His peak was not as good as the other three... Not at all. His peak was comparable to Muller and Van Basten. Possibly better than them, but still we will mostly remember him to be an incredible goalscorer, but nothing GOAT-worthy in his passing or dribbling, unlike the other 3.
Rank Maradona, Messi, Pele and C.Ronaldo
- Thread starter tentan
- Start date
that’s a harsh way of referring to yourself, mate!
Was wonder which Ronaldo it is when I saw the title.
1. Messi/Maradona/Pele
2.
3.
4. -----------
1. Messi/Maradona/Pele
2.
3.
4. -----------
Quite sad that's still the best you could do here, on your 2nd attempt. Try again!
So better international career as in Olympic > Euro and 84 goals > 118 goals.
Also, 1x Ballon D'or runners up = 5x Ballon D'ors wins + 7x Ballon D'or runners up in your eyes too.
Very objective assessment.
1) Pele
2) Messi
3) Maradona
2) Messi
3) Maradona
The oracle of sad behavior has spoken!
Insulting another member
Look another pointless attempt!
Got no time to entertain with sad tosser. Enjoy your day.
Ah, here we go, insulting and name calling. Shows your true colors. Enjoy your day.
Love these random claims. I find it funny how people don't realise how many silly leaps they make on this topic just to have a take
You have a bizarre way of interpreting things of course 84 goals in 85 games is a better goal rario than 118 in 196 games and also performance wise Puskas taking Hungary to a World Cup final where he also won the best player of the tournament(Golden Ball) is better than CR7 who hasn’t even scored a knockout goal in the WC.
The Euros wasn’t even the Euros we know today in Puskas time and the 1960 version had only 4 teams playing it,
Even in regards to the ballon d’or you keep mentioning the year Puskas won the golden ball and finished second in World Cup, the trophy had not even been in existence this is why it’s best to use context when discussing things and actually try get an understanding of different eras to the best you can.
Not only was the award coming to prominence on the tail end of his career from 60-62 there were years where he probably could have won it, but lost out to Suarez Sivori and Maspost none of these players being considered greater than him generally(despite their ballon dor wins and being probably top 20-30 players of all time.
It’s odd because I feel
Like something about Ronaldo which makes his fans who argue tooth and nail for him iq shrink, it’s bad enough to pretend he was on Messi level for 10 years but to think Puskas and Di Stefano can’t be argued to be just as good because of ballon dor wins is just as bad.
Ronaldo us an all time great but the debate about Ronaldo vs Messi is now dead and buried. Messi was always the much better footballer; Ronaldo did well to keep himself in the conversation by scoring goals galore but he eventually imploded and Messi won the world cup as the main protagonist.
Do you ever do anything except melt down and insult people anytime someone dares to criticise your idol? Grow up.
Yup. As did Gerd Muller. By comparison, it's pretty wide as Ronaldo didn't really do it at the highest level of international football (0 goals and 0 assists in the KO stages for his career).
Pessi
Mainoldo = Pele
Rimaldo
Mainoldo = Pele
Rimaldo
Maybe echoing some posters' shout.
The word "mercurial" pops up whenever I try to describe Pelé.
Football was one way and It was another way since Pele came into prominence.
The kind of football he played was way ahead of his time.
In footages where he destroyed European elites, you can see the defender might as well have their feet tied.
It was comical.
The only way to stop him was blatant foul, the kinds that can end career.
Adding to his genius, he's also a diligent trainer.
Time-travelling him to this era won't change a thing.
I'm convinced that he will just simply adapt and dominate like he was in his original era.
The word "mercurial" pops up whenever I try to describe Pelé.
Football was one way and It was another way since Pele came into prominence.
The kind of football he played was way ahead of his time.
In footages where he destroyed European elites, you can see the defender might as well have their feet tied.
It was comical.
The only way to stop him was blatant foul, the kinds that can end career.
Adding to his genius, he's also a diligent trainer.
Time-travelling him to this era won't change a thing.
I'm convinced that he will just simply adapt and dominate like he was in his original era.
Last edited:
So i can't offer an opinion? Why, because you said so?
Messi, Maradonna and Pele
The rest
The rest
He is 4th no matter what. Just now the gap between him and the others seems rather larger than it really is because he is shit and a wanker these days.
Why? Sure better athleticism (if born at the same time as the others three) than Messi/Maradona (but less than Cristiano), and quite more talented than Cristiano. But why he would have been far above Messi for example (who IMO would have still been the better passer and dribbler and equally good finisher)?
NB: I see that you explained it. I do not see how he would have been better at dribbling and passing than Messi. He would have been an elite dribbler (for example Hazard like) and very good at passing, while faster and stronger than Messi. Kind of a better version (but smaller) of Ronaldo. Maybe as good or even marginally better than Messi, but far ahead, I do not see how is that possible.
The default of dropping Pele to 3rd or even 4th as an afterthought because you literally cannot be arsed to watch footage of him does render his thread redundant, or, at most, an exercise in picking Messi or Maradona, but in actuality Messi, because he’s the only one you’ve seen.
There’ll never be an objective analysis of the subject matter - in time, when the next great #10 comes along, it’ll be the same tonic for Messi with him being pushed into the category Maradona currently resides in.
Would actually be a great thread to reduce to minutiae as to why each of the 3 are what they are skills and intangibles alike.
There’ll never be an objective analysis of the subject matter - in time, when the next great #10 comes along, it’ll be the same tonic for Messi with him being pushed into the category Maradona currently resides in.
Would actually be a great thread to reduce to minutiae as to why each of the 3 are what they are skills and intangibles alike.
We will never know how Pele would adapt into this new world of football. The differences between his era and today is like day and night. But due to nostalgia wishful thinking is taking over. He could be top 10 but we will never know. But looking at what Messi has produced in his era I simply rank him higher than Pele and Maradona.
all that Ronaldo ever had in these debates were goals and certain records. the reason he was always compared to Messi was because they played in the same era (and the same league) and because he was the only one who could score almost as much as Messi. Messi on the other hand was always compared to Maradona and Pele, while nobody even bottered with Ronaldo in such debates.
so what happened? at certain point it looked like it could be argued that Ronaldo actually had better international career than Messi, who only had couple of losing finals with his NT. but... Portugal kept losing in early stages with Ronaldo being non-factor as always, while Messi won CA playing at level that was unreachable for Ronnie. after that we had those silly Euro vs Copa debates for a while, but at last WC Portugal lost again in early stage, while Messi had another brilliant tournament and just settled every possible debate about who belongs where.
tbh, I never expected that Ronnie won't improve at all after Portugal's EURO 2016 win. he continued to be invisible and remained on his 0-0 record in knockout games. Messi on the other hand looked like a different man once he won CA with Argentina. so, from clearly being better in at least one area than Messi, that being international career, Ronaldo actually went to being the only one without not only WC win, but without a memorable one as well.
meaning, he doesn't really belong in these debates. Messi, Maradona and Pele are separate tier from him.
so what happened? at certain point it looked like it could be argued that Ronaldo actually had better international career than Messi, who only had couple of losing finals with his NT. but... Portugal kept losing in early stages with Ronaldo being non-factor as always, while Messi won CA playing at level that was unreachable for Ronnie. after that we had those silly Euro vs Copa debates for a while, but at last WC Portugal lost again in early stage, while Messi had another brilliant tournament and just settled every possible debate about who belongs where.
tbh, I never expected that Ronnie won't improve at all after Portugal's EURO 2016 win. he continued to be invisible and remained on his 0-0 record in knockout games. Messi on the other hand looked like a different man once he won CA with Argentina. so, from clearly being better in at least one area than Messi, that being international career, Ronaldo actually went to being the only one without not only WC win, but without a memorable one as well.
meaning, he doesn't really belong in these debates. Messi, Maradona and Pele are separate tier from him.
Last edited:
It's just not possible to be far above Messi and Maradona. They are all equally exceptional players
The award didn’t exist until they were in their 30s. Chances are they’d have won a few more each had it existed earlier.
I do find the airbrushing of Puskas from these debates a little odd. Dominated the game at every level he had an opportunity to influence. He’s not in my top 3 but his case for a spot in that second tier deserves a fairer hearing.
He’s also in that creative sweet-spot occupied by Messi, Pele and Cruyff where he can score and create heavily. To speak in the statistical language that has dominated much of these threads, Puskas has racked up a similar balance of goals to assists as those two players. Throughout his career he consistently scored a goal per game and assisted once every two games. A few players have come close to that goalscoring ratio and a couple have approachedthat assist ratio. But nobody has ever been able to do both at such a productive rate.
Now there are plenty of caveats and context to those figures. But if these sorts of numbers weigh heavily in how you rank your greats, then Puskas really should be in your thinking.
Yes exactly
But for a World Cup win, he would've been. Crazy how so little can determine so much.The award didn’t exist until they were in their 30s. Chances are they’d have won a few more each had it existed earlier.
I do find the airbrushing of Puskas from these debates a little odd. Dominated the game at every level he had an opportunity to influence. He’s not in my top 3 but his case for a spot in that second tier deserves a fairer hearing.
He’s also in that creative sweet-spot occupied by Messi, Pele and Cruyff where he can score and create heavily. To speak in the statistical language that has dominated much of these threads, Puskas has racked up a similar balance of goals to assists as those two players. Throughout his career he consistently scored a goal per game and assisted once every two games. A few players have come close to that goalscoring ratio and a couple have approachedthat assist ratio. But nobody has ever been able to do both at such a productive rate.
Now there are plenty of caveats and context to those figures. But if these sorts of numbers weigh heavily in how you rank your greats, then Puskas really should be in your thinking.
I agree 100%
It's a bit annoying though considering Ronaldo is 3 years older and has been playing in a tougher league its easy to criticize his current level. Messi has earned the goat status now regardless of what Ronaldo is doing because he's just won the WC but he would do well to have a 20 goal season in the PL at 37 years old.
DiStefano did not come to Europe until he was I. his late 20s and the award also did not exist until both he and Puskas had already played much of their careers. Also, when the award began, you were not allowed to win it two years in a row. So basically, this is a terrible argument.
We can easily surmise, though, the evidence is right before our eyes. Pele ran the 100 m in 11 seconds; he had a 48" vertical leap. He was an exceptional header of the ball. He had a tremendous shot with either foot and the rare ability to score long-range free kicks with either foot. He had excellent balance, first touch and close control, and he was an inventive, effective dribbler and a creative passer. He was a natural goalscorer and had an indomitable spirit in that he never shrank in the big moments. Oddly, many of the same players that eulogize Bekenbauer and Cruyyf as being visionary players dismiss Pele even though their careers intersected and those same players, after playing with him, stated quite simply that he was the best.
Did Pele have a 48’’ vertical leap or it is one of these myths that become true if enough people repeat it. For example, the highest documented leap in NBA history is 46’’. It is highly unlikely that a footballer would be able to jump as high. Ronaldo who is a top athlete jumped 41’’.
There is no video evidence that Pele ever jumped that high. No one actually ever saw it happening. It is one of those legends like ‘ Meazza once jumped with a bicycle overhead 2m, and when he landed, the ball was attached on his feet.’ Nice story, but on the realms of fantasy.
He also probably did not run 100m under 11 seconds.
Last edited:
The evidence seems to support an otherworldly vertical leap.
That is nowhere near 48’’ though. It is a crazy jump (same as Ronaldo’s crazy jump) but not the sci-fi one. Guesstimating it is probably 30-35’’.
The evidence seems to support an otherworldly vertical leap.
I did not say that this was a 48" leap but evidence that he possessed an extraordinary leaping ability. I also did not say that he ran under 11 seconds, even though I heard this but that he ran an 11-second hundred when tested. The specifics and whereabouts of these tests remain vague, but video evidence shows he had an incredible acceleration from a standing start. Pele was a once-in-a-generation athlete, and this allied with his incredible football intelligence places him at the very top of the football hierarchy. Pele has no rival in my opinion.
Even if he could, he still wouldn't.
While weighing twice as much!
He probably wasn't fat his whole career, just remember he was quite chubby on the pics i've seen.
Maradona
Messi
Ronaldo
Pele
Messi
Ronaldo
Pele
Thats just your opinion. Not more valid or less valid than anyone else posting on this silly but amusing thread.
Yes. Give yourself a biscuit.
I didnt know this. Thanks. Goes to show the flaws of the award.