided to come to Southampton and won them a PL while dazzling everyone with his undoubted skills. I would cry with joy.
I like Marcos's input in these debates because he's actually Argentinean, watched both players and is in a good position to bust some of the various Maradona myths that have come to light during the years. Even I wasn't aware of some of them until recently, like Napoli spending big at the time, my memory is hazy as I was very young but obviously much like the 86 Argentina side people like to talk about Napoli like they were a pub team too.
Only because you know he'd be playing for you the following season.
Aye. And don't forget how objective and balanced he is in his views too.
And non-obsessive. I think that's the word which describes him best: Non-obsessive.
Ahoy oi Chester. Long time.
Err no wait, you're not the Arsenal supporter.
Damn tootin'
I doubt anyone has made football look more easy and natural than Messi, and if so, it'd be so marginally that it wouldnt be significant.
And what exactly has made Maradonna's peak higher than Messi? What more has a player ever done than Messi in 2009, 2011 or even 2015. Being the best player in almost every match you play, generating a shit load of goals and assists. Winning many trophies, humiliating the biggest teams and players in the world. If you say Maradonna's world cup which contained like 8 matches? I could as well say C.Ronaldo's form earlier in this season, where he scored like over 20 goals in 10 matches..
Hence why I said "some" and not "everyone".
The big question here is... Marco's age! I saw Maradona play in Italy I even saw Maradona play and tie with Sporting in 89 (good times)