Another thing to consider besides the role or position on the pitch is the style of play and time in contact with the ball. A player like Maradona keeps the ball a lot and attempts many times to dribble (thinking of the prime Maradona here - late 70s, early and mid 80s - more than the one with over a decade of pro football and hard tackles on him). Another thing we can perhaps consider besides the sheer number of fouls is the level of aggression in them. Both in Spain and in Italy Maradona suffered a particularly fierce treatment from defenders. Heck, even in Argentina it was not so uncommon to see him nicely hacked here and there for what I understand.
That's of 1986-87. But not at the end (which might be the impression), but somewhere halfway. 1490 minutes is about 16.55 games. Did the Maradona fan on soccerpulse mention that too? It was a count when the season was in live action and still developing. There's however a slight problem with the count. Maradona played the full 90 minutes in the first 15 rounds (= 1350 minutes). Then he played 62 minutes in rnd 16 and 85 minutes in rnd 17. That makes actually 1497 minutes; a slight deviation. I know that Maradona suffered 13 fouls a game in 1985-86 and Platini had a season where he suffered 14 fouls per game. Still, it's only Serie A and not overall in Europe. Agree, I mentioned this too. He had regularly an 'aggressive' playing style, in the good sense of the word. That's debatable. At Barcelona someone like Schuster had more touches and time on the ball. Also at Napoli it wasn't always the case (the recent game viewed by me, 1989UC against Juve, is again an example; for ex. Alemao had way more touches and time on the ball). Even the prime example of a team he carried, the 1986WC Argentina team, had two midfield players who had more touches and passes as him on the ball. However, the most fouled players aren't necessarily the ones who see a lot of the ball. See current season: Diamanti, Diego Costa, Balotelli, Valbuena, Neymar, Lewandowski, Hazard etc. ----- Another example of the modern day. Lionel Messi his La Liga rank in fouls per game. 2009-10: 15th in La Liga (Busquets 9th) 2010-11: 35th (Busquets 13th) 2011-12: 15th (again) (Busquets 5th) 2012-13: 13th (Alexis was Barca's #2 at 23th place) 2013-14: 40th (Neymar is 4th) Best player (and best dribbler) is not always the most fouled one - in La Liga. And even then there is a "Messi never dives" armada around the corner, thereby arguing that his actual number becomes diluted by his own on pitch attitude. That he is in reality the most fouled player of all time (cf. Bada Bing). And that's in these days when this statistic is available with a mouse click. Which points at the limitation of the statistic: does it point at the protection a player maybe receives, or the lack of it?
I don't disagree last liga was worse as the defenders particularly from certain teams were demented. But some of the tackles in serie a were equally horrendous. I can't quite recall the name but one of maradonas teammates career was ended at the top level by a tackle against inter Milan. At 3:35 Was the offender sent off? It seems not. I remember reading that that player was pretty much finished by that injury. Also an atrocious two footed high tackle from behind on maradona by an ac Milan player that was worse in my view than foul on him by the butcher in la liga. I can't find it now, I think it was the 86 87 season. There were definite examples too of defenders trying to aggravate his ankle as was just mentioned. A clear example of that was the home match Vs brescia 86 87 At 0:20 his ankle is assassinated. Then later at 2:13 the trick is repeated to force him off for good. In another video there is also another ankle hack from this match
Of course Serie A was no kindergarten. RE the Brescia match: the referee did yellow card three Brescia players for their fouls. Argentesi, Chiodini and Sacchetti all received a yellow card for repeated fouling (Choidini for his foul on Maradona). Bagni of Napoli received a yellow card for protesting (insulting? not entirely clear).
The rule change I was posting about is the foul from behind being an automatic red if done by the last field player and an automatic yellow by anyone else. @Once @PuckVanHeel
Forgot to clarify that this is with the 'minimum appearances' box ticked. That means: the players who played a low amount of games ("Only players with total appearances greater than the average number of appearances in LIGA BBVA are displayed") are not part of this 'ranking'. In 2010-11 the minimum requirement was 19 games, in 2012-13 it was 19 games as well.
I bet he got fouled quite a bit too. Then again, he was not the "loathsome sudaca" that had come in with the label of phenomenon and every one of the many rough as phuk defenders in Spain wanted to put in place... Also, when you quoted me you erased the part I wrote "and attempts many times to dribble". A guy like Xavi has many touches and time on the ball. But a more incisive kind of player, one that would attempt to infiltrate the rival defense more frequently (Iniesta, Messi...) is more exposed to getting fouled and, more importantly, to more violent fouls.
My post - this one: Was in reference to this claim by James: You chanllenged one of his points and I thought another one was disputable too.
that's right and obviously ... Xavi is arguably having the most balls in Barca team and who CARES to foul on Xavi? Neymar was the most fouled for Barca this season because he was tricky with his dribbling and he got very high creativity passes or key passes., #Fouled per game for Barca: Neymar 3, Dani Alves = Iniesta = Busquet 1.8, Alexis 1.7, Messi 1.6 ... and Xavi 0.7 for Real Madrid: CR7 2.1, Isco 1.7, Modric 1.4 Di Maria 1.1 and ............ Bale = Benzama 0.6
FACT was: Pele after the ABUSIVE WC66 controversy, he resigned and sworn NEVER to play for FIFA games ever. Before WC70, FIFA did change the rule, and CBF convinced Pele to return ONE LAST time ========================================== Literally, none of the players (Pele, Cruijff or Maradona as my example) had power to change the LAW, but "somehow" they did influence the decision ... with their image and reputation in football stage
I left it out because I had already signalled the validity of this consideration. In the section above I mentioned "aggressiveness" as factor. In the post on the previous page I used the word "playing style" as fouls-inducing factor. So no need to repeat it again... I did not ignore this. But anyway, nevermind. SirWellingtonSilva, United_xxx, Pipiolo and Once are on a different wavelength. I was surprised to see it was Busquets who is overall in all those seasons the most fouled player. Of course, he is also often involved in all sorts of quarrelling and trickery.
I was too, but I wonder how many of those are harmless fouls probably far from the rival box and how many of those are caused by a launched defender urgently attempting to stop a dangerous action near their goal... This came up when I quoted you... Feel free to explain.
Indeed, that's for a large part why I said that striker, forwards and wingers are the foremost candidates for the 'most fouled player' title. See previous page. Agree with you here... (but Busquets is maybe the type of character to attract a lot of fouls and counter-fouling/quarrelling) https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/...-year-1950-2009.1389516/page-36#post-29810421 See this list too: http://www.whoscored.com/Statistics
And in 1970 he not only played, he also commited more fouls than he received, not counting that elbow he nicely threw into the face of an Uruguayan defender in semis. Go figure... Both your sentences are right (albeit I dont think Pelé was so violently treated as some like to believe after watching the two games he played). What I am not sure about is whether the first one was the reason for the second one.
well ... since I am a coach I can understand why Look at my last stats for "most fouled" of Barca and Real.... like you also notice Xabi Alonso and Busquet got a fair deal of being FOULED (compared to Xavi or Bale in counter as many would "normally expected", right?) The answer is: the game strategy now aday is "pressing play" to: 1- Stop creative players (like Neymar, Diego Costa ...) 2- to DISPOSSESS balls and abuse the CM/DM of opponent (Xabi Alonso, and Busquet) now if a team could do those two things successfully, some of the great players liek Messi, CR7 Xavi Iniesta or Bale or Benzama would automatically neutralized ... That also explain WHY with new tactics, no team would BOTHER to man mark Messi or CR7 - even though their stats goals are great (a few rare occasions like Nesta marking Messi in UCL2012, or Kocsiegny marking out Ibra in UCL10
I could be wrong here but I do believe Van Basten's injury the season before was the catalyst for the new rule. @PuckVanHeel @Once @United_xxx
then you should go watching more liga ... (not only Barca and real OK?) Diego Costa and Koke were the two key players in attacking (scoring and creation) for Aletico and were REASON Aletico become that STRONG now
Diego Costa - 3 assists (53rd in La Liga) Diego Costa - 23.8 passes per match (185th in La Liga) Diego Costa - 75.9% passing success (165th in La Liga) Diego Costa - 1.3 created chances per match (43rd in La Liga) Diego Costa - 1.6 successful dribbles per match (21st in La Liga) Diego Costa - 3.6 times dispossessed per match (2nd in La Liga) Diego Costa - 2.7 turnovers per match (2nd in La Liga) So creative!
Like I said, WATCH games not Whoscored stats ONLY this season, Diego COsta was become the main striker since they sold Falcao with a big price. Guess what Aletico NEVER missed Falcao prolific goals as Diego Costa fullfill that task NO problem. Go back 3,4 years, Diego Costa was alwyas the top dribbler and keypasses for Aletico. They coudl sell ANYONE but Diego Costa ... OK?
I was thinking about this and maybe an underexposed aspect of all of this is how the 1994WC 'unlocked' a new reservoir of fans. Fans with a latino background or have an allegiance to that 'brand' of football (South American/South European). The fan demographic shouldn't be underestimated in forecasting/explaining sports developments, because, like the saying goes: without fans there is no sport. So it is a relevant aspect for the 'balance of power' in football. However, the unlocking of the American continent also unleashed a potential for other parts though; for example 17.1% of the US population is of German ancestry (self reported & self identified), and there are examples of third/fourth generation people following what's happening at home. Whereas that would not happen as much 20 years ago (i.e. third generation following football of ancestor country). What are your thoughts?
WC1994 had two missions: 1- to win the HUGE population (MONEY reservoir) from US market (not everyone know that US football "SuperBALL" was the BIGGEST in term of money yearly - much bigger then UCL of whole Europe! 2- once it's done Football (soccer) would become a monopoly (or ULTIMATE) sport in world sports. The results: 1- the PROS: - - WC94 remarked the MOST participation in WC history ... thanks to US market ... - US national team are getting stronger 2- CONS: - however, after that, soccer is still the 5th most popular in US ... with a few steps climbing higher! - MLS is still a small event in US
2012-13 Diego Costa - 1 dribble per match (5th at Atletico) Diego Costa - 1.2 key passes per match (4th at Atletico) 2011-12 Not at the club 2010-11 Diego Costa - 0.5 dribbles per match (10th at Atletico) Diego Costa - 0.4 key passes per match (18th at Atletico) 2009-10 Not at the club You are hilarious, Jome, you know that? Stick to things you know about.