Lionel Messi

[Peyroteo]

@Peyroteo would say the run was better than the pass

No, just every bit as important without any of the recognition. Suarez’s whole move there is excellent but it will go unnoticed, from the way he held the ball to the way he waited for the ball to get to the passer before giving the depth and threat to the attack. Messi always plays much better when he has these kind of runners in Alba, Suarez, Pedrito, etc.

A through ball will always get more love than a cross, a great run, etc. it’s prettier on the eye so it’s only logical.

The main thing there is the defending that allows him to get the ball, go to his left foot and lift his head without any pressure on the ball or any fouling. It’s suicide. If Barcelona are dominating and the opponents allow those situations to Messi then they’ve lost the match before it even starts, I’ve always said this. In these circumstances he’s the best in the world. When the circumstances are less favourable then things change imo.

 

[Tommy]

"Messi has contributed to as many goals in La Liga this season as Real Madrid (26): 16 goals 10 assists"

 

[Zehner]

No, just every bit as important without any of the recognition. Suarez’s whole move there is excellent but it will go unnoticed, from the way he held the ball to the way he waited for the ball to get to the passer before giving the depth and threat to the attack. Messi always plays much better when he has these kind of runners in Alba, Suarez, Pedrito, etc.

A through ball will always get more love than a cross, a great run, etc. it’s prettier on the eye so it’s only logical.

The main thing there is the defending that allows him to get the ball, go to his left foot and lift his head without any pressure on the ball or any fouling. It’s suicide. If Barcelona are dominating and the opponents allow those situations to Messi then they’ve lost the match before it even starts, I’ve always said this. In these circumstances he’s the best in the world. When the circumstances are less favourable then things change imo.

It gets more recognition because it is harder to do. For both you need spatial awareness, timing and understanding of the game and movement but the one also requires great technical ability and incredible vision on top of the other stuff. And it is not exactly as if there wasn't any pressure on Messi in this situation, he just passed it in the perfect moment against the movement of the defender that attacked him - look how close it was to his feet. He tried to close down the passing lane but that inch was enough.

 

[Peyroteo]

It gets more recognition because it is harder to do. For both you need spatial awareness, timing and understanding of the game and movement but the one also requires great technical ability and incredible vision on top of the other stuff. And it is not exactly as if there wasn't any pressure on Messi in this situation, he just passed it in the perfect moment against the movement of the defender that attacked him - look how close it was to his feet. He tried to close down the passing lane but that inch was enough.

For both you need spatial awareness, timing and understanding of the game and movement but the one also requires great athleticism and incredible vision on top of the other stuff. It works the other way too. Being harder to do does not make it more or less effective anyway, it might make it more impressive and be more of a highlight though.

This isn't the point though, that's a fantastic play by Suarez and he will get little to no praise for that play as it stands, but if Messi hadn't played the pass then noone would even notice it at all. And in a game of football the run will happen a lot more often than the pass since not every great run ends up with a pass at the end of it.

It's something completely impossible to quantify and it shouldn't be simply ignored because the football romantics believe 'goals and playmaking' are what constitutes being an attacking player in this sport. The impact a player has on the game goes way beyond that.

 

[Kinsella]

For both you need spatial awareness, timing and understanding of the game and movement but the one also requires great athleticism and incredible vision on top of the other stuff. It works the other way too. Being harder to do does not make it more or less effective anyway, it might make it more impressive and be more of a highlight though.

Being harder to do makes it just that - harder to do. It requires superior ability to both see that pass and carry it out; and we all know from watching the sport that it is something that can only be performed by a select group of players. The ability to the make the run rests on a more basic level than that.

This isn't the point though, that's a fantastic play by Suarez and he will get little to no praise for that play as it stands, but if Messi hadn't played the pass then noone would even notice it at all. And in a game of football the run will happen a lot more often than the pass since not every great run ends up with a pass at the end of it.

It's something completely impossible to quantify and it shouldn't be simply ignored because the football romantics believe 'goals and playmaking' are what constitutes being an attacking player in this sport. The impact a player has on the game goes way beyond that.

It isn't ignored though. The vast majority of football fans just intuitively know that the vision and technique required for that pass demonstrates a superior talent. The reaction will be same no matter who does it.

 

[Peyroteo]

Being harder to do makes it just that - harder to do. It requires superior ability to both see that pass and carry it out; and we all know from watching the sport that it is something that can only be performed by a select group of players. The ability to the make the run rests on a more basic level than that.



It isn't ignored though. The vast majority of football fans just intuitively know that the vision and technique required for that pass demonstrates a superior talent. The reaction will be same no matter who does it.

Of course, I didn't say it wasn't.

They don't intuitively know though, that's bullshit. A chip goal looks more beautiful than a player shooting it to the bottom corner so fans will appreciate it more, it's the same outcome though. Fans want to see talent, not effectiveness.

Only a select group of players can play the sort of pass Messi played there while plenty can make the run Suarez made, that's true. How many can consistently do it as well as Suarez does it though? They're both immense at their own thing, but one is more flashy and requires more talent so only one gets any sort of appreciation for it by the majority of football fans who love to romanticize the sport.

Suarez spent the whole game torturing that defense and he didn't need no highlight worthy dribbling or through balls to do it, which means he'll be back to be called shit as soon as he goes a couple of games without scoring.

 

[dumbo]

How many players do you need to beat with one ball?

Yes it looks pretty but it was only made possible by the vision and run from the attacker, by the lack of concentration by the defenders, by Sancho the groundsman who had the grass cut to the precise length to allow the correct pace on the ball, by the boot manufacturer who added the exact padding needed for the pass, by the Anemoi who's breath delicately guided the ball along its perfect course.

We wank over Messi but where is Sancho's Balloon Door?

 

[Kinsella]

Of course, I didn't say it wasn't.

They don't intuitively know though, that's bullshit. A chip goal looks more beautiful than a player shooting it to the bottom corner so fans will appreciate it more, it's the same outcome though. Fans want to see talent, not effectiveness.

I'm referring to Messi's pass relative to the run made by Suarez, and most people do know that the former requires superior ability in comparison to the latter. It's an intuitive thing which doesn't require explanation.

Only a select group of players can play the sort of pass Messi played there while plenty can make the run Suarez made, that's true. How many can consistently do it as well as Suarez does it though? They're both immense at their own thing, but one is more flashy and requires more talent so only one gets any sort of appreciation for it by the majority of football fans who love to romanticize the sport.

Flashy implies ostentatiousness on Messi's part when playing the pass, when he doesn't make a self-conscious show of such things. Also, the appreciation you mention stems from both the level of ability it takes to do it and the relative rarity of it in the game, whereas runs are a much more common thing in the sport. They're much more 'run of the mill' in other words.

Suarez spent the whole game torturing that defense and he didn't need no highlight worthy dribbling or through balls to do it, which means he'll be back to be called shit as soon as he goes a couple of games without scoring.

These postings of yours relate back to that tiresome Messi - Ronaldo debate. You seem to be on some sort of mission to try to convince people that the runs, the appreciation and awareness of space etc; are abilities that merit an equal status to the vision, dribbling and passing etc of a Messi. I don't know why you bother tbh.

 

[Peyroteo]

I'm referring to Messi's pass relative to the run made by Suarez, and most people do know that the former requires superior ability in comparison to the latter. It's an intuitive thing which doesn't require explanation.

I'm not arguing about which one requires more ability, I couldn't care less. I'm arguing about their effectiveness and importance. They are completely different things.

It's not intuitive in the slightest ffs, and even if it was there was it takes a very special kind of logic to assume it's right and it doesn't require any logic or explanation behind it because it's something intuitive.

Flashy implies ostentatiousness on Messi's part when playing the pass, when he doesn't make a self-conscious show of such things. Also, the appreciation you mention stems from both the level of ability it takes to do it and the relative rarity of it in the game, whereas runs are a much more common thing in the sport. They're much more 'run of the mill' in other words.

Flashy does not imply ostentatiousness on Messi's part or at least it wasn't what I meant.

360 dunks are rarer than 3 point shots, is Zach LaVine being able to do 360 dunks more important to their teams than Klay Thompson hitting 'run of the mill' 3 point shots with the consistency he does? Your subjective view of 'ability' doesn't matter in the slightest as to how important or effective something is within a sport.

That was an extreme example just to make a point by the way, I'm not making a direct comparison.

These postings of yours relate back to that tiresome Messi - Ronaldo debate. You seem to be on some sort of mission to try to convince people that the runs, the appreciation and awareness of space etc; are abilities that merit an equal status to the vision, dribbling and passing etc of a Messi. I don't know why you bother tbh.

Because there are too many fans who either don't understand the sport or choose to ignore parts of it and its complexity to be able to quantify things that are impossible to quantify. I bother for the same reasons you bother.

 

[SteveW]

Jesus give it a rest. Do you need to derail every Messi thread with this crap. I used to think Cal? was bad.

Ronaldo is a great player but he's not as good as Messi. All the essays in the world won't change that.

 

[Fridge chutney]

Jesus give it a rest. Do you need to derail every Messi thread with this crap. I used to think Cal? was bad.

Ronaldo is a great player but he's not as good as Messi. All the essays in the world won't change that.

This. It's a bit sad to be honest.

 

[Ishdalar]

Yes it looks pretty but it was only made possible by the vision and run from the attacker, by the lack of concentration by the defenders, by Sancho the groundsman who had the grass cut to the precise length to allow the correct pace on the ball, by the boot manufacturer who added the exact padding needed for the pass, by the Anemoi who's breath delicately guided the ball along its perfect course.

We wank over Messi but where is Sancho's Balloon Door?

Love the sarcasm, if you watch at how that ball bounces you can see that ground is anything but "fit" for that kind of football. Not saying Leo controlled the pass for those exact bounces, but it's not your dream grass right there. Even the players complained about it yesterday, since this has been happening for ~10 years in Getafe.

Barcelona complain about Getafe's pitch: They always fail to water it when we come

https://www.marca.com/en/football/barcelona/2019/01/07/5c333a99468aeb26398b4570.html

 

[Kinsella]

I'm not arguing about which one requires more ability, I couldn't care less. I'm arguing about their effectiveness and importance. They are completely different things.

The pass reached its intended target; therefore it was effective. Suarez didn't score, or lay it on for someone else to score, therefore it wasn't 'important' on paper.

However, the brilliance of the pass isn't dimmed because a goal wasn't scored. That has nothing to do with Messi.

It's not intuitive in the slightest ffs, and even if it was there was it takes a very special kind of logic to assume it's right and it doesn't require any logic or explanation behind it because it's something intuitive.

It is intuitive. The majority of people on here have watched football for ages and instinctively know that it requires superior ability to pull it off.

You're hugely outnumbered in this crusade of yours, and always will be.

Flashy does not imply ostentatiousness on Messi's part or at least it wasn't what I meant.

360 dunks are rarer than 3 point shots, is Zach LaVine being able to do 360 dunks more important to their teams than Klay Thompson hitting 'run of the mill' 3 point shots with the consistency he does? Your subjective view of 'ability' doesn't matter in the slightest as to how important or effective something is within a sport.

That was an extreme example just to make a point by the way, I'm not making a direct comparison.

I don't want to be pedantic but flashy does imply that by dictionary definition. It wasn't what you meant though, so fair enough.

Because there are too many fans who either don't understand the sport or choose to ignore parts of it and its complexity to be able to quantify things that are impossible to quantify. I bother for the same reasons you bother.

I don't know why you bother because you're on a losing mission before you even begin. I understand why you do though, and it's because you've invested too much in the debate to just switch off from it. That said, I'm not sure what else there is to say other than statistics aren't the be all and end all of sport, and some sportspeople do things that can't be measured by statistics.

I'll make one last comment on this vis-à-vis Ronaldo. I've placed him in the top 10 of all time for years and I think people who try to diminish his standing are being very silly. His overall talent, qualities, consistency and achievements etc, elevate him above other more 'talented' (talented in the eyes of the romantic let's say) players imo.

 

[MalcolmTucker]

These postings of yours relate back to that tiresome Messi - Ronaldo debate. You seem to be on some sort of mission to try to convince people that the runs, the appreciation and awareness of space etc; are abilities that merit an equal status to the vision, dribbling and passing etc of a Messi. I don't know why you bother tbh.

Nail. Head.

 

[Peyroteo]

The pass reached its intended target; therefore it was effective. Suarez didn't score, or lay it on for someone else to score, therefore it wasn't 'important' on paper.

However, the brilliance of the pass isn't dimmed because a goal wasn't scored. That has nothing to do with Messi.

Where did I ever said its importance or effectiveness depends on if the ball goes in or not?

I don't care how 'brilliant' or 'genius' a pass is, or whatever adjective you fancy, I care how effective it was. And yes, it was obviously effective, I never argued otherwise. So was Suarez's run, one of the many he used all afternoon to cause loads of problems to the opposing defense without getting any recognition for it.

It is intuitive. The vast majority of people on here have watched football for ages and intuitively know that it requires superior ability to pull it off.

It's not intuitive and once again... being intuitive does not make it true.

For the 3rd time, I never ever said or even questioned the 'ability' it takes. I don't care about the amount of subjective ability the majority of people perceives in a play. If a player is one on one with the keeper and puts it into the bottom corner they've shown less ability than the one who nutmegs the keeper 3 different times and then chips him, doesn't make it any better though does it? It's the same outcome. If Messi passes to the side, goes to the back post, gets a mismatch with a defender, beats him in the air after a cross and heads it to Suarez... he probably created a chance just as good without as much 'ability'.

You're hugely outnumbered in this crusade of yours, and always will be.

Of course I am, I know that. The majority of football fans doesn't have a clue and sports media is interested in everything but talking about the complexities of the sport and the different ways a player can impact the game.

I don't want to be pedantic but flashy does imply that, by dictionary definition. It wasn't what you meant though.

My first language isn't english, I thought a pass can be flashy even if the passer didn't mean for it to be flashy. Is that not possible? Maybe you can teach me, probably not the best word.

Statistics aren't the be all and end all of sport Peyroteo, and some sportspeople do things that can't be measured by statistics.

Did I ever say the opposite???? I literally wrote this a few hours ago on this forum: 'lies, damned lies and statistics'.

If there's one person on here that's against 99% of the statistics used in football, it's me. I'm so confused... where the hell did you get that idea?

I understand what you're getting at and I'll make one last comment on this vis-a-vis Ronaldo. I've placed him in the top 10 of all time for years and I think people who try to diminish his standing are being very silly. His overall talent, qualities, consistency and achievements etc, elevate him above other more 'talented' players (in the eyes of the romantic let's say) imo.

[/QUOTE]

Calling Ronaldo a top 10 player of all time isn't a compliment anymore. You think I'm getting into this because of Ronaldo when it's the complete opposite, I get into the Ronaldo and Messi debates because of this.

Fans will always love the pretty dribbles and through balls over an intelligent run or a mismatch from an athletic point of view. They don't intuitively know one is more important than the other, that's impossible, it's just simpler to recognize the technical ability in those situations but its importance and effectiveness are impossible to quantify accurately from looking at it, it will depend on hundreds of different factors. There are big misconceptions as to the different ways players can impact the game and to the different ways teams can attack.

People who will generally have those discussions about football history in places like this generally have a close minded vision of what the sport is and how it should be played. They romanticize players, it's all about being a magician, or a genius, etc.. it's about having class, looking class and elegant on the ball, etc. that's why for many fans the greatest players ever have to fit into a certain mold. It's why we had so many people here arguing things like Modric being Madrid's most important player, that Isco should be the first name on Madrid's team sheet or that Benzema was making Ronaldo look better during the past couple of years. It all comes from a fundamental lack of understanding about the sport more than it comes from any bias.

 

[SCP]

Of course I am, I know that. The majority of football fans doesn't have a clue and sports media is interested in everything but talking about the complexities of the sport and the different ways a player can impact the game.

Sorry for jumping in but that can be applied on both ways.

Its the same way as hearing the media saying a player who scores more goals should win the individual awards instead those who create them. 99% of the media says it. Or those who say not voting Ronaldo is anti patriot like Joaquim Rita or Ribeiro Cristovão. Talk about media who understands the complexity of the sport.

 

[Pocho]

Please someone tell Peyroteo this is not a Ronaldo vs Messi thread. This is Goat thread, thanks in advance.

 

[Peyroteo]

Please someone tell Peyroteo this is not a Ronaldo vs Messi thread. This is Goat thread, thanks in advance.

I was not the one that mentioned Ronaldo, haven't done it once in this thread actually. Only in reply when someone brought it up in a discussion.

Like you've just done.

 

[IFC 1905]

@Peyroteo would say the run was better than the pass

It's all your fault, you know.

 

[Ish]

Please someone tell Peyroteo this is not a Ronaldo vs Messi thread. This is Goat thread, thanks in advance.

It's all your fault, you know.

 

[Pocho]

I was not the one that mentioned Ronaldo, haven't done it once in this thread actually. Only in reply when someone brought it up in a discussion.

Like you've just done.

Yes, sorry, my bad.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Do people still care enough to compare the two? Christ

 

[Joga Bonito]

It's all your fault, you know.

 

[Peyroteo]

Nobody even compared anyone with anyone

Brilliant stuff

 

[Tostao_80]

Where did I ever said its importance or effectiveness depends on if the ball goes in or not?

I don't care how 'brilliant' or 'genius' a pass is, or whatever adjective you fancy, I care how effective it was. And yes, it was obviously effective, I never argued otherwise. So was Suarez's run, one of the many he used all afternoon to cause loads of problems to the opposing defense without getting any recognition for it.



It's not intuitive and once again... being intuitive does not make it true.

For the 3rd time, I never ever said or even questioned the 'ability' it takes. I don't care about the amount of subjective ability the majority of people perceives in a play. If a player is one on one with the keeper and puts it into the bottom corner they've shown less ability than the one who nutmegs the keeper 3 different times and then chips him, doesn't make it any better though does it? It's the same outcome. If Messi passes to the side, goes to the back post, gets a mismatch with a defender, beats him in the air after a cross and heads it to Suarez... he probably created a chance just as good without as much 'ability'.





Of course I am, I know that. The majority of football fans doesn't have a clue and sports media is interested in everything but talking about the complexities of the sport and the different ways a player can impact the game.



My first language isn't english, I thought a pass can be flashy even if the passer didn't mean for it to be flashy. Is that not possible? Maybe you can teach me, probably not the best word.



Did I ever say the opposite???? I literally wrote this a few hours ago on this forum: 'lies, damned lies and statistics'.

If there's one person on here that's against 99% of the statistics used in football, it's me. I'm so confused... where the hell did you get that idea?

Calling Ronaldo a top 10 player of all time isn't a compliment anymore. You think I'm getting into this because of Ronaldo when it's the complete opposite, I get into the Ronaldo and Messi debates because of this.

Fans will always love the pretty dribbles and through balls over an intelligent run or a mismatch from an athletic point of view. They don't intuitively know one is more important than the other, that's impossible, it's just simpler to recognize the technical ability in those situations but its importance and effectiveness are impossible to quantify accurately from looking at it, it will depend on hundreds of different factors. There are big misconceptions as to the different ways players can impact the game and to the different ways teams can attack.

People who will generally have those discussions about football history in places like this generally have a close minded vision of what the sport is and how it should be played. They romanticize players, it's all about being a magician, or a genius, etc.. it's about having class, looking class and elegant on the ball, etc. that's why for many fans the greatest players ever have to fit into a certain mold. It's why we had so many people here arguing things like Modric being Madrid's most important player, that Isco should be the first name on Madrid's team sheet or that Benzema was making Ronaldo look better during the past couple of years. It all comes from a fundamental lack of understanding about the sport more than it comes from any bias.[/QUOTE]

Is this the same fundamental lack of understanding that the following people have? Klopp, Wenger, Simeone, Low, Scholes, Rooney, Rio, Maldini. They all speak of Messi in the same awe that you are criticising in the above posters. They all see a magic and otherworldly nature to Messi that they don’t see in Ronaldo. They probably don’t know much about football I guess.

 

[Peyroteo]

Is this the same fundamental lack of understanding that the following people have? Klopp, Wenger, Simeone, Low, Scholes, Rooney, Rio, Maldini. They all speak of Messi in the same awe that you are criticising in the above posters. They all see a magic and otherworldly nature to Messi that they don’t see in Ronaldo. They probably don’t know much about football I guess.

Messi is one of the best players in history imo, no shit people are in awe of him. I don't criticize anyone for being in awe of what he does. What the hell are you on about... I've played football professionally at a high standard in Portugal, if you believe managers and players don't have a nuanced view and understand how complex it is to judge a players asides from 'goals and playmaking' then I don't know what to tell you.

Way to completely miss the point.

They all see a magic and otherworldly nature to Messi that they don’t see in Ronaldo.

Thank God they play in Europe instead of Hogwarts then.

 

[Pass and Move]

Messi is one of the best players in history imo, no shit people are in awe of him. I don't criticize anyone for being in awe of what he does. What the hell are you on about... I've played football professionally at a high standard in Portugal, if you believe managers and players don't have a nuanced view and understand how complex it is to judge a players asides from 'goals and playmaking' then I don't know what to tell you.

Way to completely miss the point.



Thank God they play in Europe instead of Hogwarts then.

Anyone else starting to think Peyroteo is Ronaldo? I didn't think even Ronnie could love himself this much...

 

[Pow]

Anyone else starting to think Peyroteo is Ronaldo? I didn't think even Ronnie could love himself this much...

Think youve uncovered the truth there. Hes definitely the type of guy to check negative comments about himself and respond...

 

[Peyroteo]

One day I'll be tagged onto a post and be able to argue anything about football without a horde of incredibly biased Messi fanboys telling me how biased I am. One day...

Now imagine if I had actually come into this thread and said anything even remotely negative about Messi or positive about Ronaldo. Or if I had even compared the two at all

 

[Pink Moon]

A through ball will always get more love than a cross, a great run, etc. it’s prettier on the eye so it’s only logical.

And also because they're much harder to pull off.

 

[Peyroteo]

And also because they're much harder to pull off.

Yes, point being that how hard to pull off it is or how pretty on the eye it is has no relevance as to how important or effective it is.

What's the percentage of goals in world football than come after either great dribbling or a great through ball? There are plenty of different ways to get past the defense yet these two are given extra importance not because of how important or common they are but because they're the hardest to pull off and the prettiest to watch.

Which is understandable by the way, it's the same way for all kinds of different things in the sport.

 

[Pow]

Yes, point being that how hard to pull off it is or how pretty on the eye it is has no relevance as to how important or effective it is.

What's the percentage of goals in world football than come after either great dribbling or a great through ball? There are plenty of different ways to get past the defense yet these two are given extra importance not because of how important or common they are but because they're the hardest to pull off and the prettiest to watch.

Which is understandable by the way, it's the same way for all kinds of different things in the sport.

Mainly because all these points you point out for ronaldo ahead of dribbling and passing require someone else setting him up. Doesnt matter how good youre movement is or how high you can jump without service you are ineffective.

 

[DJ Jeff]

And also because they're much harder to pull off.

I'd argue beating players is harder, and Messi is also the best I've seen at that.

 

[Zehner]

It's all your fault, you know.

I apologize, I guess I should've known better

 

[Casanova85]

If Messi had scored the equalizer in the 2014 final, he would be considered THE GOAT by everyone.

 

[Pass and Move]

Yes, point being that how hard to pull off it is or how pretty on the eye it is has no relevance as to how important or effective it is.

What's the percentage of goals in world football than come after either great dribbling or a great through ball? There are plenty of different ways to get past the defense yet these two are given extra importance not because of how important or common they are but because they're the hardest to pull off and the prettiest to watch.

Which is understandable by the way, it's the same way for all kinds of different things in the sport.

These fancy through balls are often less effective because a difficult situation necessitates them. If an easy key pass is on then Messi would obviously take it, but when a phenomenal pass is required there are few who come close to Messi’s ability to deliver.

 

[VorZakone]

If Messi had scored the equalizer in the 2014 final, he would be considered THE GOAT by everyone.

But he didn't though.

 

[LoveFootball]

There are people whom it's impossible to convince: A man who want to date the wrong girl, a person who is about to die, Ronaldo's or Mourinho's fans. Arguing with those people is a waste of time.

That pass was something else. The Hobbit is a magician, I swear.

 

[altodevil]

But he didn't though.

His point is that one goal should not define a legacy.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Would like to see proof of peyroteos professional career to me honest, since his understanding of the game is above all of us he must have been an intelligent effective player