Lionel Messi

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

That's a lot of nonsense mate..

Nonsense rather is denying that it isn't true.

I'm not sure what gives you that impression either.

The fact that fan bois keep trying to place him above Maradona and Pele. When in actual fact he hasn't even reached Zidane yet as a great.

It's certainly not a small pocket and to dismiss them as fanboi's because they don't share your view (which is probably more in the minority) isn't fair.

It is fair to dismiss them as fan bois if they can't accept harsh reality.

And for what it's worth, he was excellent at the 2007 Copa America, before his country went into turmoil and started flopping.

Argentina has been flopping at big tournament since before his Copa America debut. And his performance in 2007 didn't come when he was rated as the best in the world playing currently, and being touted as potentially the greatest to have ever played.

Since the pressure has been on he has failed to match the hype intentionally and he and all his Argentine team mates are equally to blame. They all freeze on the big stage in the national shirt. Ever since Maradona's demise as a player.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

.....
Whether he wins a WC or not is irrelevant for me. Cruyff didn't win one either, yet he still gets listed amongst the all time greats.

Bingo. He is listed as a great. Not the greatest.

 

[Snake Plissken]

I think you're a bit delusional to be honest. You could have saved a lot of time and just said "This is what I think and I'm just going to carry on believing this no matter what".

So many legends of the past, reduced to 'fan bois' because they're not in with the small group that share your opinion I don't even think he's necessarily the greatest of all time, but I find you're dismissal of it funny and your 'anyone who doesn't share my line of thinking is a fanboi' spiel a little bit insulting.

 

[Snake Plissken]

One thing I will say, he's streets ahead of Zidane. Anyone who watched Zidane regularly and not just his youtube highlight reels will know that.

 

[Danny1982]

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber, your opinion (no matter how dramatic you make it sound), only counts for one opinion, so lay down the pipe, and get your head out of the sand.

Your logic is flawed (IMO) because:

1- Pele isn't better than Maradona IMO, and if you consider him better only because he won 3 world cups with a side that won the world cup even without him then you're wrong (again IMO).

2- You talk about "international football" not winning the world cup. Messi already won the World Cup with Argentina (U-20) and an Olympic Gold medal for his country (both of which Maradona failed to win). If he ends up breaking the all time goal scoring record for Argentina, and won let's say Copa America, will you consider him as "done his bit on international level" to be considered among the greatest (beside Maradona and Pele)?

3- Does Fabio Cannavaro (in your eyes) deserve to be mentioned among the greatest ever, beside the names of Maradona and Pele?

 

[Sixpence]

Zidane that won his side a World Cup final with being on the end of a couple of set pieces, but the Zidane that also lost his side a World Cup final with the craziest thing ever seen on a football pitch. Where do we stand on that?

 

[Ruud10]

Anyone who denies, to this day, that Messi > Maradona or Messi > Zidane is delusional in the extreme.

Three years ago it would have been a respectable and defensible position to hold, but not today. And in three years' time from now, we will have more than enough evidence to commit such a person to a mental institution.

 

[I'm always right]

Bollocks, Messi's the greatest ever.

Excellent argument.

 

[I'm always right]

Zidane that won his side a World Cup final with being on the end of a couple of set pieces, but the Zidane that also lost his side a World Cup final with the craziest thing ever seen on a football pitch. Where do we stand on that?

Craziest thing we've ever seen? Eric still comes out on top of the Frenchmen there for me, no contest.

 

[Gio]

I have never seen anyone who uses so much and so efficiently.Messi chips the ball over keepers while running at a high pace, the control it takes to do that consistently is crazy.He can even do it on his right foot

Yes he's mastered it, better than anyone. It's much to do with the slickness of pitches these days, that sort of finish simply wasn't a viable option on a sub-par surface, be it bobbly, hard or muddy.

Anyone who denies, to this day, that Messi > Maradona or Messi > Zidane is delusional in the extreme.

Three years ago it would have been a respectable and defensible position to hold, but not today. And in three years' time from now, we will have more than enough evidence to commit such a person to a mental institution.

You've pretty much labelled every caftard as "delusional in the extreme" given nobody in the Tiers of Greatness thread placed Messi in a tier of his own, or in a tier ahead of Maradona. People might marginally prefer one over the other, but it's never as cut-and-dried as you're making out.

 

[Ruud10]

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber, your opinion (no matter how dramatic you make it sound), only counts for one opinion, so lay down the pipe, and get your head out of the sand.

Your logic is flawed (IMO) because:

1- Pele isn't better than Maradona IMO, and if you consider him better only because he won 3 world cups with a side that won the world cup even without him then you're wrong (again IMO).
2- You talk about "international football" not winning the world cup. Messi already won the World Cup with Argentina (U-20) and an Olympic Gold medal for his country (both of which Maradona failed to win). If he ends up breaking the all time goal scoring record for Argentina, and won let's say Copa America, will you consider him as "done his bit on international level" to be considered among the greatest (beside Maradona and Pele)?

3- Does Fabio Cannavaro (in your eyes) deserve to be mentioned among the greatest ever, beside the names of Maradona and Pele?

Pele was at the top of the world game for over a decade. In any one or two seasons, one could grant that Maradona was the better player (I wouldn't, but I would grant its plausibility) but Pele was consistently undefendable for 12 years, and still played at a high level for another 3-5 seasons.

Pele did what no other footballer has ever done, nor likely will ever do, lead his country as a 17 year old to a World Cup wins in the semifinal and final games. That single season scoring record that Muller broke and then Messi broke recently was set by Pele, when he was 17.

I'm prepared to admit that Messi may surpass Pele as the greatest footballer who ever lived, but he's already passed Maradona. World Cup or no World Cup, Messi has earned his stripes. Pele's stripes are beyond any reasonable question.

 

[I'm always right]

Anyone who denies, to this day, that Messi > Maradona or Messi > Zidane is delusional in the extreme.

Three years ago it would have been a respectable and defensible position to hold, but not today. And in three years' time from now, we will have more than enough evidence to commit such a person to a mental institution.

I was one of Zidane's biggest fans but I agree there.

Denying Messi > Maradona isn't "delusional" though, only a retard would say such a thing, a retard or someone who never actually witnessed just how good Maradona was. Hopefully you fit into the second group Ruud.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

I think you're a bit delusional to be honest. You could have saved a lot of time and just said "This is what I think and I'm just going to carry on believing this no matter what".

I only wasted my time because I thought you could be reasoned with. Clearly I was mistaken....

So many legends of the past, reduced to 'fan bois' because they're not in with the small group that share your opinion

No. Fanbois are people who insist on something in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.

Besides, I have not seen many legends from the days of Pele claiming Messi has surpassed him. So I don't know what the heck you are on about really.

I don't even think he's necessarily the greatest of all time..

Then what are you attempting to dispute, exactly?

but I find you're dismissal of it funny and your 'anyone who doesn't share my line of thinking is a fanboi' spiel a little bit insulting.

That is because you are proving poor at comprehending what you read. It has feck all to do with my point of view. and ''people opposed to it being fan bois''.

Every person who is serious about football history knows Pele is rated as the greatest because these reasons

i. what he did at international level (especially his key role in 3 world cup triumphs)

ii His impeccable club record and career

It isn't hard to grasp that to surpass that anyone would have to at the very least consistently perform in international football and perform in or win at least a world cup, or some other major international tournament, alongside what they do at club level to even be considered in his league. Let alone better than him.

Thus anyone who thinks that is just a matter of mere opinion is the one who is truly deluded and exhibiting extreme signs of fanboism. For fan bois are the ones who only rely on opinions to make judgments rather than objective facts.

Those are the one who always act like a Pele is a great just because of world cups. As if he never had a stellar club career. Or the ones who claim people are arguing that mere wining a world cup is what makes a player great.

 

[Ruud10]

I was one of Zidane's biggest fans but I agree there.

Denying Messi > Maradona isn't "delusional" though, only a retard would say such a thing, a retard or someone who never actually witnessed just how good Maradona was. Hopefully you fit into the second group Ruud.

I'm not suggesting Maradona is overrated. What I'm suggesting is that Messi is beyond anything most of us have seen in our lifetimes. I'm old enough to have seen both Maradona and Pele play -- on television like the rest of us -- and I can tell you Messi's consistency is what really sets him apart. You can put together a fantastic 3 minute video of Maradona too, but if you have hundreds of hours to spend watching whatever video there is both players, it's an easy call -- Messi > Maradona. He's that good.

 

[Gio]

Craziest thing we've ever seen? Eric still comes out on top of the Frenchmen there for me, no contest.

I'm glad the majority of the Caf haven't bought a lot of the mythology regarding Zidane, but I think this is taking it too far. His 1998 World Cup was over-rated (not in the top 10 performers), he dominated Euro 2000 and had a strong farewell tournament in 2006, albeit he didn't start performing until the knockout stages. Despite his inconsistency in the bread-and-butter of domestic football, he still possessed enough elegance, class and quality when it mattered to make a claim as one of the top 3-4 of his generation, a level I don't think Cantona reached.

 

[I'm always right]

3 minutes of Maradona! Ha ha

Wow, the guy considered by many as the greatest ever player to kick a ball and you give him a 3 minute youtube vid. Seriously, what the flying feck?

Fwiw I put them on a similar level right about now, I personally don't think Messi would've made Argentina WC winners in 86 or Napoli the force they were, but I do accept that Messi's consistancy is something else, allbeit in a sensational football team built around him.

The "delusional" comment though... get a grip of yourself Ruud.

 

[I'm always right]

I'm glad the majority of the Caf haven't bought a lot of the mythology regarding Zidane, but I think this is taking it too far. His 1998 World Cup was over-rated (not in the top 10 performers), he dominated Euro 2000 and had a strong farewell tournament in 2006, albeit he didn't start performing until the knockout stages. Despite his inconsistency in the bread-and-butter of domestic football, he still possessed enough elegance, class and quality when it mattered to make a claim as one of the top 3-4 of his generation, a level I don't think Cantona reached.

Eh?

Of course Zidane was better than Cantona, what on Earth are you on about?

 

[Snake Plissken]

I can only repeat what was said above Chief. Your opinion counts for your opinion only, so no sense in trying to pretend only a small number disagree with your opinion when they don't.

And I've seen vast numbers of old timers say he's the greatest, so maybe you're just not looking in the right places.

As for Zidane, you generally only ever hear about his performance against Brazil in 2006. He wasn't great in the 98 World cup by any stretch of the imagination, but he he scored twice in the final, and yet I've heard people claim he won France that World Cup in his own, which is ludicrous and absolute lies.

What's happened is his career has been romanticized as happens with all retired players. As for old floppy cock, his team won the world cup without him. That doesn't say much for either the opposition he faced, or his individual impact on the team.

 

[Gio]

Eh?

Of course Zidane was better than Cantona, what on Earth are you on about?

Ah didn't realise it was the madman factor you were comparing the two rather than the quality factor. Carry on then.

 

[Amir]

International football has lost that special spot he had at the top of the tree. 20-30-40 years ago, a match that would make the world stand still and be broadcast all over would normally be a game at the late stages of the World Cup. So that's where legends were born. But now that happens quite a few times every year in club football. Whether it's El Classico, or United v Real this season, CL final, other big games in Europe or domestic leagues.

And when you see what Messi does, week in week out, I don't see how you can put him anywhere else other than that top, top tier of selected few. THE greatest? Well, if he continues to do in club football what he's been doing these past few years, then yes, even if he achieves nothing in international football. It's never about one player, and if Argentina don't get it right, you have to look at the reasons rather than say 'Messi didn't carry them all the way, not good enough'.

 

[United Fan 101]

Messi is, and will go down as, one of the greatest players to have ever laced up a pair of football boots.

But if he doesn't win a world cup, he won't be in the same league as Pele and Maradona. If he wins one world cup you can argue he's on par with Maradona, but even then, not Pele.

I love how the Messi fans discount Pele's 3 world cups because of the amazing team he had, but it's okay for Messi to excel with the club team HE has

 

[Danny1982]

I love how the Messi fans discount Pele's 3 world cups because of the amazing team he had, but it's okay for Messi to excel with the club team HE has

If you know enough about those 3 world cups, you'd know that Pele actually won 2 of them, and the third was won by the same Brazil team he was playing with, without him.

 

[I'm always right]

If you know enough about those 3 world cups, you'd know that Pele actually won 2 of them, and the third was won by the same Brazil team he was playing with, without him.

What does that have to do with his point and the argument he is making?

 

[Brwned]

That is why Pele is rated above Maradona and every one else as the greatest. Not only did he perform at club level, like the other greats did, he was the business at international level, at 3 world cups and unlike them key in 3 world cups wins.

at the idea Pelé was key in 3 World Cup wins. It's pretty silly to even talk about Pelé winning 3 World Cups, he was part of a squad that won a World Cup in '62 - that's it. It was never something he won, he was just there to join the party. What Pelé did in two World Cups is unlikely to be matched for a long, long time...why do people feel the need to massage the facts to make him sound even better? It was bad luck and cynical defending that stopped him from doing the unthinkable by being a key player in 3 World Cup wins but the fact remains he was stopped from doing that. He was just a spectator in one of his World Cup "wins".

 

[Pexbo]

at the idea Pelé was key in 3 World Cup wins. It's pretty silly to even talk about Pelé winning 3 World Cups, he was part of a squad that won a World Cup in '62 - that's it. It was never something he won, he was just there to join the party. What Pelé did in two World Cups is unlikely to be matched for a long, long time...why do people feel the need to massage the facts to make him sound even better? It was bad luck and cynical defending that stopped him from doing the unthinkable by being a key player in 3 World Cup wins but the fact remains he was stopped from doing that. He was just a spectator in one of his World Cup "wins".

Was it a similar squad that won it "without" him?

 

[Danny1982]

What does that have to do with his point and the argument he is making?

He called them Pele's 3 world cups. Meh?

 

[Skorenzy]

8 of the Final XI were the same in 1958 and 1962.

- Gilmar
- N. Santos
- D. Santos
- Zito
- Didi
- Garrincha
- Zagallo
- Vavá

 

[Danny1982]

8 of the Final XI were the same in 1958 and 1962.

- Gilmar
- N. Santos
- D. Santos
- Zito
- Didi
- Garrincha
- Zagallo
- Vavá

And the 1970 team was considered as a stronger one than the one played in 1958 and 1962.

 

[Ruud10]

3 minutes of Maradona! Ha ha

Wow, the guy considered by many as the greatest ever player to kick a ball and you give him a 3 minute youtube vid. Seriously, what the flying feck?

Fwiw I put them on a similar level right about now, I personally don't think Messi would've made Argentina WC winners in 86 or Napoli the force they were, but I do accept that Messi's consistancy is something else, allbeit in a sensational football team built around him.

The "delusional" comment though... get a grip of yourself Ruud.

For your benefit, I'll type more slowly. And no, you're not always right!

All I'm saying is that as great as Maradona was, Messi is even greater. True, Messi "hasn't won a World Cup", but I hope you realize what a ridiculous standard that is. Kleberson "won a World Cup", but he's nowhere near the quality of Cruyff. I hope you agree.

Also true, Maradona had a lot to say about who won the World Cup in 1986 (Kleberson actually had a pretty decent World Cup outing in 2002, but he was not the central actor), but it has become urban myth than he carried them single-handedly. In point of fact, the Argies had an outstanding team. Going off memory, they had Burruchaga, Ruggeri and Valdano. If you're not familiar with these names, I highly recommend looking them up. They were some of the greatest footballers ever produced in Argentina. I won't go as far as saying they were as good as some of the members of the current Spain squad, but this was a pretty ferocious Argie side. But yes, Maradona was the leader of this squad and by far its best player -- and yes, a World Cup winner.

Maradona was a genius, an immortal of the game. But what we've already seen from Messi, who at this point in his career has done FAR MORE than Maradona in his career, is even more mind-boggling.

Maradona "won" his sole World Cup when he was 26. Messi will be 27 when the next World Cup is played. We shall see how he performs in Brasil 2014, but all indications are that now that since Maradona was sacked as Argentina manager (quite rightly so), Messi has excelled his for country.

So yes, it is ridiculous now, though not four years ago, to deny that Messi reached a level of consistently outstanding performances that Maradona never reached.

 

[Brwned]

Similar to...? That's an ambiguous question, I could read it four or five different ways! Do you mean was there a noticeable difference without him there or do you mean was it a similar squad that won 4 years earlier? Assuming it's the latter I'd say it was pretty similar. 8 of the 11 players that played in the '58 final played in the '62 final and the ones that didn't play were improved upon (other than Pelé for Amarildo of course). Didi was the best player in '58 but was now in his early 30s and wasn't quite at the same level, Nilton Santos was 37 now so well past his peak and Zagallo was beginning to wind down a bit, but even then they were all playing at a very high level. Other than that they improved in every area really.

I agree with Ruud that the idea Maradona carried them to the WC single-handedly is pure hyperbole and he had a much better team supporting them than people often suggest these days, but they were a mile away from being an outstanding team.

 

[Skorenzy]

Amarildo did well enough though, all his goals vital to Brazil's tournament.

 

[The Don]

Similar to...? That's an ambiguous question, I could read it four or five different ways! Do you mean was there a noticeable difference without him there or do you mean was it a similar squad that won 4 years earlier? Assuming it's the latter I'd say it was pretty similar. 8 of the 11 players that played in the '58 final played in the '62 final and the ones that didn't play were improved upon (other than Pelé for Amarildo of course). Didi was the best player in '58 but was now in his early 30s and wasn't quite at the same level, Nilton Santos was 37 now so well past his peak and Zagallo was beginning to wind down a bit, but even then they were all playing at a very high level. Other than that they improved in every area really.

I agree with Ruud that the idea Maradona carried them to the WC single-handedly is pure hyperbole and he had a much better team supporting them than people often suggest these days, but they were a mile away from being an outstanding team.

So which is it then? Was he the stand out player who's goals and assists and general play propelled his team to a WC win or was he just one of a number of good players in a squad that could have easily won it without him?

I don't think you can have it both ways.

 

[KingEric7]

Easy, sure. Alexis Sanchez thought so too

This Xavi/Iniesta/ thing...I sometimes wonder to what extent it can be considered ridiculously impressive for a player to play alongside these two whilst still being a clear league ahead of them. There is a different angle there, surely.

It's always a case of "Messi is quality but Xavi/Iniesta etc...".

Well...

"Maradona never played in a team with the quality of Xavi/Iniesta and stood head and shoulders above them..."

"He never proved he could play with other greats and still look considerably better".



I'm being a bit silly about the point, but as you infer it's always just assumed that a player of Messi's quality should be the player he is because of those players. Really though, it says a lot of a lot about Messi's talent and mentality that he can go straight into a team with that much quality and pretty much immediately become the best player in the team/on the planet. Granted that the three really hit top form around about the same time, but I just find his career phenomenal. He's stood head and shoulders above everyone from pretty much the second he's been fit consistently, he's had a whole team consisting of that sort of class structured around him, he's possibly the best player of all time in 3 different positions (out wide, where he is now and behind the front man), he's broken pretty much every goalscoring record to have ever existed...all of this and more whilst still only being 25!

It's laughably good. There will surely come a point whereby this collective orthodoxy regarding criteria for the 'Greatest of All Time" tag has to be altered to cater for the sort of domination that we've seen from Messi, even if he does not perform exceptionally well on the international stage.

 

[Brwned]

Amarildo did well enough though, all his goals vital to Brazil's tournament.

Have to admit I don't remember him much, just remember thinking he was quite a mobile, creative player but nowhere near as good as Tostao or even Vava never mind Pelé.

So which is it then? Was he the stand out player who's goals and assists and general play propelled his team to a WC win or was he just one of a number of good players in a squad that could have easily won it without him?

I don't think you can have it both ways.

Surely there's a middle ground between being a one-man team and being just one of a number of good players? He was clearly the best player in the team, there's never been another player that stood that far above his other World Cup-winning team-mates. They weren't a bunch of mugs though despite what some will have you believe. Burruchaga in his prime was excellent in fairness as was Valdano, Ruggeri was very good, Giusti, Batista, Brown, Pumpido and perhaps even Olarticoechea wouldn't have looked out of place in title-wining teams in Europe as supporting players. They probably would've made it to the QFs without Diego in the squad - they were a good team and Maradona took them up a couple of levels on his own.

 

[The Don]

Have to admit I don't remember him much, just remember thinking he was quite a mobile, creative player but nowhere near as good as Tostao or even Vava never mind Pelé.



Surely there's a middle ground between being a one-man team and being just one of a number of good players? He was clearly the best player in the team, there's never been another player that stood that far above his other World Cup-winning team-mates. They weren't a bunch of mugs though despite what some will have you believe. Burruchaga in his prime was excellent in fairness as was Valdano, Ruggeri was very good, Giusti, Batista, Brown, Pumpido and perhaps even Olarticoechea wouldn't have looked out of place in title-wining teams in Europe as supporting players. They probably would've made it to the QFs without Diego in the squad - they were a good team and Maradona took them up a couple of levels on his own.

Your whole post made sense and I agree with the point in general, but the bolded bit is what really interests me. In a funny way, when it comes to the Maradona/Argentina argument, I don't think there is any middle ground, per say. His contribution to the achievement my have been exaggerated over time but not by much. Quite simply, without him, there was no WC win.

I suppose you can say that about a lot of players and be countered with the argument that if such and such didn't score the goals, somebody else would have etc. but I think in the case of Maradona (and to an extent Zidane with France) he genuinely was the reason they won it, I don't think anyone else in the team could have stepped up and done what he did.

 

[Brwned]

I've certainly not seen a player that could offer anything like what he did. He'd just dribble past a few players and create a goal out of nothing. If they tried to kick him out of the game he'd just drop a little deeper and start spraying those passes around effortlessly, and if that didn't work he'd just take another set piece and put it on a plate for Valdano and co. The set piece aspect is really understated in my experience, he was one of the best crossers/set piece takers the game has seen yet because his dribbling and passing steal all the headlines its often forgotten that his inch-perfect crossing won them a lot of games in that tournament. Very rarely hit a bad free kick direct at goal either.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber, your opinion (no matter how dramatic you make it sound), only counts for one opinion, so lay down the pipe, and get your head out of the sand.?

You first

Your logic is flawed (IMO) because:

1- Pele isn't better than Maradona IMO

Mere opinion is irrelevant to the debate.

and if you consider him better only because he won 3 world cups with a side that won the world cup even without him then you're wrong (again IMO).

Pele is considered greater than any other player because he did more than any other player by the standards that greats are measured by. Which includes a stellar club career, a stellar international career, and top performances in the biggest international tournaments more than once.

2- You talk about "international football" not winning the world cup. Messi already won the World Cup with Argentina (U-20) and an Olympic Gold medal for his country (both of which Maradona failed to win). If he ends up breaking the all time goal scoring record for Argentina, and won let's say Copa America, will you consider him as "done his bit on international level" to be considered among the greatest (beside Maradona and Pele)?

When I talk of international football its obvious I'm talking about senior level football. Till Messi actually consistently performs for his national team, from friendlies, to qualifiers, to Copa America, and world cups he will be considered to have had a poor international career for a great.

If by some cruel twist of fate he gets the Argentine international goal record, whilst failing to do much in big international tournaments, it won't help him much in the rankings of the greatest ever.

- Does Fabio Cannavaro (in your eyes) deserve to be mentioned among the greatest ever, beside the names of Maradona and Pele?

Is that even a serious question? Who has ever argued that he is in Maradona and Pele class?

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

at the idea Pelé was key in 3 World Cup wins. It's pretty silly to even talk about Pelé winning 3 World Cups, he was part of a squad that won a World Cup in '62 - that's it. It was never something he won, he was just there to join the party. What Pelé did in two World Cups is unlikely to be matched for a long, long time...why do people feel the need to massage the facts to make him sound even better? It was bad luck and cynical defending that stopped him from doing the unthinkable by being a key player in 3 World Cup wins but the fact remains he was stopped from doing that. He was just a spectator in one of his World Cup "wins".

Thanks for the correction.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

And I've seen vast numbers of old timers say he's the greatest, so maybe you're just not looking in the right places.

I'm convinced you are making things up. Save for Cruyff I do not believe they are many greats from Pele's era who consider Messi better than Pele.

As for Zidane, you generally only ever hear about his performance against Brazil in 2006. He wasn't great in the 98 World cup by any stretch of the imagination, but he he scored twice in the final, and yet I've heard people claim he won France that World Cup in his own, which is ludicrous and absolute lies.

Which is irrelevant to what I have argued. I'm not amongst them. Zidane was ace at one world cup (2006), excellent at a Euro's(2000), was consistently good in a France national shirt both in friendlies and qualifiers, and his club career exploits are well documented. Yet even that hasn't placed him in Maradona or Pele's class. I'm not even sure it places him above a Platini for that matter.

So it shouldn't surprise anyone that people would want to hold a Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo, the current kings of the game, to a similar standard.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

It's easy to do great things in possibly the greatest club side ever. Many would like to see if he can replicate his club success when he isn't surrounded with Xavi, Iniesta and co. He needs to win a world-cup to prove the doubters wrong, just like Pele & Maradona did. Until then, he's not quite there.

Game, set and match.