Can Someone Please Rank These Players In Order.

Sorry duplicate post!
Just to re-iterate that you didn't come across in a bad way but I was just eager to avoid too much of an argument (without just agreeing to relegate Best to the bottom of the list ;-))

Sorry James, I didn't mean to offend you.

For you, I will be more precise with my statement:

At the end of 1968 the premier sport publication held a survey among all major sport journalists from various newspapers, in Holland and Belgium together.

Five questions stood out:

Is Best [currently] the best player in the world?
11 out of 13 said yes.

Is anyone close to him?
9 out of 13 said no.

Is he inherently better than Cruijff?
6 out of 13 said yes. Among them three Dutch publications as well.

Is he right now a better player than Pelé ever was?
7 out of 13 said yes.

Is he a more all-round than Pelé ever was?
10 out of 13 said yes.


I hope this clarifies.

OK, thanks. I briefly searched for a nice and recent Xavi, Iniesta vid and this seemed to me a very good one:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFGpQo4CZF8"]Xavi and Iniesta 2011-2012 Mid-Season Review by ElAlonso - YouTube[/ame]

yonko, Best is usually considered top ten, at worst top fifteen, in most all-time lists...and usually placed higher than Zico, Zidane, Ronaldo, and way higher than Ronaldinho . Only Puskas from your list is more frequently ranked above him than below.

You must not rate Best too high then, but the consensus (in lieu of truth) is Best is top dozen or so of all-time. As for wingers, he is top three along with Puskas and Garrincha in a position created for the "loons": facing the rival on one side, and the tougher chalkline on the other.

Ok, at this point I wont even talk about making a case for Messi. I will talk about the other players.

Who considers Best as Top 10, at worst Top 15? Anyone who rates Best higher than the likes of Zico, Zidane and Ronaldo (R9), should not call himself a "football expert"!

No, I do not rate Best very highly or as highly as apparently some of you here do. I even rate Ronaldinho and Gerd Muller higher than him. George Best wasn't even the best player on his team, except for one year - 1968. Denis Law and Bobby Charlton were better players than him IMO.

And Puskas was a winger? I don't think so......as far as wingers, what about Gento, Czibor and Blokhin?

All-time players better than Best (in no particular order):

Maradona, Pele, Cruyff, Di Stefano, Beckenbauer, Platini, Ronaldo, Zico, Zidane, Eusebio, Garrincha, Muller, Bobby Charlton, Puskas, Ronaldinho, Romario, Van Basten, Jairzinho, Ronaldinho and.....Messi.

That is 20 players and as you can see they are all attacking players, except for Beckenbauer. In an all-time list there could easily be placed a couple of defensive players (take your pick: Scirea, Maldini, Baresi, Pasarella, Neeskens, Matthaus) and maybe even a GK (again, take your pick: Yashin, Maier, Zoff, Banks.

Puck, not at all ...
I had never doubted your words (about Best), but it's just depending on how you think/interpret the term "many" or "some" like I used.

For me a Stats pundit (LOL j/k) 5 x ocasions with only 13 samples (65) is quite so tiny number for a survey to consider "reasonable" or "successful"

A good survey usually consists of at last 500 samples = even we disregard geographic, races and time ... out of the context. I hope I am clear with my point as well...

==================================

This is a bit off ;;; look at the last survey I can't stop laughing ...

Pele was the most or at least among the most all rounded player in history (along with Di Stefano, Cruijff) = Those 10 did not watch or know Pele.

Pele >> Best in defense for example. He could even do GK LOL ... Besides, some obvious fields that Pele > Best (shooting long short, freekick, passing short, positioning, vision, reading games and leadership) ... I can NOT name any thing Best could do better than Pele!! I think many would say "dribble" but I am not so sure.... or probably just that one!

For an exact percentage it is not an sufficient amount, agree. But roughly it is a measurement, at least from this cultural point of view. It is safe to say that a considerable section of the population who followed football closely, rated Best very high.

James, I already admitted that there is a cultural bias. See the sentence "ecause over here the English league was quite closely followed".

Pelé himself often says that he played goalkeeper in some matches, but is there a record available? Of Di Stefano I know that he played for 20 minutes as goalkeeper against Boca Juniors and did not concede a goal.

Yes he did in some games (professional level), when the GK was sent off and no other substitute allowed at that time ... Pele changed his shirt and played as GK for the rest of the games ... he did not concede any goals.

Pele was among the "pure footballer" not "pro-footballer like present - money, and he was willing to play anywhere (DF to GK) just to be on the field especially in friendlies against lower quality teams ...

I have to find the the link ... which I knew was lost ... for years

Id say in this match i was very impressed with his dribbling ability and technical ability. Clearly a very balletic player who was very pleasing to watch, so id imagine many critics who watched him first hand might overlook his careers flaws when writing an all time list. His defending is surprisingly good, and some of his passing was exceptional.

On the other hand he was a bit careless and even wasteful occassionally. But overall very impressive

His opponent Eusebio was also a very good one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=pNcA7FzXZNo#t=5691s

And this is unbelievable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=pNcA7FzXZNo#t=4920s

["Puck", when you say "striker" here, you mean an "out-&-out"-type or a "spearhead" striker, correct?]

I mean both but I think that Raul was more an "out&out type" than "spearhead type" when deployed as most advanced man.

[I was essentially combining the two terms for the purpose(s) of my post. If you want to be more precise: an "out-&-out"-type "ST" = a "predator" striker AND a "spearhead" striker is simply a central forward that usually maintains the most advanced position in a given formation/attacking system.

I just wanted to clarify what you were saying because originally in English/British football lingo a "striker" = any central forward. As in, "England are taking five strikers in their WC squad-"...]

Check Fifa Classic 11 they do it for you

[Best and Law are VERY difficult to rank head-to-head because they were almost diametrically opposed types of attacking players IMHO: Best was a ball-mover/crosser/"set-up man" whose job on the pitch was to get the ball to goal-scorer Law to stick it in the opposition's net.

Best and Charlton are easier to compare (again IMO) because both were ball-mover meets creative players and both played out wide fairly frequently over the course of their respective playing careers...]

Agree there with Best and Charlton. For me Best was the BEST ever that UK could have produced. Charlton in other hand was like the best of Scholes + Gerard combined - skillful in attack + versatile

I just don't rate Best that highly, I'm sorry if that offends someone. I'm not saying he was a bad player, but I think there are at least 20 all-time great players better than him.

[I take it that you don't exactly have much experience w/seeing "Sir Bobby" in action from around '58-'65, mate? ]

[We're all entitled to our own opinions...]

Nice post.

According to me Maradona is the best of all time.

Maradona
Pele
Zidane
Puskas
Beckenbaur
Cruyff
Messi
Ronaldinho
Zico
Platini
Ronaldo
Romario
George Best
Neymar (Under Best Talent)

Besides football on spare times I do Scrapebooking supplies work

So what your take on that ? or how you describe him? I only saw some Video of his games in WC66 and very few with ManU like Eurocup 68 ... Hey Iam npot that old ,...

[The best way to start this off is just to show you IMO. This is Charlton lining-up as a goal-scoring "No.10" ("W-M"-speak) for Utd. v. Fulham at Highbury for an FA Cup semi-final replay in March of '58 (shortly after the "MAD"). I'll try and find more footage of Charlton in action during this part of his playing career and post it so that you can get an even better idea of how gifted that he really was:






This is a good retrospective on both the 1st semi-final and the replay (along w/a contemporary match report by Frank McGhee of "The Daily Mirror") from a United fansite:



http://www.trulyreds.com/20100822/flashback-a-1958-man-united-v-fulham-classic/



Once again, I hope that you will find this information helpful...]

I disagree. I will rate Pele first and then Maradona. Then is a toss up between Cruyff and Ronaldo. Cruyff´s only drawback against Ronaldo was his inability to win the world cup. Messi is great but still has to prove himself by winning a world cup with Argentina. In fact, I see Neymar or even Luis Suarez and Cavani winning the world cup before Messi does.