Argentina vs Serbia and Montenegro

Attractive Nun

Ste05 wrote:

Hey Eirebhoy, do you really think this??

Maradona IMO (but to stop a fight Pele too :rolleyes: ) is the best player ever, by a long way, the only player that has come close in recent years is surely Zidane.
Who around now could you compare with Maradona, Pele or Zidane. Obviously, Ronaldinho is up there, but he still has a way to go before he's up there with these guys....

I'm only a youngun, so I admit I haven't seen a great deal of the older players. But it seems to me that due to increased fitness, a quicker pace to games and perhaps other factors, the skill level required to play in the modern game is greater than in football in, say, the 70s. Maybe this is negated by new technology and such, but I think the point remains valid.

Of course, in many respects, football is a different game nowadays. But with more and more people practising and playing football, joining teams and spending more and more time training, it only seems logical that standards would improve. Obviously, raw 'talent' is constant - and maybe Maradona, Pele, Garrincha, Best, Eusebio, Cruyff, Charlton, Zidane or whoever were better in this respect (or maybe not) - but if raw talent were taken into account, then someone like Ronaldo or other 'wasted talents' would have to be up there with the greatest. It seems to me that standards, performance and skill have improved, so logically then players playing today will generally be better than players playing in the past.

Or maybe I'm just biased.

Pigman II

Ste05 wrote:

Ye I got that alright, and I'm sure with the advances in sports science and technology, many of the players are fitter, quicker, etc. now, but IMO things like reading a game, ball control, technique, etc. cannot be taught and noone around now compares to Maradona, maybe if you look at the flip side and make the field level, so imagine Maradona/Pele, etc. playing in this day and age, with all the latest training techniques, etc. and imagine what they'd be like compared to Henry/ Ronaldinho, etc.

Well that's one way of looking at it but another way of looking at it is that maybe the emphasis on physicality would work against these players (esp 5'4'' Maradona).

It seems to me these days that there is still more emphasis on the physical size of a player rather than his skill so maybe if Maradona was a young player in the 00's he could have been cast aside from day 1 for all we know?

Slash/ED

Maybe around here, but just look at Argentina, Tevez and Messi aren't exactly giants.

Stunning performance. It's performances like that that make football the beautiful game, absolutley incredible. And with Messi hopefully soon to be capable of playing the full 90 minutes, they can still improve...Which is some prospect...

I hope Crespos farcical booking doesn't come back to haunt him, pure idiotic refereeing, not to mention the fact he was never offside anyway.

Pepe LeFrits

Oh how I love the World Cup.

Brilliant performance by Argentina followed by a terrific match an hour later.

And today we get Italy, Czech Rep and Portugal! mmm...

d22ontour

Attractive Nun wrote:

Of course, in many respects, football is a different game nowadays. But with more and more people practising and playing football, joining teams and spending more and more time training, it only seems logical that standards would improve. Obviously, raw 'talent' is constant - and maybe Maradona, Pele, Garrincha, Best, Eusebio, Cruyff, Charlton, Zidane or whoever were better in this respect

I find it amusing that people would place Zidane in such a list considering he was regarded a nobody until he signed for Juventus aged 26 i think.

Anam

d22ontour wrote:

I find it amusing that people would place Zidane in such a list considering he was regarded a nobody until he signed for Juventus aged 26 i think.

He was closer to 24 i think.And i couldnt disagree more if you are trying to say that Zidane isnt up there with Cruyff,Di Stefano and Maradona etc.


I would agree with what Ste05 has said.

In my view,the best a player can achieve is to be the best player of their generation,as the game of football evolves and is played in different ways over time.Zidane was certainly the best of his generation imo.

Effectively,what you really are arguing is which generation of football is the best.

BTW,i watched the Cambiasso goal again.I have to say i thinks its the best team goal ive ever seen,better than Carlos Alberto for Brazil.

PHB

I find it amusing that people would place Zidane in such a list considering he was regarded a nobody until he signed for Juventus aged 26 i think.

He was 24 when he signed.
Most people didn't know who Ronaldinho was when he was at PSG, he 22 when he joined.

Zidane is the best of his generation, and Ronaldinho has yet to prove that imo.

eirebhoy

jank wrote:

Eirebhoy so who is this player you are on about??

I wasn't on about anyone in particular. Roger Federer is the best ever tennis player (although Nadal is a challenger for that now), Tiger Woods is the best ever golfer, Ronnie O'Sullivan is the best ever snooker player, Justin Gatlin is the best ever sprinter, etc, etc. I think 20 years on from Maradona surely we now have a best ever footballer that has played in the last few years or is currently playing. If I was to pick a player it would obviously be Ronaldinho though. Although, it's not a great time to be saying that considering his last 2 performances. Ronaldinho has stuck out from all the great players playing today and winning all the awards possible.

d22ontour wrote:

I find it amusing that people would place Zidane in such a list considering he was regarded a nobody until he signed for Juventus aged 26 i think.

As PHB said, he was 24. The same age Maradona was when Barca let him go.

PHB

Roger Federer is the best ever tennis player (although Nadal is a challenger for that now),

That's a matter of opinion, I think many would argue that Sampras and even Agassi were better.

Ronnie O'Sullivan is the best ever snooker player,

Cough, Stephen Henry

You're just asserting these to be true, and many many many many people would totally disagree with you.

eirebhoy

PHB wrote:

Cough, Stephen Henry

You're just asserting these to be true, and many many many many people would totally disagree with you.

Ronnie is better than Hendry, no question. Anyway, we're way off topic.

PHB

He has earned more prize money than any other player (about £8 million). He has scored the most 147 breaks (eight) and was the first player to have scored one in the deciding frame of a match; the final of the 1997 Liverpool Victoria Charity Challenge. He has also compiled the most century breaks, currently over 700, and he holds the most ranking event titles (36). He is the winner of 6 Masters titles, 5 of which were in a row. He won 7 World titles (5 in a row) and he collected over 18 major titles (World, UK, Masters). In the Crucible Theatre era of the world championship, he holds the record for the most wins, finals (9), semi-finals (11, shared with Steve Davis) and quarter-finals (16).

Hmmmm

Also he is currently the top ranked player in the world

eirebhoy

All that and O'Sullivan is still better. :eek: What's the point of this anyway? I could understand if Hendry was 20 years older than Ronnie.

Rikand

Ronnie has the raw talent to be the best in the world, but he doesnt make full use of his gifts through being a bit cracked like or whatever.

Hendry had a lot of talent and worked hard to become the best in the world.

Ronnie definately the most gifted player to pick up the cue, but Hendry would be the better actual player, imo

^^ why are we talking about snooker on a soccer forum anyways ?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=413

^^ there's a forum for the two of ye

p.s. Tony Drago is the best ever tho imo

PHB

The point is about eirebhoy just asserting that players now are better.
There are many sports where the best players are players who played in the past.
Sampras, Babe Ruth, Hendry

It's without a doubt that people are at the peak in physical condition, and that effects sports like running etc, but football isn't like that.

eirebhoy

I think it's good that you mention Stephen Hendry because the Stephen Hendry of today has improved so much from the Hendry of the late 80's. Back then he was dominating snooker, now he's only 1 of a bunch of great players.

With the advances in training and scouting, the fact that you can hardly drink anymore (never mind take coke every day), the physical condition of players, etc. I'd be very suprised if Ronaldinho now is not a better player than Maradona was 20 years ago.

Guy:Incognito

eirebhoy wrote:

Any other year a performance like that from a team would have them as clear favourites to win the cup. I think football is at it's peak atm and surely the best ever player is one of the currently active players no matter what the nostalgically biased people think. If you look at every other sport (especially one's which performances can be accurately measured), the best ever player/athlete has come from the last decade. I don't see why it should be any different with football. Sorry Maradona.

There are very few if any players as skillfull as pele/maradonna/best. The difference now is fitness. It's not really fair to compare football to measured sports like track and field, which to a large extent can be thought and trained into. Skill like the 3 names I mentioned and the likes of Ronaldinho, Mesi etc cant be thought, it's natural ability. The more training facilities and techniques improve, the faster and more athletic people get, but natural ability cant be gained from that.

You cant take an average footballler and teach him to run by 6 or 7 players at will. You can take a quick runner and build him up to an extent. It was acceptable to drink and smoke (although not so much smoke) and be a footballer up to probably the start of the premiership era. You just cant go out getting locked a couple of nights a week during the season anymore as the body cant keep pace with the fitness levels and be drinking like they could 30 years ago. Tbh I would say football now is more about fitness than skill. There are a lot of average payers playing for top clubs with not a lot of ability but are athletes.

eirebhoy

Stekelly wrote:

There are very few if any players as skillfull as pele/maradonna/bst. The difference now is fitness. It's not really fair to compare football to measured sports like track and field, which to a large extent can be thought and trained into. Skill like the 3 names I mentioned and the likes of Ronaldinho, Mesi etc cant be thought, it's natural ability. The more training facilities and techniques improve, the faster and more athletic people get, but natural ability cant be gained from that.

You cant take an average footballler and teach him to run by 6 or 7 players at will. You can take a quick runner and build him up to an extent.

I agree completely. It doesn't change my opinion though.

BaZmO*

Anam wrote:

In my view,the best a player can achieve is to be the best player of their generation,as the game of football evolves and is played in different ways over time.

Very, very true.