Girl need info on who's the best ??? [Archive]

View Full Version : Girl need info on who's the best ???

Pages : [1] 2 3

girlneedsinfo

27 Nov 2006, 08:17 PM

Hi Everybody,

I'm looking to learn more when my boyfriend and his buddies are drinking and the girls are stuck in the kitchen I'd love to surprise him with some answers. Don't know a lot in soccer/football such as Off Sides or Yellow Card? I never grew up with sports and my boyfriend has three tv's on all the time in his apartment and I want to impress him with facts. Please Please help me out....

Best Soccer Player?
Best Now?
Fastest Player with the ball?
Fastest Player all time with ball?
Best passer all time?
Best passer right Now.
What team is the fastest?
What team is the strongest?
Best Wing Player? Why?
Best Wing Player All Time?
Best Golie?
Best Golie all time?
Best team overall?

I'd love to know anything crazy of issues going on in sports for table talk or when we go out for a beer. Since I'm a designer and create personalized t-shirts, who has the best, coolest uniform? Why?

Chris

Yañez

27 Nov 2006, 08:50 PM

Lol, all those questions are asked here everyday here and we r still discussing the answers...good luck though

bsas

28 Nov 2006, 06:40 AM

Lol, all those questions are asked here everyday here and we r still discussing the answers...good luck though

Indeed, each question is a big topic. It's not like in Formula 1, where you can easily pick up 2-3 of the best. There are many players who may qualify for each category, and people keep arguing all the time about them.

I think it's nice that you are trying to step down to the level :D of your boyfriend by learning something about soccer. But instead of looking for names, you can probably google some sites explaining the basic rules of the game. And then when he watches a match, you can always ask him relevant questions about it.

And, of course, never say that Beckham is the best... :D

themodelcitizen

28 Nov 2006, 11:06 PM

Best Soccer Player?
Maradona

Best Now?
Ronaldinho

Fastest Player with the ball?
Henry

Fastest Player all time with ball?
maybe Henry? balls a lot lighter these days

Best passer all time?
Not sure, Rui Costa comes to mind for recent memory

Best passer right Now.
Xavi (Barcelona) or Pirlo (AC Milan), also the youngster Fabregas (Arsenal)

What team is the fastest?
Arsenal, Valencia, Roma, Ivory Coast

What team is the strongest?
Bolton

Best Wing Player? Why?
A lot of good young wingers like Robben, Walcott, Christiano Ronaldo, Aaron Lennon... ability to take on a man and beat him on the line is what makes these wingers

Best Wing Player All Time?
Jairzinho

Best Golie?
Gianluigi Buffon

Best Golie all time?
Lev Yashin

Best team overall?
Barca are European champions but have a lot of injuries right now.

For "crazy issues" just go to sites like football365 and goal.com.

Yañez

28 Nov 2006, 11:25 PM

Best Soccer Player? Pele

Best Now? Ronaldinho

Fastest Player with the ball? Henry

Fastest Player all time with ball? Henry cause of wat ^^ he said

Best Passer all time? No Clue

Best Passer Right Now? Ronaldinho , Beckham

Fastest Team? Arsenal, Holland, Liverpool

What Team is the strongest? On Paper...Chelsea and Internazionale

Best Winger? C. Ronaldo, Robben

Best Goalie? Buffon

Best Team Overall? Barcelona FC

Tribune

29 Nov 2006, 05:18 AM

nikolaos1981

02 Dec 2006, 03:12 AM

Just blame the ref,when his favorite team loses!You don't really need to learn anything else.

LosMerengues89

03 Dec 2006, 08:43 AM

Do not believe this guy. While Pele/Maradona is a whole debate (and a very controversial one, I might say) Garrincha is the best winger all-time, Jairzinho does not stand a chance against him.

Agreed 100%.

EDIT:

Best player of all time: Alfredo Di Stefano.

Fulham Fan

04 Dec 2006, 08:22 AM

I'd love to know anything crazy of issues going on in sports for table talk or when we go out for a beer.

Television money is having a huge impact on the sport. Some say players are overpaid and there should be an American-style salary cap (would likely not pass through EU trade law).

There's also the match-fixing scandal in Italy and the question of whether the big teams (really big teams) were adequately punished.

Scheduling is controversial, too. Some say that teams play too many matches in a year and that players are incurring needless injuries.

FIFA (fee-fah), the organization that sets the rules for the sport worldwide, is also always controversial. Ask about Sepp Blatter and people's opinions on him.

sidis

04 Dec 2006, 08:38 AM

LosMerengues89

04 Dec 2006, 09:30 AM

Jairzinho was a centre forward!!!

Best Soccer Player?
Pelé, with large advantagem.
tied in 2nd place: Zico, Maradona, Puskas, Di stefano, cruyff, george best, garrincha.

Best Now?
Ronaldinho, Robinho will be in near future.

Fastest Player with the ball?
Kaka, around 35km/h

Fastest Player all time with ball?
Roberto dinamite, Zico... maybe

Best passer all time?
pele.

Best passer right Now.
Ronaldinho, Zidane.

What team is the fastest?
i don't think we have team fastests, Vasco have some players that be really faster!!!

What team is the strongest?
German teams are more physically, i think.

Best Wing Player? Why?
no one.

Best Wing Player All Time?
garrincha, canhoteiro: excelent pass, score goals, incredible dribbling skills

Best Golie?
cech.

Best Golie all time?
Lev Yashin, the black spider

Best team overall?
Barcelona, in all time: Santos 1960's, brazil 1970's

This is incredibly biased towards Brazil.

Fastest Player with the ball?
Kaka, around 35km/h

35 km/h? Are you f*cking kidding me? Do the calcultions! That's 9.72 metres per second with the ball! So he does the 100m WITH A BALL in about 10.3 seconds? You're not serious! He can't even do it without the ball in that time. The fastest footballers in the world can probably just about manage to do it in 10.3 without a ball! Kaka isn't even an exceptionally fast player!

Best Soccer Player?
Pelé, with large advantagem.

With large 'advantagem'? Perhaps you mean by a large margin? If you do...
NO NO NO NO NO DEFINETLY NOT! Look, you can have your opinion and say that Pele is the best and you can probably make a pretty good argument for it too, but to say that he is better than Maradonna by a large margin is just criminal. Look, you can't really compare players from different generations, so we'll never know really who is better. They were both the best players of their generation, like Di Stefano was in the late 50's.

Best team overall?
Barcelona, in all time: Santos 1960's, brazil 1970's

Barcelona best team of all time?
Real Madrid: 29 League Titles, and 9 European Cups.
Barcelona: 18 Leauge Titles, 2 European Cups.

Best team of all time? They're not even the best Spanish club of all time.
I'm not so sure about Santos 1960's, but Brazil 1970's I think I can agree with. I'd include the Hungarian team of the early 1950's...

Wikipedia:
Together with Zoltán Czibor, Sándor Kocsis, József Bozsik and Nándor Hidegkuti, he (Puskas) formed the nucleus of the legendary team that went unbeaten for an incredible 32 consecutive games. This record still stands today.

LosMerengues89

04 Dec 2006, 09:37 AM

Since I'm a designer and create personalized t-shirts, who has the best, coolest uniform? Why?

BBC has an article about the best and worst kits of all time.

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/photo_galleries/5007904.stm)

I think you won't have a too difficult time figuring out which ones are the best and which ones are the worst. :p

italchacao

04 Dec 2006, 09:46 AM

What team is the strongest?

that one's easy :)
http://www.brandsoftheworld.com/brands/0003/8129/brand.gif

sidis

04 Dec 2006, 10:15 AM

This is incredibly biased towards Brazil.

because soccer is incredibly dominated by Brazil.

35 km/h? Are you f*cking kidding me? Do the calcultions! That's 9.72 metres per second with the ball! So he does the 100m WITH A BALL in about 10.3 seconds? You're not serious! He can't even do it without the ball in that time. The fastest footballers in the world can probably just about manage to do it in 10.3 without a ball! Kaka isn't even an exceptionally fast player!

in brazil goal against argentina in london he reach at 35km/h in sprint with ball. for 2 seconds, the tv Globo do the calculations. (in the final the velocity drop to 26km/h)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S23aEyXrrrs

With large 'advantagem'? Perhaps you mean by a large margin? If you do...
NO NO NO NO NO DEFINETLY NOT! Look, you can have your opinion and say that Pele is the best and you can probably make a pretty good argument for it too, but to say that he is better than Maradonna by a large margin is just criminal. Look, you can't really compare players from different generations, so we'll never know really who is better. They were both the best players of their generation, like Di Stefano was in the late 50's.

Isn't too separated generations, for example some players play against two (paulo cesar caju, for example).
Pele was much more complete player than maradona. pelé play on 4 or more positions, is good with head, play making, scoring, shooting with left.
Maradona play in europe when the hype is bigger and play in a general bad era for soccer, you can pick few great player in the 80's: zico, romário, platini..
pelé play against cruyff, beckembauer, gordon banks, garrincha, didi, tostão, jairzinho, gerd mülller, eusébio, one forward uruguayan that in dont remember the name but was one of top of all time by fifa...
and that kind of genius in field pelé was tree time wolrd champion, 2 time club world champion, 5 time brazil champion (any other team in history could dominate this way brazilian soccer).

we have all the statistics favorable to pelé, then i'm not "criminal" to say that. +). criminal is who say they are leveled =);

Best team of all time? They're not even the best Spanish club of all time.
I'm not so sure about Santos 1960's, but Brazil 1970's I think I can agree with. I'd include the Hungarian team of the early 1950's...

i'm talking barcelona for now, and the others historical.

santos 60's was best brazilian team of all time, i only compare santos 60's with 4 other teams: di stefano's real madrid, vasco da gama 'the express of victory" , 1960's palmeiras (la academia) the unique team in the world to have positive retrospect against santos 60's and the independiente 60's and early 70's and ajax 70's was a great teams too.
off course english teams in the early XX are honorable too.

italchacao

04 Dec 2006, 10:20 AM

Best passer all time?
Best passer right Now.

http://www.tujefetevigila.com/Deportes/coca-maradona.jpg

LosMerengues89

04 Dec 2006, 10:49 AM

Maradona play in europe when the hype is bigger and play in a general bad era for soccer, you can pick few great player in the 80's: zico, romário, platini..

...Paolo Rossi, Falcao, Socrates, Enzo Francescoli...to name a few more...These are all South American Footballers of the Year, Ballon D'or winners or the Golden Ball (World Cup) winners.

Pretty much every team Pele was in was filled with World Class players. A good example would be Brazil 1970, which you yourself named as one of the best teams ever. Now let's look at Maradonna:

Wikipedia
He subsequently went to Serie A and SSC Napoli for another record fee, £6.9m, and became an adored star among the club's fans, as he elevated the team to its most successful era. Napoli won their only Italian Championships (1986/87 and 1989/1990), a Coppa Italia (1987), a UEFA Cup (1989) and an Italian Supercup (1990). Napoli were also runners-up in the Italian Championship twice (1987/88 and 1988/89)

He made a pretty average team into an exceptional one. Would Pele have? I guess we'll never know.

we have all the statistics favorable to pelé, then i'm not "criminal" to say that. +). criminal is who say they are leveled =);

What statistics? Leagues and Cups are won by teams, not individuals. So what can we compare them by then? Goals? But wait, then that would be a little unfair seeing as Maradonna played further back than Pele, in midfield.

Look, I understand that you're Brazillian, and naturally, you'd have a preference for a Brazillian player. That's fine; it makes sense. But saying that Pele is a lot better than Maradonna would be plain wrong. First of all, you're comparing a striker to an attacking midfielder. Second of all, the whole 'Who's better, Pele or Maradonna' debate has been going on for 20 years. Why do you think that is? If Pele was really a lot better than Maradonna, then why is there debate at all?

Here's a little fact for you. When Garrincha and Pele played together, Brazil never lost a match, so you can't say Pele did it alone. What did Maradonna do to Napoli? Look at the quoted bit.

Plus, (do correct me if I'm wrong), didn't Pele play only one match in one of the World Cup's Brazil won due to injury?

sidis

04 Dec 2006, 11:30 AM

...Paolo Rossi, Falcao, Socrates, Enzo Francescoli...to name a few more...These are all South American Footballers of the Year, Ballon D'or winners or the Golden Ball (World Cup) winners.

Sorry but, rossi, falcão and socrates are all great players, but impossible to compare with didi, eusébio, garrincha, beckenbauer, nilton santos... (players in almost all top players of all time).

Pretty much every team Pele was in was filled with World Class players. A good example would be Brazil 1970, which you yourself named as one of the best teams ever. Now let's look at Maradonna:

He made a pretty average team into an exceptional one. Would Pele have? I guess we'll never know.

santos before pelé, was a average team in brazilian soccer, and pelé play against team at least too good than santos overall, botafogo of garrincha, fluminense of didi, "a academia" palmeiras, peñarol, milan...

and in napoli we have a very good players too like: Careca, titular from brazil squad and one of most talented center forwards of his generation (only comparable with romário and van basten), alemão, brazilian DMF,de napoli and others very good players.
the the myth of "maradona play alone in napoli" isn't real. Napoli was a team at least leveled with other serie A teams (but in my opinion they was favorite to win serie A with or without maradona).

What statistics? Leagues and Cups are won by teams, not individuals. So what can we compare them by then? Goals? But wait, then that would be a little unfair seeing as Maradonna played further back than Pele, in midfield.

goals by team in national squad?
by team in championships?
if he is good in assistances as good pele was scoring the two teams will have similar goal average.
but not. santos is the team in the world who more score goals (11k +).
assists? pele is a very good in assistances.

the biggest difference is pelé was a attacking midfielder in 70's. and win the cup.
can you imagine maradona playng a cup in the center forward?

Here's a little fact for you. When Garrincha and Pele played together, Brazil never lost a match, so you can't say Pele did it alone. What did Maradonna do to Napoli? Look at the quoted bit.

Plus, (do correct me if I'm wrong), didn't Pele play only one match in one of the World Cup's Brazil won due to injury?

he play two games, but brazil only classify to round of 8 because win mexico 2x0 with pele in field, in the same year santos be club world champion.

much people say pelé play in a star team, its true, but is more difficult "to shine" in a constelation than solo even being more easy win in a star team.
even playng with garrincha, didi, tostão, rivelino, and others players with great talent of all time he always be considered the best by these players and the world press.

its much more "unfair" put garrincha, didi or leônidas below maradona, for example.
and no one make this comparations because is more simple create a rivalry brazil x argentina than accept that brazil make in his history at least 5-6 players too or more gifted than maradona.

greetings.

Tribune

04 Dec 2006, 11:59 AM

Pretty much every team Pele was in was filled with World Class players. A good example would be Brazil 1970, which you yourself named as one of the best teams ever. Now let's look at Maradonna:

Mate, Maradona was great and so on, but let's not exaggerate and put things into context. Yes, Maradona won that cup with an average team, but he also had the chance of not meeting opponents who were clearly superior to his side. The best teams of that tournament were Brazil and France and Argentina did not play against them.

The infamous WC from 1986 is always brought into this discussion and plays a key role in this debate. The main idea, sometimes bluntly stated, sometimes only suggested, is that Maradona played in an average side and won the WC with them, thus his accomplishment is more valuable than the accomplishment of Pele because Pele played with a much better team.
This starts from the idea that the accomplishments of both players in those WC, 1970 and 1986, are even, so since Maradona did the same with less help, he should have the edge. This is a common misconception which found a place in the legend of those 2 players. Because it starts FROM A COMPLETE INACCURATE BASIS. Point is, the accomplishments of those 2 players are NOT even, meaning that it's not a WC trophy versus another WC trophy.

Maradona won the WC with an average team. Great accomplishment, indeed, but sometimes I feel it's blown out of proportions. I will explain later why.

But what Pele did was merely win a WC ? That is all what the team from 1970 is known for ? Maradona took an average team and made them champions, Pele took an excellent team and made them THE BEST EVER. If people are asked to point out which national team is the best, Brazil 1970 would be the most obvious choice as the champion of the century. One of the main arguments in this issue is that the team from 1970 could have won the WC even without Pele. Maybe, we'll never known. But, without Pele in the team, they would have most likely had a much tougher time in that WC and they would have been just a WC winner among other WC winners.
Brazil of 1970 dominated the competition like no other team EVER did, they simply KILLED them. Out of those six games, there was only one when they scored 1 goal, 2 other with 3 goals and 3 with 4 goals. They won the final 4 - 1 against Italy, reigning european champions, and it could have been 5 - 1 if Pele did not have a goal wrongly disallowed.

The same story in 1958 : if we are going to choose a second team after the one from 1970, the one from 1958 comes into the mind immediately. Could Brasil have won in 1958 without Pele ? Maybe. Would that Brazil team be one of the best ever without Pele ? Nope. When the team settled especially after the games against Soviet Union and Wales (Feola had to make some changes into the team and bring Pele and Garrincha instead of Altafini and Joel), they beat teams like France and Sweden with 5 - 2.

And, btw, unlike some other people, I'm not so sure that Brazil would have won in 1958 and 1970 without Pele. Did they won in 1962 ? Yes, but Garrincha had the tournament of his life, there is no guarantee he could have done it in 1958 as well and in 1970 was no Garrincha. But, much more important, in 1958 and 1970 Brazil met at least one opponent who was superior to everything they encountered in 1962 and was in a great form during that tournament : France in 1958, against which Pele scored a hat-trick, and Italy in 1970, against which Pele scored one goal and created other 2.
And another particularity of Pele's performance in 1970 was that Brazil of 1970 had also the toughest run of all the WC winners. Look at the opposition :

- England : WC holders ;
- Czechs : Euro winners in 1976, former WC finalists in 1962 ;
- Romania : nothing ;
- Peru : Copa America Winners in 1975 ;
- Uruguay : Copa America Winners in 1967 ;
- Italy : Euro champions in 1968.

No other team ever had such a difficult road to the title.

Now, let's return to Maradona. Maradona dominated that WC, but Argentina did not. In fact, two of their victories were on the edge of a sword, against England and West Germany and they had a draw with Italy.
Let's look at the opposition :
- Italy : WC holders ;
- South Korea : no comment ;
- Bulgaria : no comment ;
- Uruguay : copa America winners in 1987 ;
- England : nothing ;
- Belgium : former Euro finalists in 1980 ;
- West Germany : future WC winners.

Ok, Argentina was average. But let's look at the rosters of the other teams in the knock-out stage :

ARG - URU 1:0 (0:0)

ARG: Pumpido - Cuciuffo, Ruggeri, Brown, Garré - Giusti, Batista
(87 Olarticoechea), Burruchaga, Pasculli - Maradona ©, Valdano

URU: Alvez - Gutierrez, Acevedo (61 Paz), Rivero, Santin - Ramos, Bossio,
Barrios ©, Pereyra - Cabrera (46 da Silva), Francescoli

ARG - ENG 2:1 (0:0)

ARG: Pumpido - Cuciuffo, Brown, Ruggeri, Olarticoechea - Batista, Giusti,
Burruchaga (76 Tapia), Enrique - Valdano, Maradona ©

ENG: Shilton © - G.M.Stevens, Butcher, Fenwick, Sansom - Hoddle, Steven
(76 Barnes), Reid (66 Waddle), Hodge - Lineker, Beardsley

ARG - BEL 2 : 0

ARG: Pumpido - Cuciuffo, Ruggeri, Brown, Olarticoechea - Giusti, Enrique,
Batista, Burruchaga (86 Bochini) - Maradona ©, Valdano

BEL: Pfaff - Gerets, Grun, Demol, Renquin (54 Desmet) - Vervoort, Scifo,
Vercauteren, Ceulemans © - Claesen, Veyt

ARG - GER 3:2 (1:0)

ARG: Pumpido - Brown, Cuciuffo, Ruggeri, Olarticoechea - Giusti,
Batista, Maradona ©, Enrique - Burruchaga (89 Trobbiani), Valdano

GER: Schumacher - Jakobs, Berthold, K.-H.Förster, Briegel - Matthäus,
Brehme, Magath (63 D.Hoeness), Eder, K.H.Rummenigge ©, K.K.Allofs (46 Völler)

Now, sure that Argentina looks rubbish if we compare it with Brazil 1970 , but, looking at the rosters of the opposition, does it really looks like a fight between David and Goliath ? Were those 4 teams so much better than Argentina ?

Granted was Maradona was the reason of that success, but many people see only the forest but not the trees. If you look at the details, you get a slightly different picture. Argentina in 1986 had the chance of not facing the best teams of the tournament, which were Brazil and France. If they did, there is a high chance that Maradona's road to glory would have met an abrupt end. After all, that is exactly what happened in 1982 : when they encountered elite opposition, Argentina, even with a better team than the one from 1986, despite Maradona's presence in the squad, was defeated. Even so, their success was not by a great margin, like Brazil did in 1970.

ZeekLTK

04 Dec 2006, 12:29 PM

What team is the strongest?
German teams are more physically, i think.

I can think of a handful of teams more physical than Germany, like Norway for example.

But as much as I'd like to believe we are the most physical, I'd have to say the Czechs can outmuscle us (like they did in WCQ play-offs), and probably anyone else in the world as well. The Czechs are just huge!

Cris 09

04 Dec 2006, 01:31 PM

I can think of a handful of teams more physical than Germany, like Norway for example.

But as much as I'd like to believe we are the most physical, I'd have to say the Czechs can outmuscle us (like they did in WCQ play-offs), and probably anyone else in the world as well. The Czechs are just huge!

OK, just rephrase it then; physical and that gets results...It's Germany!!
2nd place WC 2002
3rd place WC 2006