'Messi scores all his goals because of Xavi and Iniesta making sick assists...'

Havelange had nothing to do with Brazil's wins during the Pele/Garrincha era. As a lifelong Argentina fan, I watched the videotapes of Brazil's games during that period hoping that it was overinflated hype and favoritism from the system that made them so successful. I came out an undisputed fan...they were the biggest and baddest in a time of many great NTs. What can you do?

Similar to mine. I rank Maradona, Moreno, DiStefano, Pedernera, Messi and Sivori (in that order) as the top six in Argentine football.

 

Respectful manner? Not for you as someone who uses moot points to argue.

Yes, you've explained your position....from which you show that you do not understand. Again, you mention the population of countries as some sort of factor why defenses play poorly or well. WTF does that have to do with the subject?

It doesn't matter how big is the population, it doesn't matter if the defenders are top class or not. The only think that matters is how they perform at the WC. In 1974 Holland's defenders performed very good, regardless if they were not the first choice defenders. And there were no guarantees that the first choice defenders would've performed as well or even better than those who did play in their place. In 2010 Argentina's defenders performed poorly, especially vs Germany and it was well know fact that their defense was their weakness and might fail them at the tournament.

Top class and first choice defenders may perform badly at WCs just as average and second choice defenders may perform above their level and impress at WCs. Their performances, bad or good, also depend on the coaching, management and overall organization.

Do you get it now? And do not take that question as an insult. I just want to make sure you understand what I'm trying to say.

BTW, when Messi plays for Argentina, he doesn't just play without Xavi and Iniesta. He also plays without Puyol, Pique, Alves, Abidal, Busquets, Pedro and the rest of the Barcelona squad......if you get my point. Pedro and Alves contribute more assists to Messi than Xavi and Iniesta. And before you say that those two make Barcelona play the way they do, I will tell you that Barca's play is based on a trio of players - Xavi, Iniesta AND Messi. Come to think of it, we can also include Busquets and Alves as key players to the way Barca plays.

This is how you start a response to Pipiolo. Is this "respectful manner" calling someone a troll?

 

y.o.n.k.o.,

I did not disagree with your opinion that their defense was bad. That is 100% correct. They had good defenders (I'd say better than Haan-Rijsbergen in 1974) but underperformed.

I did not disagree with it.

I also think it is a viable excuse for Argentina failing to reach the last stages. Of course Messi cannot be blamed for defensive mistakes. Only idiots do.
Argentina was by the way helped in their match against Mexico although they won deservedly.

But,

I said: history shows it is perfectly possible to perform individually well as creative player without a good defense. Davor Suker in 1998, Zico in 1982 or Cruijff in 1974 are good examples.

So while the defense was a good reason for Argentina breaking down, it is a less good reason for Messi under-performing.

Another option, around which you can build an argument, is that the defense is also key for the creative aspect. So the defense let Messi down in the build-up play of the attacks.
If that is the case, you can have a plausible point.

 

You are aware about the relative scarcity of material featuring a prime Pelé?

And another thing:

You pointed at the head-to-head of Germany versus Brazil. Do you know what the head-to-head is of Argentina versus Germany? And the head-to-head of Argentina versus Holland?

 

I'm not saying I totally agree with you, but it does seem a bit backwards that hockey awards the secondary assist and soccer does not (in fact hockey counts the secondary assist as much as a goal, which is really dumb). I mean, most goals in hockey the second assist man did f&*k all, but in soccer the build-up play is generally longer and often involves 3 or more players.

 

the only signifant game was in olympics 1952, no fifa game .... a german team won 4:2 against a team of brasil....

 

First thanks for the article of Stefano vs Moreno

I second that Moreno was mostly regarded as best argentina player ... until El Diego won WC86!

 

I once read a story that Moreno liked to eat raw chickens ( ? ) but I'm curious about his technical level compared with Pedernera and the general skillset.

 

The WC footage is there for us to watch Pele and Garrincha.

Not just head to head, but Brazil is stronger overall than Germany. My point, before this goes off the rails, is that Schiaffino's Uruguay beat the biggest NT in football, while Cruyff's Netherlands lost against one of the top four.

Yes, Maradona's win in WC86 placed him almost immediately in top five of all-time discussion. His subsequent years at Napoli (winning two titles and the double) and the run to the final with Argentina in WC90, further upped him to greatest of all time (or top two with Pele).

 

Your point is incorrect and post-hoc reasoning, that is: because Brazil won 5 WCs afterwards you think they were great in 1950 too.

Yes, they were. Brazil was 4th in the ELO rating in May 1950.

Germany was 2nd in May 1974, despite their losses against Argentina and Brazil in the year leading up to the World Cup.

 

It;s just hard to differentiate them as they were both great "inside forward" -(before di Stefano get fully developed) = I admit I lacked of their footages

I think ... Moreno was a "better goal scorer" (timing, positioning and shooting) than Pedernera (?) any one?

 

As on topic remark. According to this source Iniesta is on average equally highly rated as Messi.

http://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2012/04/average-ratings-barcelona-201112.html
http://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2012/03/average-ratings-barcelona-201112.html


The excellent source, Estel once posted it, has many more ratings (Maradona, Cruyff and so on).

I always remark as counter-balance that defensive minded players possess imo an advantage but Iniesta is of course not a defender or defensive midfielder.

 

All that says is that Iniesta has usually been rated way fewer times than Messi. Of course if fewer people rate it's going to be higher ave. since the amount of people involved is fewer. It's simple math. More people rated Messi both years, the averages are different and that link is irrelevant unless both were rated by the same amount of people.

That link means nothing and nobody who actually watches Barcelona play would in their right mind say Iniesta was better than Messi those two seasons.

 

Good, that is all I wanted you to respond so I know you understand what I was trying to say.

Not necessarily. Croatia's defense play well in 1998 so did Holland's defense in 1974. Brazil's defense in 1982 was bad perhaps in the defending phase, but they had good fullback who contributed to the build-up and the creative side. Plus look at who surrounded Zico in midfield - Falcao, Eder and Socrates.

The thing is that it wasn't just the defense being bad. The whole organization of the team was messed up, which exposed the defense as bad. Look at how Argentina was set up against Germany in the quarter-final. They played 4 at the back, one DM, two wide midfielders/winger, one AM (Messi) and 2 strikers - in other words a wide diamond 4-4-2. Meanwhile Germany played 4-2-3-1. This meant that Messi was always surrounded by 2 German DMs. Still, he was the only Argentinian who tried to do something in that game. In the other games Messi played well as AM, yes still not as impressive as for Barca. But he was given a different role in different team organization with different teammates.

Of course that can also be taken into consideration and I'm glad you bring it up. Compare how Barca's defense helps in the build-up, not just for Messi, but also for Xavi and Iniesta. The latter two enjoy the same luxury when playing for Spain, as the play of Ramos, Pique, Puyol and Capdevilla is very similar to Barca's. Plus Spain has excellent passers with Xabi Alonso and Busquets, which allows Xavi to play higher up the field and Iniesta to play in wide positions more effectively.

Argentina doesn't have defenders who can play like Alves or Ramos do in the fullback positions. They do not have ball-playing defenders like Pique and Puyol. Ok, they have Mascherano. But look at how he plays for Barca and how he plays for Argentina. There is a difference, right?

So when Messi plays for Argentina is not like he misses Xavi and Iniesta. It is more than that. Strangely, Argentina plays pretty well in friendly matches. Everyone seems focused and composed, they move the ball nicely, etc. But come important matches and tournaments, everyone seems so tense and psychologically burdened. It seems the pressure gets to everyone, including Messi. And they all know that. This is where the role of the coach is important as a motivator and someone who can calm the players and put them in the right frame of mind.....in addition to the get the tactics and players' roles right.

 

I get the feeling that most people who pass judgement on Barca, Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, etc., do so without watching the team play frequently. Instead of looking at stats and a few highlights, people should watch Barca play more frequently in addition to the high-profile CL or Real M game, before they post opinions.

Perhaps you feel the same way I do. But majority of Barca fans (who watch the team play every game) actually think that the team is too dependent on Messi - his goals, assists and overall creative play. This is especially true when injuries or bad form hamper some of the other players (for example, like this season with Villa and Pedro). This season is the first season, when Guardiola has almost equal replacements for Xavi and Iniesta curtesy of Thiago and Fabregas. But there is no replacement for Messi!

 

According to Nilton Santos – who was in the stands - Brazil was very nervous and afraid heading into that final. They felt that the pressure of the home-crowd played against them. In other words, despite being very talented, they lacked the intestinal-fortitude that separates the boys from the men; Uruguay on the other hand, had machos on their squad.

Some made that claim by as early as 1980.

The Spanish newspaper “El Mundo” published an article in December of 1980 stating that a vote amongst experts classified him as one of the top-5 in Argentinean history. He was compared to Sastre, Moreno, Pedernera and Di Stefano. But many went even further by comparing him to Pele. The British publication of “Soccer” in the same year hailed him as one of the greatest aces in the history and the successor to the throne of Pele and Cruyff. In South America, he was without any doubt hailed as the best – voted in ’79 and ’80 as the “king of Las Americas”.

In 1979, Kubala said he was the finest youngster in the world.

Enzo Bearzot hailed him as the future and the player destined to be the "man" of the '80s.

Menotti considered him the “white Pele”.

In August of 1980, the Spanish newspaper "El Pais" mentioned how he was viewed by many as the best in the world: http://elpais.com/diario/1980/08/09/deportes/334620008_850215.html
(Those that can’t read Spanish, can Google the translation).

Newspapers in South America such as “El Tiempo” cataloged him as the successor to Pele.

Pele himself by 1981 said that Maradona was amongst the best and that no one in Europe could reach his potential. Some people went even further by stating that he was already the ‘new king’ in football, such as Graham Nicles, in his column of “Football”.

All of this hype made him the center of attention entering WC82 and it was understandable why the press widely regarded him as the finest in the world.

However, none of this pressure did well for him -- and he himself threatened to retire in 1980 -- because he was tired of the critics that castigated him whenever he had a subpar game. For them, he had to be perfect in every game. Ultimately, the pressure was too much, and his involvement with recreational drugs would lead to his downfall.

Nevertheless, as you pointed out, many would argue that after WC86 the inevitable comparisons were justified.

You are welcome.

What occurred was neither Moreno nor Pedernera were ever in a position to be able to showcase their skills like Pele, simply because they were from another era that was less privileged than the epoch of the Brazilian.

The two Argentines commenced their careers when World War 2 was just four years away. WC38 was out of the question because the Argentinean federation decided not to send the NT to participate because they felt the WC should have been held in Argentina and not in France; then there was no World Cups in ’42 and ’46 due to the war. In WC50 Argentina’s federation again intervened, and never sent any team because they were at war with the Brazilian football federation, and in 1954 they decided they were not ready to send a competitive NT so they withdrew. By 1958, the two players had already retired.

Moving to Europe was also out of the question for mostly any player in the late '30s and throughout the '40s -- not only because the ‘old continent’ was in ruins because of civil wars (Spain) and the “world at war” but because players rarely moved abroad to play outside of their continent.

Had Pele kicked-off his career in the middle of the 1930s, he would never have played in four World Cups. He would never have obtained the media exposure that his generation benefited from: World Cups 1958 and 1966 were filmed and hosted in Europe; WC 1970 was broadcasted in color, and his decision to go to NY and play for the Cosmos was not only a smart financial move but it also enhanced his image around the globe with contracts with sponsorships; and he even did a movie. On top of that, he loved the spotlight, and always wanted the world to hear him, something that he does to this very day.

But in sharp contrast, this was the direct opposite to what the two Argentine players went through.

Second: Di Stefano moved to Europe when Moreno and Pedernera were at the end of their careers, and any move abroad was an unlikely scenario by then. Had the “blond arrow” started his career at the same stage as the others, he also would have not gone to Europe.

So again, the difference of eras and decisions that were made fell into the advantage of Di Stefano as well. We must remember: he became number one in the world in Europe, not in South America. The same applies to Sivori.

The guy was considered a crazy dude. His teammates called him the “fanfa” – a term used in Argentina for someone that’s full of himself and likes to talk smack.

In regards to the question of the difference of the two: I’ll get back to you once I go over my sources.

 

Thats the way barcelona are set up though? to depend on messi as much as possible, ie give him a role where he can get the ball as much as possible so almost all attacks go through him. If it is a concern that you are too dependent on him give him a set role rather than him doing several jobs and increase the responsibility of other players going forward. Even when villa is fit he was unhappy that he couldnt play how he wants because of messi

 

That is interesting.

I read about newspapers announcing the world title before the game was played, about people celebrating on the streets before the game took place and so on.

Still, I think Pipioli wrongly assumes that Brazil was in 1950 the same nation as it is now. Their fourth place in the elo ranking hint to it.

Brazil was by the way number 1 in May 1974.


Another question.


You said that a British publication hailed Maradona as one of the greatest. Do you own that publication by yourself?


It is funny because in a press conference on the Mundialito in 1981 Maradona said "Pele and Di Stefano were good players, but Maradona will be better."

The Dutch reporters could only laugh.

 

On that issue, I went to a presentation a few years back hosted by the Brazilian embassy for the screening of a long documentary film on Pele that included tons of highlights from his club career that I've never seen anywhere else. Not sure what the name of the film was (might be called Pele Forever which came out around that time) but I'd suggest that anyone interested in seeing how great Pele really was (beyond the widely available World Cup footage) find and watch this film. All too often I've see people try to compare Pele to players that most people have seen much more film on or seen live without having seen any of his club career in Brazil.

 

Let me just add that the Austrian "Kicker" correspodent wrote in his weekly column after the Austria-Argentina friendly in 1980 (3-5) that he "saw Maradona do things he had never seen anybody do including Pelé". That correspondent looked like roughly 65 years old back in 1980 judging from the picture next to his column, so he probably saw quite a number of football greats up to that point.

 

Yes, that game is very famous for football fans from the former Yugoslavia. A famous Yugoslavian reporter at that time was sent to Austria to write a short overview about that friendly between the hosts and Argentina. He had only 22 lines in disposition though. He described the match with the word ''terrific'' and he could write ''an entire book on the match and Maradona's performance''. The title of the report was ''Diego, are you The Little Green?'' - green=an alien, extraterrestrial. That match was a chance for the public to become more familiar with the young talent of Diego.

In 1982, in the second stage of the Cup Winners Cup Barcelona played against Red Star Belgrade in the Serbian capital. Maradona played extremely well and inpressed all the country with a perfect chip shot. After the match the same reporter wrote a more detailed article titled ''Diego, you are really The Little Green!''.

PS: From my sources, that game was played in Wien and finished 5-1 for Argentina, with a young Maradona scoring a hat-trick. One of the greatest Diego's performance that year.

 

Yes, it was 5-1 to Argentina, not 5-3.

The "veteran" Austrian columnist wrote something like this: "so the new South American wonderboy visited Vienna for the first time and we all have heard a lot about him and indeed I have to say I have never seen a player do things like he did in that game, including Pelé" (along those lines).