Lionel Messi

[carew_villa]

I'm too young to ever see Maradona play, but from the clips I've seen of him, Messi looks the much better player IMO.

I just think that of the clips of Maradona that is always on TV, the defending just looks very bad, whereas with Messi, he easily goes past defences where the defence has done nothing wrong, it's just his brilliance.

My opinion probably doesn't count for much though seen as I've never saw Maradona play.

And I agree with the Spurs fan about Pele. I reckon he was probably the equivalent of Jermaine Defoe or Darren Bent of the 60s, 70s. Just a poacher, nothing much else about him.

[The_Rev]

And I agree with the Spurs fan about Pele. I reckon he was probably the equivalent of Jermaine Defoe or Darren Bent of the 60s, 70s. Just a poacher, nothing much else about him.

Pelé was the star player in three world cup winning teams. :?

[AVFC-Prideofbrum]

so a fair comparison to Darren Bent surely then after what we've heard on other football?

[theunderstudy]

Of all time

Scholes

Scholes is probably the best Englishman to play in the Prem. Don't see what's so funny about that.

[theunderstudy]

I might add he "poached" over 1000 competitive goals. (Pele, not Scholes)

[carew_villa]

But Pele played against very poor teams didn't he? Teams that pale in comparison to modern day teams. Maybe the comparison with Bent or Defoe is a bit harsh, but what I mean is that I think he was just a poacher, not much else. Just my opinion.

[Troglodyte]

To label Pelé as "just a poacher" is absolutely bonkers.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Pele was the best in his era. Maradona the best in his. Messi is the best in the modern era.

You can't compare them head on because the game changed a lot between the 60s to the 80s, and from the 80s to now.

For example, would Messi be the same player if he got a rough kicking every game? Would Pele be the same player without the time and space that was available to him back in the day, especially in his own league where he stood out like a sore thumb? Would Maradona even be a player with the more rigourous drug tests there are today?

Who knows, but it's pointless all the same.

[PauloBarnesi]

Ethan Moore: el más grande

[The_Rev]

Pele was the best in his era. Maradona the best in his. Messi is the best in the modern era.

You can't compare them head on because the game changed a lot between the 60s to the 80s, and from the 80s to now.

For example, would Messi be the same player if he got a rough kicking every game? Would Pele be the same player without the time and space that was available to him back in the day, especially in his own league where he stood out like a sore thumb? Would Maradona even be a player with the more rigourous drug tests there are today?

Who knows, but it's pointless all the same.

Pretty much this.

I'll be the first to admit I have not seen enough of Pele to make a call on how good or bad he was, but the guy won three world cups and was widely regarded as the best player in the team every time (including the 1970 Brazil side who a lot of people say were the best team of all time) but then does he just get his #1 spot in a lot of people's list because he was the guy who was on top in the 60s when the world suddenly became a smaller place due to television hitting a critical mass? I mean just look at Elvis and The Beatles. They both get a special place in history because they were the first truly global superstar solo artist and the first truly global superstar band. Pele was (arguably) the first global superstar footballer so he gets remembered more than, say, Di Stefano, Puskas, Dixie Dean or John Charles. What if TV had been invented 20 years earlier? Would we all be saying that some Welsh guy who did really very well indeed at Juventus was the greatest?

[Mr_Dogg]

Here's clip of some of Maradona's passing for some of the younger guys who perhaps didn't get to see him play and therefore probably know him more for his dribbling skills. You have to remember there aren't the hundreds of games to search through to make these clips for him, as there are for modern players and therefore the vast majority these passes were made at international tournaments and were taken from a pool of less than 30 games. When you consider that Xavi and Iniesta are up for the world player of the year award and largelly it's becasue of their ability to make special incisive passes that decide games, it shows just how good Maradona was, as he can pass like them and dribble like Messi and all on shitty pitches.

Just watch Messi against Real Madrid, his passing is sublime but generally he's on the end of a pass rather than delivering it.

[Zatman]

Pele was the best in his era. Maradona the best in his. Messi is the best in the modern era.

and Gareth Bale is the best of the lot

[Troglodyte]

Messi is a very good passer of the ball. Xavi and Iniesta are two of the most creative players in the world, and play behind him, so he will find himself in an advanced position and on the receiving end of passes all the time. If you look at Xavi's passing stats, they're unbelievable. Messi then scores a ridiculous amount of goals, as well as providing assists of his own.

Even when he's not involved in the direct passage of play though, his movement is fantastic. All this, coupled with his work rate and exemplary attitude, and of course his skill with the ball at his feet, make him the best player in the world.

[AVFC-Prideofbrum]

Yeah, I think what makes Messi stand out as well, not just his goals and ability to go past players but if you look at his passing, if he played the role Xavi/Iniesta played, I still believe he'd be the best or at least one of the best in the world yet I'm not sure other players could play in the role Messi does so effectively.

Anyway, thank God he plays in such a beautiful team to watch. Never miss a Barca game anymore.

[carew_villa]

If Messi played for Wigan, they'd probably be around top 4 IMO.

[The_Rev]

If Messi played for Wigan, he would be on the move when the transfer market opens in four days!

[dudevillaisnice]

If Messi played for Wigan, they'd probably be around top 4 IMO.

You think? idk, cant see it myself.. will bring up the team no doubt but doubt they'd achieve 4th place with him solely being responsible for it.

[Troglodyte]

It'd be very easy to target him if he were playing for someone like Wigan. Yes, he has the skill, pace, speed of thought and movement to get out of situations where he's got two or three men tightly marking him; but at Barcelona teams find it difficult to have pin him down for an entire game, not just because of his skill, but because that simply frees up space for Xavi, Iniesta, Pedro, Villa et al to inflict damage instead. If he were playing for Wigan, it'd be a lot easier to just try and mark him out of the game. Plus, he wouldn't get the supply he gets at Barcelona - let's not forget they're the best passing side in the world.

On top of that, in realistic/practical terms (not that Messi at Wigan is particularly realistic!) he'd have to adjust to the climate, culture, language, style of play etc.

Any team would be hugely improved with Lionel Messi playing in it, but I don't think he alone could take Wigan to being a top 4 side.

[carew_villa]

I've seen games where nearly all the team were tightly marking Messi and he still managed to score a goal or create a goal without the help of team mates.

[Troglodyte]

Yes, but often teams with poor or badly organised defences. Like I said, Messi has sublime ability to find space - with or without the ball - even when he's being marked tightly, but he wouldn't receive anything like the same quality of passing at Wigan as he does at Barcelona. Neither would he be surrounded by world-class players who make fantastic runs themselves to allow more space for other players.

I'd argue that it'd be easier for Messi to lead Argentina to World Cup glory than Wigan into the top four. I do think he'd put Wigan well up there, but I doubt they'd break into that bracket.