Bris Vegas Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Well your logic is a bit confusing. You say Messi can do it against Real, so he can do it against anyone, and I say Pele did it for the big games and you question if he could do it against anyone? Fair enough, sh1te comparison about the World Cup. But back then, the World Cup was more like the Champions League anyway - outside of Europe, footballers wanted to shine there, not in a foreign club competition. And Pele consistently did so. So discounting Pele's World Cup record saying he had the best team is like dismissing Messi because he has the best team in the Champions League. And yes, Maradona did make Argentina World Champions SINGLE HANDedly, I can agree with that! The opposition that the likes of Maradona and Messi faced in comparison to Pele is huge. Messi is playing in arguebly the strongest league in the world (with The PL) and also The CL against Europes finest.. And hes broken scoring records/assist records aswell as winning Europes biggest trophy for the 3rd time in 6 years. Maradona, I dont need to explain. Pele on the other hand was playing in a league consistanly just of Brazilian players, for the biggest club in Brazil.. His opposition was nowehere near the strength of what Messi and Maradona are up against on a weekly basis.. Saying the Brazilian league was one of the strongest, it featured just Brazilians.. How can it be? No other Brazilian team could go out and buy the best players in the world like the likes of Real Madrid, Milan, Man Utd, Inter do.. Peles big competition was the world cup.. A cup Brazil won at a canter. That doesnt make him the best player of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 no, it doesn't you take into account the players skill in general, and as you didn't watch the final you wouldn't realise how little rooney mattered and how he wasn't a tenth as good compared to xavi, iniesta, messi or villa. If you would rather have rooney than anyone else then frankly you need to see more games with messi in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghRam Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 no, it doesn't you take into account the players skill in general, and as you didn't watch the final you wouldn't realise how little rooney mattered and how he wasn't a tenth as good compared to xavi, iniesta, messi or villa. If you would rather have rooney than anyone else then frankly you need to see more games with messi in them. Once again one game (albeit a big one) doesn't mean they are better players. I'd rather have Rooney than anyone of them, I'll leave you with a final conundrum, one-on-one match, Rooney vs Messi, who wins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 messi would walk all over rooney tbh, rooney could use brute force but i don't think he would touch him, yes one game but they did it in 2009 as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghRam Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 messi would walk all over rooney tbh, rooney could use brute force but i don't think he would touch him, yes one game but they did it in 2009 as well. replace tbh with imo and you have an acceptable post tbf. I'm sick of arguing young ram, let's just say that you think Pele and Messi are two of the greatest players of all time, and I think Rooney and Ronaldo are two of the greatest players of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 The opposition that the likes of Maradona and Messi faced in comparison to Pele is huge. Messi is playing in arguebly the strongest league in the world (with The PL) and also The CL against Europes finest.. And hes broken scoring records/assist records aswell as winning Europes biggest trophy for the 3rd time in 6 years. Maradona, I dont need to explain. Pele on the other hand was playing in a league consistanly just of Brazilian players, for the biggest club in Brazil.. His opposition was nowehere near the strength of what Messi and Maradona are up against on a weekly basis.. Saying the Brazilian league was one of the strongest, it featured just Brazilians.. How can it be? No other Brazilian team could go out and buy the best players in the world like the likes of Real Madrid, Milan, Man Utd, Inter do.. Peles big competition was the world cup.. A cup Brazil won at a canter. That doesnt make him the best player of all time. You speak like Messi won the CL titles - didn't Barca, the best team in the World, not win that at a canter rather than Messi himself? That is Messi's big comeptition, just like it is Pele's. Do discount Pele's World Cups, where he did indeed play the world's best players, is to dismiss Messi's Champions Leagues too. And yes, at this time, English clubs featured just Brits, Portugese clubs featured mainly Portugese - Barca featured only Catalans, and Celtic only Catholics. Football was far more localised. And why would Santos need to spend money on foreigners? Brazil had the best players in the world, they only needed Brazilians; and when Santos played Europe's top clubs, they proved it was enough. Just like now, Spain has the world's best footballers, and Barca's team is basically the Spanish national team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 replace tbh with imo and you have an acceptable post tbf. I'm sick of arguing young ram, let's just say that you think Pele and Messi are two of the greatest players of all time, and I think Rooney and Ronaldo are two of the greatest players of all time. fair enough. I presume you think rooney would beat messi then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghRam Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 fair enough. I presume you think rooney would beat messi then You are correct sir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 fair enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 You speak like Messi won the CL titles - didn't Barca, the best team in the World, not win that at a canter rather than Messi himself? That is Messi's big comeptition, just like it is Pele's. Do discount Pele's World Cups, where he did indeed play the world's best players, is to dismiss Messi's Champions Leagues too. And yes, at this time, English clubs featured just Brits, Portugese clubs featured mainly Portugese - Barca featured only Catalans, and Celtic only Catholics. Football was far more localised. And why would Santos need to spend money on foreigners? Brazil had the best players in the world, they only needed Brazilians; and when Santos played Europe's top clubs, they proved it was enough. Just like now, Spain has the world's best footballers, and Barca's team is basically the Spanish national team. I dont think you're getting to grips with what I'm saying.. And I'm exhausted to be honest. You think Pele is the greatest player to have lived, I don't. And video evidence or a few stories will never convince me of it.. It isnt a fact, people have their opinions and thats the beauty of football. Take Edin for example, never in my wildest dreams would I think that someone could honestly believe Rooney is better than Messi.. But he has his opinion and that is that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_ram Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 People laud Pele for his goalscoring record, yet the standard of opposition was poor so chances were more frequent and therefore more goals were scored. Then how about this.. A little before Pele and during Pele's time there was a Hungarian player named Ferenc Puskas. He scored 509 league goals in 523 league games. He was recognised in 1995 by the 'International Federation of Football History & Statistics' as the greatest goalscorer of the 20th century. No Pele? No, because one can only imagine the standard of league was took under consideration, and he played in the Brazilian league which would of been considered weaker. This tells you that for how good he was, he was never took serious enough by football authorities, and THAT is why he isn't the greatest footballer of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 The greatest footballer of all time can never be quantified. Countless millions of people round the world recognise Pele as the greatest player. Today's generation will quite possibly think the same of Messi if he continues to perform at the level he's at for another 8 years or so. Its not a debate anyone can ever win. You can only go by what you've seen. For my generation, Pele will always be the best. He was a world wide superstar years and years before 24 hour news, wall to wall live games, Internet etc. From the back streets of every English town to the shanty towns of South America and remote villages of Africa, every school kid in the world wanted to play like Pele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inglorious01 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 I've seen Messi play a few times and whilst I admit he is a great player, he needs to be judged at the end of his career, not right now. The only title I'd award him right now is most over rated player of all time. He is great but I have seen many others do the things that he can do. Zinedine Zidane was at least as good, if not better. Anyway, greatest footballer of all time? Steve Bloomer surely?!! The first true superstar of football. Once scored for England against Scotland from the halfway line. Played in an age when the ball was like a block of concrete and if you broke a leg, you just got up and tried to run it off. Amazing player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srg Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 Saw him live did you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 The greatest footballer of all time can never be quantified. Countless millions of people round the world recognise Pele as the greatest player. Today's generation will quite possibly think the same of Messi if he continues to perform at the level he's at for another 8 years or so. Its not a debate anyone can ever win. You can only go by what you've seen. For my generation, Pele will always be the best. He was a world wide superstar years and years before 24 hour news, wall to wall live games, Internet etc. From the back streets of every English town to the shanty towns of South America and remote villages of Africa, every school kid in the world wanted to play like Pele. And that's why I think you can win the debate. I'm not arguin Pele was the greatest because it's my opinion, I'm arguing he's the greatest because that's the general consensus. Messi doesn't hold for my generation what he does for yours. No player ever will, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inglorious01 Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 Saw him live did you? This is an argument I heard before. Radio Derby in conjunction with Radio Nottingham and Leicester tried to come up with an all time East Midlands 11. Steve Bloomer was discounted because there was no one left alive that had seen him play. Surely stats tell a story though? Are we going to throw the history books out the window and ignore them, just because no one is around now who saw Bloomer play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asanovic Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 replace tbh with imo and you have an acceptable post tbf. I'm sick of arguing young ram, let's just say that you think Pele and Messi are two of the greatest players of all time, and I think Rooney and Ronaldo are two of the greatest players of all time. You never get sick of arguing? Rooney's not even the best player Man United have ever had! But all opinion I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 in all honesty though you can say the same about politics but some views are considered so mad that they are laughed out of the room and not taken seriously, the view that Rooney is better than messi should be taken like that political opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asanovic Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 in all honesty though you can say the same about politics but some views are considered so mad that they are laughed out of the room and not taken seriously, the view that Rooney is better than messi should be taken like that political opinion. Don't get him arguing again - he's sick of it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted June 2, 2011 Author Share Posted June 2, 2011 Top 20.. Pele, Maradona, Messi, Zidane, Cruyff, C Ronaldo, Ronaldo, Platini, Maldini, Best, Xavi, Help me out guys, especially with the older ones.. Some decisions are going to be debatable, but the 11 I just mentioned are certainties no? I'd throw in Hugo Sanchez as a personal favourite, not sure he's in the top 20 though! Eusebio and Beckanbauer too so they say. Can't really judge any players before my time. Seen some special players that don't even touch that list..... Rivaldo, Raul, Figo, Ronaldinho (not quite top 30? Equal to Henry imo)...... loads! Probably my age or my ignorance...... but for me Pele doesn't quite come above Messi or Maradona or Cruyff. Probably a bit disrepectful to Santos and Brazilian football. What he did internationally though shoots him into 4th though. Still a legend and a gift from football Gods! For me it's Messi v Maradona. Seeing as Maradona has had his time...... Messi has another 7+ years to eclipse him. I'm sure Argentina will win a World Cup with him. He'll win another World POTY etc probably next year. There's no reason to believe he wont continue to score 40-50 goals per season. But then, Ronaldo and Ronaldinho looked like they would go on forever unplayable. Now people don't give Ronaldinho a second thought. Would Messi be forgotten about if next season he got a bad injury and we never saw him play like this again? Even with all those awards around him and all the comparisons with greats like Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, Best etc would get forgotten like Ronaldinho? It's hard to seperate the Great from the Greatest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.