Pele

ullu

I was just watching the BBC Match of the Day highlights programme and they revealed the results of their World Cup legends poll. It was no surprise that Pele won with 42% of the vote followed by Maradona with 24%.

I'm curious about the way Pele is regarded. I'll admit I know very little about his playing career apart from the obvious facts and figures and the famous footage everyone has seen countless times. However, I'd say that a lot of people are in the same boat as me. Most people who would have watched him throughout his career would be in their fifties and at a guess, most people who voted in the poll would not have seen Pele in action during his playing career.

Without trying to belittle any of his career achievements, others on the list are more deserving in my opinion. Maradona effectively won the World Cup for his country singlehandedly while Pele was surrounded by phenomenal players in every tournament. Beckenbauer has won the WC as both player (captain) and manager, a unique feat which proves an adeptness in wider aspects of football. While I know nothing about the 1970 Italian team, I think it's safe to say that the 1974 Netherlands team is the best team to lose a WC final and a lot of that was down to Beckenbauer and his leadership. It was all the more impressive given the West German's sluggish start to the tournament.

Outside the WC arena, Pele never played in Europe and therefore (in my opinion) cannot be objectively compared to the greats of his or any era. South American football has historically been far weaker than European football. Brazilian football to this day is not defensively geared and scorelines of 4-2, 5-3 etc are more regular than in any top class European league. This sort of pervasive attitude in the game will generally help a striker's goaltally.

Maradona's effect on the club and city of Napoli single him out as a far more influential individual on and off the pitch. Perhaps Pele had a similar effect in Brazil that is less well known but I doubt it.

Just to reiterate, I am not doubting Pele's skill but I find it odd that he would top a poll so easily and predictably. Most of today's fans will not have seen him in action and even in his prime, this would not have been possible, unless you lived in Sao Paolo and followed Santos every week. And given the more challenging achievements of Maradona and Beckenbauer, surely they deserve more praise.

Opinions?

Trippie

i would agree with you, pele is like aryton senna he always hed the best equipment and the best team around him and therfoe it is hard to judge his raw ability and i do believe in order to judge a player you need to look at him when he is on his own and imo there was nobody better than maradona(but maybe theo walcott might change this) as he single handily won the world cup,seria a, uefa cup and and the european super cup.

maradona has always maintained that he is not regarded in the same group as pele and beckenbauer because he does not wear a suit and speak highly of fifa like the others do.however i think the kaiser is up there with im in sheer presence as he must of been amzing to play along side as he always exuberated confidence somewhat like what cannavaro is doing in this world cup except for 10 years +

Attractive Nun

I have only vague memories of Maradona playing in the 1994 World Cup, or possibly 1990 - I don't remember - and that is the only experience I have of watching any of these players live. (Except for Zidane, obviously) But I do agree with you, and I think there is a natural bias to consider players of a past era 'better' than more recent footballers, for whatever reason. Pele was obviously an amazing player, but I'd assume that a lot of the praise he gets comes from reputation rather than actual analysis. It's probably as difficult to compare people who have only played in South America to players who play in Europe as it is to compare footballers from different eras, so there will never be an answer.

For the record, I think Maradona was the best ever. I mean, Argentina are one of the 'big' WC nations, with Germany, Brazil and Italy probably. Would they have this reputation without Maradona? Everyone can name Brazilian stars of the past (Pele, Jairzinho, Garrincha, Dunga, Zico etc), but other than Maradona, how many genuinley great Argentinian players have there been? Kempes? Di Stefano? Passarella? Is that it? Surely Maradona's is the greatest influence any single player has had over the World Cup.

Chakar

Yeah I agree with the OP I have be wondering about that too.Its a thinker alright there's a lot of factors but Pele was definitely very good, he had great ability compared to others in soccer at that time.Soccer players are judged in the times that they played in for example Zidane is playing in the most competitive game than was in the 1960's and early 1970's.

I think its the times that the players were playing that people judge them mainly with their ability.

p.pete

Always used to wonder what did he contribute other than goals in a good team - then having seen replays of some of Brazil's goals during this wc I've seen/noticed stuff I didn't before. 2 of Brazil's greatest ever goals weren't scored by Pele but he was involved in both, both cases having an insightful pass from the man which then made it incredibly simple for the goal (quality finish or not).

His goal against Sweden in 58 when he was a kid, quality stuff at that age and that level.

Scored more than 1000 goals - that's good in any league and the Brazilian league can be very tough, certainly at the time Pele was playing I'd imagine the league was strong as they were churning out good international teams. The fact that he didn't play in Europe shouldn't matter - South American football was as strong as European and it wasn't the normal case for people to travel. In these days he'd be a legend simply for turning down the money to go to Europe.

AFAIK he did eventually play in the American league so there would have been a chance to compare him with Best and Cryff etc - not sure how that one panned out though...

iregk

Personally I have always thought of Pele as being somewhat over rated and a touch of a myth about him. He scored bags of goals in an era where defending was not really priority. Now thats not to take anything away from the fact that 1000 goals is still an amazing feat, but Romario is also very close to this number so why don't we regard him as the same as Pele?

Pele played in a Brazil team that had so much talent and class about it that it would have made Clinton Morrisson look world class. That said look at his videos and you can not help but notice the man was such a classy finisher! Maradonna on the contrary played pretty much on his own as his team was decidedly average. For me personally Diego is the greatest ever player.

There is the other matter of FIFA and who they want remembered as the greatest ever player. They have long had a smear campaign against Diego due to the drugs and controversy and the fact that he does not stand up and support them, he speaks his mind regarding football matters. Pele on the other hand bows to FIFA, wears the suit, presents himself in a professional manner and is the ideal poster boy for FIFA, for this they promote him a lot more than Diego. Which is a shame and something they have to live with.

p.pete

iregk wrote:

There is the other matter of FIFA and who they want remembered as the greatest ever player. They have long had a smear campaign against Diego due to the drugs and controversy and the fact that he does not stand up and support them, he speaks his mind regarding football matters. Pele on the other hand bows to FIFA, wears the suit, presents himself in a professional manner and is the ideal poster boy for FIFA, for this they promote him a lot more than Diego. Which is a shame and something they have to live with.

Aye, the same question seems to get asked every world cup and they seem to be getting better at coming up with the answer they want - I remember it being more 'realistic' before.

eirebhoy

iregk wrote:

Maradonna on the contrary played pretty much on his own as his team was decidedly average.

I think this is used too often as a reason why Maradona is the better player. Maradona played in a team that was built around him and his teammates just laid it off to him. He wasn't called a greedy git if he ran the length of the pitch on his own without any end product. He failed to perform in a team full of superstars and was shipped out to Napoli at the age of 24. Pele shined in a team full of superstars. He was 1 player in a team of great players and stuck out as the best of the lot.

PHB

In all fairness, Pele didn't make that much money as a player compared to Maradonna, and while Maradonna is financially secure due to his footballing career, Pele still needs to work to make a living. That is why he is involved in FIFA

Dont be at yourself

And viagra!

p.pete

PHB wrote:

In all fairness, Pele didn't make that much money as a player compared to Maradonna, and while Maradonna is financially secure due to his footballing career, Pele still needs to work to make a living. That is why he is involved in FIFA

I'm not convinced that Maradona is secure at all. Both guys can easily make a tidy sum through sponsorship whenever they want but I have the feeling that Maradona has people who'd be waiting for a handout from that tidy-sum as soon as he received it.

I think Pelé likes what he does.

L5

Trippie wrote:

there was nobody better than maradona(but maybe theo walcott might change this)

I hope you are being sarcastic....comparing theo walcott to maradona :rolleyes:

Unearthly

The thing about this, is that the majority of people did not see Pele or Maradona etc play that often cause they were retired or well past their best by the time they started watching football.

I'm of the opinion that you can't judge a player, unless you yourself have seen them play numourous times. Why? You're basically going off other peoples opinions. You could basically say it's googles opinion, who researched the best. What's the point in a forum if you're just going by other peoples opinions?

As for match footage highlights, they will never show Pele, Maradona slicing a pass, shooting over the bar. It's cleverly done so it looks like they're amazing all the time.

Say for example in 30 years time, someone new who started watching football, and lets say for argument sake they never watched full 90 minute games from today, wouldn't they be under the impression Beckham was one of the all time greats? All they would see would be highlights of him scoring amazing goals, and being so famous and people mistaken that for ability.

Hippo

It's usually impossible to compare players from different times and different countries, there are so many variables- where did they play, who were their team mates, even the type of ball they played with! I was around for the latter stages of Pele's career, and I can still remember watching the 1970 world cup. Certainly he played for an extraordinary team, but I do remember how he dominated the world game at the time, and how he was without question the world's best. He could do everything, scored more goals than anyone else, his game had no apparent weaknesses, and he was as hard in the tackle as he had to be. Certainly Beckenbauer was legendary, but as a creative defender and captain, not quite as an all-rounder. Maybe Maradona has the edge, but as I say it's so hard to compare from different times. I do think I can say that had Pele played in the European game he would certainly have been its major figure-just ask any of the Italian team from that 70 world cup final.

Hippo

iregk wrote:

He scored bags of goals in an era where defending was not really priority

By the way, this just isn't true. Defenders used to get away with far more in those days, no one was ever sent off. Pele was frequently kicked from one end of the pitch to the other.

patmac

Judging players from different eras is always subjective. It has a lot to do with television coverage and hype people think Ronaldinho, Henry, Zidane etc are fantastic players because every aspect of their game is now shown on telly. When George Best died there was great footage of him doing tricks and scoring some great goals bearing in mind there was probably only 3-5 matches involving him shown every year, it's the same with Pele we only ever got to see footage of him in the World Cup and prior to 1966 that was very sketchy. In his defence if you ever see footage of the 1970 World Cup 3 images stick out the dummy against Uruguay, the attempted lob as the keeper was saying his prayers and the pass for Carlos Alberto's goal, he doesn't even look up. Also 77,000 showed up for his final game for New York Cosmos it was shown live on television he was carried shoulder high from the field, and when he left despite the presence of some of the world's best players at the time, the league died a death. Pele stayed in Brazil because at the time few players left or were allowed to leave their clubs. Pele, Best, Maradona now if only they had tv coverage of their matches like they do now the stores would be full of their DVD's.

BaZmO*

Well my opinion of this is that as seen as the BBC poll was called "World Cup Legends Poll" it would be fair to say that Pele is the biggest Legend when it comes to the World Cup.

3 entries found for legend.
leg·end ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ljnd)
n.

An unverified story handed down from earlier times, especially one popularly believed to be historical.
A body or collection of such stories.
A romanticized or popularized myth of modern times.
One that inspires legends or achieves legendary fame.

Attractive Nun

^Touché

Jagera

ullu wrote:

... I find it odd that he would top a poll so easily and predictably.

I saw some "greatest sportsperson of all time" show on BBC or some UK channel, from the beginning it was clear Muhammad Ali was going to win.. He's a poll topper.

Don't think I'm degrading his career, but there's been sports people who's comparison to others in their field ranks WAY above the next best person..

I'm not going to list any because I can't be bothered, but the point was Ali won this poll-show but around 80% or some redicilous amount..

I reckon Pele has a similar effect when it comes to football.

LostinBlanch

Don't forget this is a BBC poll. They're still bitter about the Hand of God and will be going on about it for ever.

So there's no way I'd trust an English poll inviting members of the public to vote on the best player ever / world cup legend etc.

I remember seeing one poll it was either on ITV or BBC where they said that Keegan was a better player than Diego!

Who knows, maybe they were right! :rolleyes:

BaZmO*

Yeah, I wouldn't trust English polls. I remember one time they had a poll to see what the best song ever was and the Great British public chose "A Nation Once Again" by the Wolftones!!! Gobsh1tes!!! ...........oh wait, hang on a sec......

Jagera

LostinBlanch wrote:

Don't forget this is a BBC poll.

I should have mentioned the best ever cricketer they picked was Ian Botham.. HAA-HAA!!

Ah yes, the hand-of-god goal... they forget to mention the goal Maradona scored after that!! Probably one of the greatest WC goals ever!

ullu

p.pete wrote:

Scored more than 1000 goals - that's good in any league and the Brazilian league can be very tough, certainly at the time Pele was playing I'd imagine the league was strong as they were churning out good international teams.

I'd have to dispute that the Brazilian league was or is as strong as any of its major European counterparts. Sure, it produced a huge number of immensely talented individuals but defending has never been a priority in the league.

Argentinian teams have won the Copa Libertadores (South American Champions League) twenty times as opposed to Brazil's twelve. This shouldn't be the case if the quality of the Brazilian league was as strong as any European league. Brazil dwarfs Argentina in size, both geographically and in terms of population. This would indicate that the standard of domestic football in the country isn't particularly strong. Of course you have the odd team that could rival anything Europe produces but in terms of overall quality, Brazil has never been on a par with Spain, Italy etc.

The following is from the Wikipedia entry for Pele.

He ended his career with a total of 1,281 goals in 1,363 matches, becoming the highest goalscorer in professional football ever. However, fewer than half of these goals were scored on a professional basis, the rest being scored in the then-amateur Brazilian championship; hence, this record is not recognized by any official body.

I don't think a league can be strong or tough if it's run on an amateur basis.

BaZmO*

ullu wrote:

He ended his career with a total of 1,281 goals in 1,363 matches, becoming the highest goalscorer in professional football ever. However, fewer than half of these goals were scored on a professional basis, the rest being scored in the then-amateur Brazilian championship; hence, this record is not recognized by any official body.

But how many goals did he score relative to games played at a professional level?

ullu

BaZmO* wrote:

But how many goals did he score relative to games played at a professional level?

I've no idea, you should look it up.

He spent his entire career in Brazil bar two years in America at the end so assumedly the Brazilian league became professional while he was playing in it. Still, there wouldn't have been that much of an increase in competition overnight.

Hippo

Whatever about his record in domestic football, his international record was 95 goals in 114 appearances.

patmac

LostinBlanch wrote:

I remember seeing one poll it was either on ITV or BBC where they said that Keegan was a better player than Diego!

It was a program called "You the Jury" which dragged in 12 members of the public as a jury and a debate ensued between 2 teams of 3 pundits who gave arguments for or against certain candidates in that case it was George Best v Kevin Keegan. The result was 11-1 in favour of Keegan something to do with an all England Jury, at when bombs were going of everywhere. Best's reply when told of the result was "Keegan wasn't fit to lace my drinks". The show died a death shortly afterwards.

ullu

Hippo wrote:

Whatever about his record in domestic football, his international record was 95 goals in 114 appearances.

18 of those goals were in "unofficial matches".

http://sport.indiatimes.com/soccerarticleshow/1629037.cms

In any case, here is the list of international goals Pele scored.

http://www.rsssf.com/miscellaneous/pele-intlg.html

Looking at that list, you'll see that a fair number of those games are walkovers against predominantely weaker South American opponents. Two of his hat-tricks were scored against Belgium in Brazil and against Egypt in Alexandria, hardly world class opposition back in the day. Without trying to exaggerate, figures like this remind me of Ali Daei.

Hippo

Actually you're right, he was crap

ullu

Hippo wrote:

Actually you're right, he was crap

Yeah because that's what I said, isn't it?

Maybe if you bothered to actually look into it instead of just reel off one line about his goal scoring record, you'd see that there are reasons players like him have scored far more goals than their European counterparts.

Hippo

ullu wrote:

Yeah because that's what I said, isn't it?

Maybe if you bothered to actually look into it instead of just reel off one line about his goal scoring record, you'd see that there are reasons players like him have scored far more goals than their European counterparts.

And you're now missing my point completely, which was much earlier in the thread, I wasn't just 'reeling off one line about his scoring record'. But enough of this, I don't mean to start a slanging match.

Hippo

Hippo wrote:

I don't mean to start a slanging match.

Er...having started one:)