Treble
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,551
I don't know what you mean with the first paragraph. "Platini is Zidane level." Zidane level at what?
Also, in terms of technique, what do you think seperates Zidane from Messi?
Your second paragraph is hyperbolic. Those aren't the only 3 players who had technique on par with Messi.
Ronaldinho, Zico, Magico Gonzalez, Platini (his passing is equivocal to Messi's dribbling, his free kicks were on par with any great who has played. His ability to trap a ball is on par as was his finishing and overall shooting technique) all come to mind immediately and if I gave it some thought there would be others.
This 'Messi, Maradona & Pele' only thing is a fallacy. There have been great players who are now looked upon in a different light because they didn't win the world cup. Zico is one such player, Platini is another. Prior to WC '86 it was pretty much a 3-way tie between those two and Maradona if one of the other two had won the WC and Maradona did not, they would have claimed the lion's share of the praise that is now reserved for Maradona. There's very little that seperates them on the field outside of Maradona's ability to dribble to such a standard and carry the ball on lengthy runs as well as his charisma and will to win. As number ten's all 3 of them were phenomenal players - there's no chasm between them and where Zico and Platini could not dribble as well as Messi, they had the passing and free kick ability he does not (to the same degree).
Tend to agree with that. The question is whether it was down to chance that Argentina won the tournament and not France or Brazil. One could argue that both France and Brazi had better teams than Argentina. The fact that exactly Argentina won with Maradona scoring some of the greatest WC goals ever (one of the goals vs Belgium was fantastic, too) elevated Maradona above Platini and Zico, and fully deservedly IMO.