AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted May 30, 2011 Author Share Posted May 30, 2011 To be fair, they consider Tevez above Messi in Argentina, as they don't consider him 'one of them'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 maybe not anymore as Tevez has been dropped since November and probably Batrista will force him out longer for lack of loyalty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 He will no doubt go on to become the greatest player ever in my view. Why? Because he is already on par with Maradona, who is the greatest player ever, but unlike Diego he doesnt have any character flaws. This chap's head seems firmly screwed on and his feet are on the ground. How? Maradona did his best work at Napoli and Argentina surrounded by some good players and a few journeymen. Messi as good as he is is surrounded by Xavi and Iniesta 2 players that will be named as legends of the game in 20-50 years time. If MEssi came to a club say like Villa and won the league then he be in Maradona's league To be honest I just want to see how he does when Xavi and Iniesta are gone. There is no doubt that he is a fantastic player and if he continues to dominate when surrounded by weaker players for years to come he will righty be talked about as an all time great. But for now greatest player ever is just 24hr media over hype. The thing is Barca will sign back Fabregas and bring through Thiago Alcantara and get away with it midfield but they'll never replace Messi I don't think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted May 30, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted May 30, 2011 I'd still put him behind Ronaldo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Puskas is number 1 He scored 84 goals in 85 international matches and 514 goals in 529 club matches . That's basically a goal a game throughout his entire career and doing it with a football that weighed more than a cow ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted May 30, 2011 Author Share Posted May 30, 2011 He also played at a time where most games had between 4-6 goals. World Cup 1954 ....scores: 9-0, 8-3, 4-2, 4-2, 2-3 in their games. 26 games overall in that World Cup: 140 goals. Over 5 a game ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 It just proves you cant compare different eras in football, or any sport in that matter. You could say Messi is playing at a time where the opposition are more clued up tactically than at any other time in history, but then Pele or Maradona played at a time when it was okay to kick the shit out of a skillful striker. Do they cancel each other out? You could argue about it until the cows come home and not have an answer. I prefer to think about it in tiers. Messi is without a doubt the finest player of his generation. The fact that he can make Christiano Ronaldo look ordinary is insane. Messi is undoubtedly in that all time top tier of players with Pele, Maradona, Johan Cruyff & co but to try and separate those into an order of who was best is impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 30, 2011 Moderator Share Posted May 30, 2011 Puskas is number 1 He scored 84 goals in 85 international matches and 514 goals in 529 club matches . That's basically a goal a game throughout his entire career and doing it with a football that weighed more than a cow ! And you couldn't kick him or you'd break your foot. He was a brick shithouse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 30, 2011 Moderator Share Posted May 30, 2011 It just proves you cant compare different eras in football, or any sport in that matter. You could say Messi is playing at a time where the opposition are more clued up tactically than at any other time in history, but then Pele or Maradona played at a time when it was okay to kick the shit out of a skillful striker. Do they cancel each other out? You could argue about it until the cows come home and not have an answer. I prefer to think about it in tiers. Messi is without a doubt the finest player of his generation. The fact that he can make Christiano Ronaldo look ordinary is insane. Messi is undoubtedly in that all time top tier of players with Pele, Maradona, Johan Cruyff & co but to try and separate those into an order of who was best is impossible.All true. Though if you took the skillful sides I.e. the ones that wouldn't kick each other, the modern side would win. I remember reading something that went through the distances covered in the 70's compared to now. Fitness-wise, this Barca side would run rings around the '70 Brazil side. Midfielders back then ran on average something like 3 miles per game compared to the 6 or 7 these days. And I personally think the disadvantage of facing more physical opponents is not as difficult as facing opponents that are all tactically savvy for the purposes of demonstrating ability and accruing personal career milestones. JMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAndLoyal Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I'd still put him behind Ronaldo. Are you being serious? Messi is head and shoulders above Ronaldo. He proved that in the semi-final when he ran past the whole Madrid team to score an incredible goal while Ronaldo looked helplessly on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norton65ca Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Is he not referring to Brazilian Ronaldo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDuck Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Though if you took the skillful sides I.e. the ones that wouldn't kick each other, the modern side would win. I remember reading something that went through the distances covered in the 70's compared to now. Fitness-wise, this Barca side would run rings around the '70 Brazil side. Of course. But then the modern side has all the advantages in terms of fitness training. How good would the 70 Brazil side have been with modern training methods? You simply can't make a worthwhile comparison between sides of different eras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAndLoyal Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Is he not referring to Brazilian Ronaldo? Could well be. Although my point would still stand, Messi is the best player since Maradona - and arguably he's better than him, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted June 1, 2011 Author Share Posted June 1, 2011 I'd still put him behind Ronaldo. Which one, Cristiano or Brazilian, I'd have thought Brazilian but I'm sure you've claimed C.Ronaldo to be better before, although not sure. I think you're wrong on both counts anyway. Especially CR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 1, 2011 Moderator Share Posted June 1, 2011 Of course. But then the modern side has all the advantages in terms of fitness training. How good would the 70 Brazil side have been with modern training methods? You simply can't make a worthwhile comparison between sides of different eras. True. All you can do is lift them out of their eras and put them in a mythical head to head. If we accept that the game has moved on and everything around the game has moved on too, then the modern side is the better side. With significant caveats attached admittedly, but still the better side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Of course. But then the modern side has all the advantages in terms of fitness training. How good would the 70 Brazil side have been with modern training methods? You simply can't make a worthwhile comparison between sides of different eras. True. All you can do is lift them out of their eras and put them in a mythical head to head. If we accept that the game has moved on and everything around the game has moved on too, then the modern side is the better side. With significant caveats attached admittedly, but still the better side. But it is a pretty meaningless comparison. The modern Barca side may well be crap if forced to deal with the sports 'science' and lack of professionalism of that era. It is pointless speculating. What does make for interesting comparison is by how much a player or team stands out amongs the other players/teams of their same era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 1, 2011 Moderator Share Posted June 1, 2011 I know it's meaningless. All of these types of discussion are meaningless. It's as valid to point out that this Barca would crap all over the Brazil 70 side as it is to hypothesise anything else though i.e. not very. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted June 1, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted June 1, 2011 I meant the Brazilian. And I think that because he was, throughout his career, playing in different teams and different leagues, when his knees were falling apart and he was unfit, consistantly devastatingly good. I rate that consistancy of excellency despite the problems with injuries and fitness he had - he scored absurd amounts of goals everywhere he went, he was world class on every stage he played, even when he was off form, out of shape and struggling with injuries he was great. If Messi can do that, he'll overtake him in my list. But since it's very unlikely he'll leave Barca any time soon, it's not likely he'll do that. I have said before now I believe C.Ronaldo to be a better player than Messi, that's no longer the case - though I do think C.Ronaldo is a more flexible player. I think the Portugeuse could go to more or less any league and immediately be in it's top 2 players (if not top full stop - he's behind Messi in La Liga of course), whereas Messi I think might struggle a little more in England for example. That doesn't take away from the fact that Messi stands ahead of him now though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted June 1, 2011 Author Share Posted June 1, 2011 That is fair enough, I love Ronaldo too but there is something about Messi that makes me rate him more, maybe it's because I only witnessed Ronaldo more regularly from 2002 onwards. When basically he wasn't at his peak. Wouldn't be a bad combo though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted June 1, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted June 1, 2011 Even in the 9 years he carried on after 2011 he was still absolutely banging in goals, and he was still struggling more and more for fitness. I mean if you take his club form post 2002, across 3 leagues he's still scoring 0.6 goals a game. And that includes his worst period of form in his career (as a bit part player at Milan, where he still only just misses out on 1 in 2). He was just a superb player. Best player I've ever seen. Better than Messi for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts