[Gregoriak]

Originally Posted by comme

The sad thing about this thread is that KingKong's bravado actually detracts from Pele's greatness. Nobody disputes how good Pele was, there is no need to make false or misleading claims to hype him even more.

Yes indeed. I would understand it if 'the Müller camp' was arguing that Müller was on the same level or even better than Pelé because he scored more goals than Pelé did.

But even those arguing for Müller repeatedly stated that Pelé is of course the greatest player ever. Nobody in their right mind would argue that Müller is comparable to Pelé.

Yet still he goes on discrediting Müller's goals total left and right ... weird.

[kingkong1]

Originally Posted by Gregoriak

Yes indeed. I would understand it if

'the Müller camp' was arguing that Müller was on the same level or

even better than Pelé because he scored more goals than Pelé did.

But even those arguing for Müller repeatedly stated that Pelé is

of course the greatest player ever. Nobody in their right mind

would argue that Müller is comparable to Pelé.

Yet still he goes on discrediting Müller's goals total left and right ... weird.

While Gregoriak keeps going with his Gregorian chants (pardon, posts), I prepared a couple of questions to him.

1. Why you never get scandalized in BS Forum when people dismiss Pelé's frindlies' goals under the most absurd premises?...

Without producing a single rational argument?...

2. Who in this thread said that 'Pelé is better than anyone because was the only that scored 1000 + goals' (in spite of that being an essential part of the truth)?...

3. What 'morale' has Gregoriak to say that I 'dismiss' anybody's deeds, when he with the cleanest face dismisses Garrincha's epic performances in 1962 as one of the top 5 in the history of the WC's?...

Originally Posted by Gregoriak

Personally, I struggle to see why Garrincha 1962 seems to be set in stone as a Top 5 World Cup individual performance.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showp...&postcount=105

And worse, by using 'un-truisms' in order to justify his assertives, like:

Two games in which he excelled is already enough for an apparently immovable Top 5 performance?

When nine among ten Hollywood stars know it's NOT true that he excelled in 'just' two games in 62!...

And that Djalma Santos earned the best right-back award in 1958 having played just the final! lol ...

And that's an almost unanimous expert's opinion, Greg! ...

But the great Greg is mad: mad because today he asked me to show where in FIFA site it was said that 1000 + goals were a Pelé's prerrogative and...I showed.

[Gregoriak]

I fail to see what my opinion on Garrincha ’62 has to do with the debate going on in this thread?

What makes discussion boards interesting is that many people from all over the world can express a multitude of differing opinions. If all had shared the same opinions, the discussion part of the internet would be pretty boring. So in this post you dug out, you will see a member of a discussion board expressing a different opinion than the consensus opinion. If you think my ‘reputation’ on this discussion board is now in danger of going downhill, then so be it. If you wish, you may go ahead digging out even more ‘debatable’ posts of mine and post them in this thread. The thing is, I wouldn’t really mind if my reputation would sink due to your investigations, as I’m not too concerned with my login name’s ‘reputation’ on an internet message board actually. Just to get this out of the way.

What bothers me a little though is that instead of addressing the point I made above in which I explain why Pele’s 1,000+ goals are more publicized than Müller’s 1,000+ goals, you’re digging out posts that add nothing to the discussion in this thread.

And: who handed out a 'best right back' award to D.Santos in 1958? As far as I know, FIFA did not nominate 'best players' awards in those days.

[JamesBH11]

Originally Posted by Gregoriak

I fail to see what my opinion on Garrincha ’62 has to do with the debate going on in this thread?

What makes discussion boards interesting is that many people from all over the world can express a multitude of differing opinions. If all had shared the same opinions, the discussion part of the internet would be pretty boring. So in this post you dug out, you will see a member of a discussion board expressing a different opinion than the consensus opinion. If you think my ‘reputation’ on this discussion board is now in danger of going downhill, then so be it. If you wish, you may go ahead digging out even more ‘debatable’ posts of mine and post them in this thread. The thing is, I wouldn’t really mind if my reputation would sink due to your investigations, as I’m not too concerned with my login name’s ‘reputation’ on an internet message board actually. Just to get this out of the way.

What bothers me a little though is that instead of addressing the point I made above in which I explain why Pele’s 1,000+ goals are more publicized than Müller’s 1,000+ goals, you’re digging out posts that add nothing to the discussion in this thread.

And: who handed out a 'best right back' award to D.Santos in 1958? As far as I know, FIFA did not nominate 'best players' awards in those days.

I totally agree with Greg's point of view there - bold

I think it's a matter of "OPINION" and "INTERPRETATION"

- Opinion:
While I agree witth Kingkong1 that Garrincha should be in TOP5 best WC performers of ALL TIME, but Greg's has his own view! and it's OK if he could justify his "taste' in watching and rating

- Interpretation:
Again, I would agree that Pele's 1000goals record is well deserved (because of his OBVIOUS talent and performance in big games, against big teams from friendly to pros, but I would not fully buy in WHY (only him) as there is no "official analysis" about that - including Kingkong's "interpretation".

- WC awards:
Greg is right here, there was no awards existed in early days, except the "goldenboot" (top scorer in number of goals). By end of 1999, before new century begins, FIFA established a list of "justifying" who were the best players (golden ball, Silver, bronze) for each WC prior to WC90.

- Here WC58:
Didi was "honourly conceived" as the MVP- which he was well deserved! (however, in reality, many in the old days would FAVOURIZE Pele as the ONE to watch of the WC or the "best" there per se - like Kingkong1 mentioned.
At same event (FIFA commitee voting), D.Santos was worldwidely accepted as "best RB" ever in football history - not only at those 2 WC he played in!

[JamesBH11]

I totally agree with Greg's point of view there - bold

I think it's a matter of "OPINION" and "INTERPRETATION"

- Opinion:
While I agree witth Kingkong1 that Garrincha should be in TOP5 best WC performers of ALL TIME, but Greg's has his own view! and it's OK if he could justify his "taste' in watching and rating

- Interpretation:
Again, I would agree that Pele's 1000goals record is well deserved (because of his OBVIOUS talent and performance in big games, against big teams from friendly to pros, but I would not fully buy in WHY (only him) as there is no "official analysis" about that - including Kingkong's "interpretation".

- WC awards:
Greg is right here, there was no awards existed in early days, except the "goldenboot" (top scorer in number of goals). By end of 1999, before new century begins, FIFA established a list of "justifying" who were the best players (golden ball, Silver, bronze) for each WC prior to WC90.

- Here WC58:
Didi was "honourly conceived" as the MVP- which he was well deserved! (however, in reality, many in the old days would FAVOURIZE Pele as the ONE to watch of the WC or the "best" there per se - like Kingkong1 mentioned.
At same event (FIFA commitee voting), D.Santos was worldwidely accepted as "best RB" ever in football history - not only at those 2 WC he played in!

[kingkong1]

Originally Posted by Gregoriak

I fail to see what my opinion on Garrincha ’62 has to do with the debate going on in this thread

What in reality you fail to see is that there is an evident paralellism in the attempt of downgrading not only Pelé stats & Garrincha deeds but also of other Brazilian giants and that that's a general trend among Europeans in their desperate gymnastics to fill in the 'blanks' when it comes down to fit their superstars among the 'greatest ever' lists.

"No, Pelé's 1000 + goals is 'media hype' because half of them were friendlies & if we are to count goals in friendlies others will have scored even more than him".

'Forgetting' that there are friendlies & 'friendlies' as it became quite evident in this thread.

Or:

"Garrincha played in a time of slow football & he was very quick, so..."

'Forgetting' that every epoch, every era has its 'tempo', which ends up being the 'same' as far as you analyze them in their relativeness.

Especially when they see that there ain't just Pelé, Garrincha & Di Stéfano but also Carlos Alberto, Djalma Santos, Domingos da Guia, Nilton Santos, Didi, Zizinho, Gérson, Sastre, Moreno, Pedernera, Maradona, Leônidas, Zico, Romário, Ronaldo, with seats practically captive in any 'All-Time XI' or 'All-Time XXII', with a few seats that rest in the first rank to be filled in by Yashin, Banks, Beckenbauer, Matthews, Puskas, Kócsis, Cruyjff, Moore, Charlton, Best, Eusébio, Platini, Maldini.

And some of them suddenly see - & unfortunately a football team counts only with 11 players - that will have to content themselves as subs in a more than honorable 'All-Time XXII or XXXIII'.

It's remarkable to see though how legends like Moreno, Leônidas, Domingos da Guia, Zizinho, Sastre, Didi, Djalma & Nilton Santos & even Garrincha are seen as 'nobodies' - true museum pieces in the lists of the 'greatest of all times' contrived by European experts.

In a famous one they were able to contrive a final list of greats without a single Brazilian in the midfield (!) ignoring a Zizinho, a Didi, a Gérson & pushing Pelé & Maradona to the 'strikers' zone so that they could fit Platini there with Cruyjff & the 'spanish' Di Stéfano.

The midfield of course - the 'brain' of a team - had to be all-European.

The defense would have Yashin as goalie, Beckenbauer as a 'libero', Maldini as LB, Moore as CB, with the RB spot being 'gently' conceded to Carlos Alberto or Djalma Santos.

With the' masters' of the midfield 'preparing' all the brilliant plays for the 'errand boys' - Garrincha, Pelé & Maradona - to do what everybody expects from them: running up front like hares in order to score half-gifted goals.

What bothers me a little though is that instead of addressing the point I made above in which I explain why Pele’s 1,000+ goals are more publicized than Müller’s 1,000+ goals, you’re digging out posts that add nothing to the discussion in this thread.

So Müller's supposed '1000 +' add, but Garrincha's two actual world titles don't (one of them won 'singlehandedly', as the Argentines like to say)...

Besides 'Pele’s 1,000+ goals' were not 'more publicized' than 'Müller's 1000 +' simply because 'Müller's 1000 +'...didn't exist.

You cannot count in favor of Schumacher's F-1 records the points he obtained in 'kart' races...

On the other hand, as it was showed at large in the last pages, Pelé, differently from Müller, hardly drove 'karts' in his long career.

And: who handed out a 'best right back' award to D.Santos in 1958? As far as I know, FIFA did not nominate 'best players' awards in those days.

Of course it wasn't the formal 'award' with all its cerimonial that we have in our days, but he was in all lists of the 11 best players of the 1958 World Cup.