Next Ballon d'Or winner that isn't CR7 or LM10 (and when)?

Discussion in 'The Beautiful Game' started by BocaFan, Jan 19, 2015.

  1. SCP_16

    SCP_16 Member+

    Aug 8, 2004
    Bay Area
    Club:
    Sporting CP Lisbon
    Nat'l Team:
    Portugal

    This is all really good stuff right here. Essentially summarizing my view of Messi over the last 10+ years.
     
  2. Bavarian14

    Bavarian14 Member

    Bayern München
    Jun 1, 2017
    Well he might've been a gold digger. But you're making him out to be the dictator which he's not. He refuses to make any decision for the National Team even though he has the power to do so
    https://www.foxsportsasia.com/footb...de-at-copa-america-2019-luis-suarez-responds/

    https://www.marca.com/en/football/international-football/2018/07/20/5b51b7a3268e3e70388b45d0.html
    That's fundamentally wrong. Cristiano is a more complete goalscorer. Is adept to using both feet, outstanding header and has a very powerful shot. Messi has a more complete technical skill-set with his dribbling, finesse shots, playmaking and has also emerged as a better free kick taker in the past few years. They're both geniuses in their own right
     
  3. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011

    What Luis Suarez says has no bearing on the reality with Argentina. And what negative thing do you expect him to say ?
     
  4. Bavarian14

    Bavarian14 Member

    Bayern München
    Jun 1, 2017
    OK did you visited the other link?
     
  5. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    Yes, that was published by the reporter Ariel Senosiain, who works for TYC sports, a company known to be the most avid ass-kissers of Messi that will never criticize him. They are not objective with their clown at the helm, “El Pollo” Vignolo, who sticks within the system.

    Messi recently gave an interview with TYC Sports because they are the only ones that Messi approved in order to be interviewed. Whoever objectively criticizes Messi and AFA is shunned and considered against the system and ostracized from the rest that have power in the Argentinian media. Few can handle the weight, such as Martin Lieberman or Alejandro Fantino, although admittedly they themselves have their inconsistencies.

    I applaud those that stick by their guns and are not deterred by the conformist system even if it may cost them their jobs.

    Sometimes it’s good to think outside the box, if you know what I mean.
     
  6. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    Edit: Fox Sports with Vognolo and TYC Sports with Gaston Recondo are his avid fans. It was with Fox Sports that he conducted that interview recently. Neither companies dare to criticize him objectively (ofc there's the odd correspondent like Liberman but that’s not politically correct in today’s media to criticize the darling of Argentinian football).
     
  7. Bavarian14

    Bavarian14 Member

    Bayern München
    Jun 1, 2017
    It was a well known footage from the Croatia game (I think). But if you want to stick with your conspiracy theories that's fine :thumbsup:
     
  8. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    I would say that the other home nations had a lot quality and they certainly wouldn't have looked out of place in the Copa America.

    Accomplishments in that sphere are extremely hard to gauge. Are they more impressive than what Matthews did? Certainly the two tournaments he won were full of cannon fodder and he benefits from not having played (and failed) at the World Cup. That helps his mystique.

    It's certainly hard to stack (for instance), Moreno scoring 4 against Ecuador in 1942 in a 12-0 win against the type of opposition modern players face.
     
  9. poetgooner

    poetgooner Member+

    Arsenal
    Nov 20, 2014
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I agree. At this point, it's hard for me to argue for anyone above C.Ronaldo for the title of 'most complete goalscorer' of all time. I have a very soft spot for Muller's big-game record so I still rate him as the greatest of all time, but as far as skillset goes, I've had C. Ronaldo as no.1 for a while now. I genuinely cannot think of a single aspect of goalscoring where he's not at least very good at (world-class in most).

    Having not seen Pele or Cruyff, I have to rate Messi as the most dominant/complete attacker of all time. There were times in his career where he was simultaneously the single best dribbler/playmaker/scorer in the world. Even when he's not, it's been many straight years now where he's competed for the best in all 3 categories each and every year. Like in 2018, he would compete with Hazard for best dribbler, KDB for best playmaker, and Ronaldo for best scorer. That's a ridiculous level of all-round dominance over his peers.
     
    carlito86 repped this.
  10. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid

    Theoretically the vast majority of these shots were "off target"

    So when we hear CR takes a disproportionate amount of shots
    We don't hear about the 70 odd times he was denied just by the post

    The style of Cristiano Ronaldo can be described as ambitious
    He tries things that others will not dare
     
    ko242 repped this.
  11. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    Mate, pay attention carefully (it involves some of your enigmas regarding Cruijff, Messi and Cristiano and others).

    The problem with your reasoning is that it clashes with other eras that were more defensive and provided more parity. I’ve already stated that the 1970s-1980s period is the most uncomfortable for a foreigner at scoring in Spanish and Italian league football. I can guess that neither of these current stars would have impacted those leagues at that time as they’ve done in the past decade.

    Furthermore, the parity balances itself out at NT level. It’s where we see a significant decline in major competitions for the major stars: Messi, Cristiano, Neymar, Salah... It’s where I use the example of tennis competitions of ATP vs Grand-Slams. I know you disagree because of the nature of the short duration of tournaments but for me leagues around the world are not major grand-slam competitions - in Europe mostly always won by Juventus in Italy, Barcelona in Spain, Bayern Munich in Germany, PSG in France...

    You mentioned Cruijff but here again there’s a problem: he was scoring at a high volume in the Dutch league in the 1960s-1970s but his move to Spanish league football brought that number significantly down still in the prime of his career.

    It’s well-documented that Maradona, Shuster and others had their ankles broken due to the rough challenges of Spanish league markers in the early 1980s. Cruijff in Spain understood that he couldn’t dominate the offensive game in ways that he could in his country, so he pulled back like a quarterback to provide defensive coverage and direct from deep.

    There was an interesting article written by a Catalan journalist right after he retired, about the abilities of Cruijff and his everlasting impact in Spanish league football.

    And I quote:

    "A King leaves the game of football"

    "With Cruyff exceptional football is extinguished

    "Since Ladislao Kubala left the club no other player like Cruyff has been able to full up the illusion and the honor of those associated with the club, neither has anyone like him been able to vibrate with the lightning of his fantasy.

    With Cruyff there is not a great player, because he never was a complete footballer, but what has existed is an authentic phenomenon. For years, no player has possessed the innate sense as Cruyff to convert any action into a jewel. His famous and incomparable change of rhythm, his elegance on the run, his ability to dodge, his vision of the game and his accurate instinct to discover the most minimum hollow space to place a deadly ball, have delighted millions of fans.

    Five seasons at Barcelona have given him a meager harvest of titles: a league and a Spanish cup. Perhaps, from the point of view of his managers, Cruyff has not been a profitable player. He’s been criticized, and not without reasons at times, his conformism on the go, conformism derived from an ever more increasing indifference to the game which has given him money and fame only exceeded in scale in this decade by Pele and Beckenbauer.

    For the fans, however, Cruyff has been an idol. Half a dozen of his plays resulted sufficient to transform a bad game into a paradise dream, to convert boredom and yawning into a roar of admiration or massive ecstasy.

    Cruyff has been, above all in his career, an artist. And like a good artist he’s been somewhat anarchic, irregular, with parentheses of neglect but with sudden moments where he would transfigure and silence his critics with outbursts of wonderful spells of his exceptional qualities.

    He has been, (and how couldn’t he be?) a conflictive player… But no ‘crack’ in the history of football has escaped from such similar deformations. The way Kubala used to shield the ball got on the nerves of his rivals which earned him insults. Alfredo Di Stefano would insult his own teammates. And the examples could fill entire pages.

    The projection of itself of an “ace” makes him become stronger, brings applause but it also brings envy, admiration but also hate. Cruyff has possessed, in great quantity, a range of amazing virtues for his adversaries. And for certain adversaries there were brutal and insulting reactions, which explains to some point, the reactions not so diplomatic of Cruyff.

    But that is just anecdotal, inconsequential, what won’t be counted in the moment of remembering his game. It will be difficult if not impossible for the generation that has witnessed him set foot onto any field in the world, to erase from memory a player gifted like few others and to make a sport played essentially with feet into a prodigious work of sorcery. The football of Cruyff has been dominated by an entrancing magic, by an enchanting and unlimited beauty.

    Who cares if Cruyff was a player of limited capacity of maneuver, with scarce dominance in the aerial game and with a discrete index of finishing? In football, the conqueror, the element of capturing the devotion of the masses and the worshipping of the fans, is the one that performs the unexpected which no other can do.

    Cruyff has been an unsurpassable footballer in value because of his manner to understand the game, but above all, his way to handle things theoretically impossible, which were exclusively privileges that belonged to him. The diamonds of football that he gave to us for the past five seasons at the Camp Nou constitute a gift to the spectators that understand this sport…

    Cruyff hangs the boots at the age of 31, when his game can still produce sublime football… The genius retires and a myth is born."

    https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/johan-cruyff-matches-and-goals-scored.1865250/page-69#post-27294496

    When I close my eyes and think of Cruijff I think about my upbringings and how football and the world has changed over the years. There was still communism in the world before many on this forum were even born. It was another time. Cruijff was viewed by some as a mercenary and dictator for club and country, but no one was better than him at his best; not Cristiano nor Messi. It’s true he could have stayed at the top for longer, but injuries and personal lucrative deals swayed his decisions to move to the semiprofessional NASL.

    I respect the opinion of many like @comme, our moderator, if he believes Cruijff doesn’t belong in the same class of Messi or others, but Johan Cruijff was all about spectacle: he said it himself in 1981 when he arrived at Levante, 2nd division side in Spain, “What can I offer?...well spectacle.”

    His football was magic in an era that was dry and robust, where defenders reigned supreme over those that attempted to construct and innovate.

    Cruijff perhaps wasn’t the representation of what constitutes a complete offensive footballer, but as the article explained, “the conqueror, the element of capturing the devotion of the masses and the worshipping of the fans, is the one that performs the unexpected which no other can do.”

    Does Messi or Cristiano qualify under those adjectives ? Maybe so but with Cruijff it was a given.

    In conclusion, you’ve voiced your impressions about what constitutes an all-time great attacker, but there’s a dilemma: while I’ve already stated that Messi is one of the greatest in certain fields and environments, he also too suffers outside the confines of his comfort zone. For a candidate of being a GOAT attacker, it’s problematic that in 9 major NT tournaments he’s had ZERO open play goals at WC2010, Copa America 2011, Copa America 2015 and Copa America 2019. Further making it more problematic that he’s never been capable of breaching a top 5 opponent in the world. And with the exception of the Centennial CA2016, vs minnows, he’s never had a great scoring tournament for his country.

    Is that the representation of your most “dominant” greatest attacker of all-time ?
     
  12. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    In what sense is Cristiano his big game record significantly worse? National team record is in many different ways not a fair comparison although Cristiano could have done better compared to players of his own generation. He didn't score in every club final but neither did Muller (scored in 3/8 of his finals, Ronaldo in 6/11).

    When looking at top opponents then yes Ronaldo initially struggled (famously) against Ashley Cole and the likes at a consistent rate (and now Napoli, basically the #2 team of Italy now), but we don't have to talk about his later record against Barcelona. Is that automatically unfavorable next to Muller, by an enormous distance? Of course you can say Ronaldo plays with better team-mates, but that also applies to his main opponents - is his relative advantage much bigger? (e.g. 70s Bayern breaking various transfer records). Ronaldo didn't play for the best team in the league each season, with respect to his record against the top of the league.

    No disrespect but just asking what makes him markedly/significantly worse.
     
  13. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Markedly worse
    Definitely not

    However in the context of big game scorers gerd muller is unique
    Scorer in a world cup final
    European championship final
    European cup (replay) final
    That's completely unprecedented in the history of this game

    Of course Ronaldo has scored in 3 champions league finals
    18 vs Barcelona
    1 gpg vs bayern
    1 gpg vs juventus
    4 hat tricks vs simenos atletico
    so he isn't exactly too shabby in this department

    In short
    Gerd muller scored few more "iconic" big game goals

    Cristiano Ronaldo scored more big game goals(period)

    In big games scoring gerd muller was like Pele, Zidane,van Basten
    (Proven in both setting-club and international)

    Cristiano was like R9 (proven in 1 setting-R9 at international and CR at club)

    From all those names CR was the only one not to benefit from "legendary team edge" at international level
     
  14. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    It is of course logic to accept that Messi at the NT level in the modern era has certain disadvantages compared to what Moreno and Argentina went through in the 1940s. There is more pressure that Messi has had to burden on his shoulders. It’s easier to study your opponents now with camera footage, making it more difficult for a superstar to excel at the highest level when there’s parity. Tactical innovations have improved in 80 years and the game is played at a supersonic speed. I doubt Moreno was doggedly defended in ways that Messi is given attention to by opponents. Having said that, pitches and equipment were worse back then, the game was rougher with little protection from the referees, and Messi simply has had more shots at glory than previous legends but hasn’t stamped his legacy like Moreno or Maradona did.
     
  15. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    I'm not sure I've ever said that.

    I've said I place Messi in a top 2 with Pele (and I increasingly believe that Messi deserves the top spot), with Cruyff alongside others like Maradona, Di Stefano, Beckenbauer and Puskas in the next tier.

    That's not necessarily a question of class but about his consistent brilliance over a longer spell than any of the others managed.
     
  16. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Incredible again (so typical of this board and modern 'big four' oriented media) people have started to think long time FIFA friend Beckenbauer is of the same tier as Cruijff. It is pretty obvious and well established (by the end of the decade certainly) who was the greatest 1970s footballer, regardless of a few fluky European Cups or not. Many also seriously underestimate how he was a consistent match winner against elite opponents in the 60s and even as late as 1983-1984 against (international) top class teams at a regular base, and he was evidently mightily influential for achieving consistently close finishes and near-wins (thus not a couple of seasons finishing 6th, 10th etc. or going out against Toulouse in the first round). That said, Pele and Messi are the two most dominant players in history, in their own setting at least. Pele more so for national team, Messi more so for club.
     
  17. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    The penalty goal doesn't count
    He didn't "earn" it

    It is 0 goals+1 assist
    Big soccer rules (not mine)
     
  18. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    Part of the disparity in views I think inevitably comes from the difference of perspectives.

    To my mind the highest quality competition in the world is the Champions League and the tournament that best rewards quality is the domestic championship.

    The Champions League has better quality teams and players. They get to work together vastly more than national squads, have better coaches and that makes a big difference. The duration of the league season helps to reduce the random nature of a small competition like the World Cup or Copa America.

    As such, I put a large emphasis on achievements in those area.

    At the same time, Messi has played well in the international arena. Not to Messi's club levels, but well by almost anyone else's standards.

    He has played well at multiple World Cups and multiple Copa Americas. The fact that he hasn't converted those performances into trophies isn't a huge factor for me.

    For a South American, I can see there might a different viewpoint.
     
    ko242 repped this.
  19. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    #7445 PuckVanHeel, Jul 11, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2019
    As an aside, there is now someone (Auke Kok) who is trying to write a definitive biography and has been researching for three years. Hopefully it will be a good one, but his previous work is of variable quality I'd say (some excellent, some less so).

    I liked his take on the 'France Football placed Michels #1 manager of all-time' subject. He answered that while there are good arguments to place Ferguson as #1 and swap the ordering of Michels-Cruijff (the style and success without the other; the context of Cruijff his very early involvement in the tactics, the only player to discuss this on a daily base; that the leading players forced the swap to the 4-3-3 system, keeping the lines more compact and truly 'total' in that sense), during the research he discovered more and more how much Cruijff learned from him, and learned to think along, while before Michels there is no one. The author has grown to appreciate how much Michels figured out entirely by himself with no one to teach him or guide him.

    Three years ago (when he had just started his research, so caveat emptor) he had this article about "the man and the myth, five misunderstandings" (I scanned it, used google translate and corrected a few words/sentences)

    ------------------

    1. HE THANKS EVERYTHING TO HIS TALENT
    Anyone who says such a thing does not know the history of Gerrie Splinter. Around the age of fifteen, Gerrie Splinter made the service in the juniors of Ajax together with skinny Johan. Gerrie and Johan made just about all goals in their team. They played matches in the matches: who will score the most goals this afternoon? In the club magazine, the gentlemen were strongly pointed out that football is a team sport and that they should also award the ball to the other players. Gerrie then let himself be seduced on Leidseplein by what occupied teenage boys more than kicking a ball. And when Gerrie was reprimanded by the trainer, he didn't hit a ball anymore. Johan went out much less and instead spent countless hours at the club, where his mother cleaned the changing rooms. He practiced endlessly on his weak left leg against a blank wall. Criticism from the trainer made him stronger, not weaker. Gerrie did not get a contract, Jopie did.

    Funny detail: just before the 1974 World Cup, the Dutch national team, with Johan as a center forward, played against the Dutch Amateur eleven, with Gerrie in the center forward. Gerrie thought: if only I hadn't stepped into the Can-Can.

    Cruijff, on the other hand, owes a great deal to his perseverance. He was so thin and light that the youth trainers took him home for an extra meal with pasta. Something was seriously wrong with his feet and he was suffering from nervousness. You could almost say that his physical and mental equipment made him unsuitable for top sport. Jopie first had to conquer himself before he came to his opponents. What he had to put aside for his career is often ignored but borders on the incredible. Cruijff could afford less than others. Even disciplined, he was not from home. No one of his generation was punished as often at Ajax as he. Even his trainer Rinus Michels, with whom he would (almost) conquer the world together, initially had a lot to do with him. It was initially difficult for him to arrive on time, although he did listen eagerly to what his trainers said about tactics.

    Listening, doing your very best, devoting everything to it: the rise of Johan Cruijff in the 1960s is food for pedagogues. Despite his renowned rebellion and stubbornness, which has always received more attention, the basis of his enduring success was precisely his ability to deal with pain and setbacks.

    2. CRUIJFF WAS A LEFT WING REBEL
    He was certainly rebellious. Driven by his father-in-law, he took on directors in the late 1960s who did not take footballers like him seriously. With at times brazen manners he manifested himself as a representative of his fellow players with regard to salary, insurance and sponsor money. With that he became the target of scorn - he was a chat maker who always had something to complain about - and he accepted that with the knowledge that he was right. Most of the times he was right, in hindsight.

    This grind on those placed above him, which he always had, coincided with the rebellious beat and rock music of the sixties. And in the early 1970s he became a pop star with his long hair, beaded necklace and bracelets. But he was certainly not on the left. Left-wing students identified with him, he did not do that with the students. Cruijff had little interest in demonstrating and sleeping late. [note: as some are aware he did join demonstrations for 'the good cause' at times but not as a full-time pastime yes]

    Cruyff's rebelliousness was perhaps right, or rather: liberal. Wage for work, even though he didn't always go for the highest deal. He wanted to get paid more than the others because he was more important. Father-in-law and businessman Cor Coster made him aware of his economic value, which had to be redeemed in a relatively short period of a football career. More and more, Cruijff realized that people were coming for him, that his team was driven by his eternal talk and pointing in the field, that thanks to him Ajax won way more often than without him. So if he could catch it. And that look of rock and roll, of a hippie, did not come from the desire to be an icon of "the new generation": it was simply his fashion-conscious wife Danny who styled him. Danny, who herself had the appearance as the Dutch Dusty Springfield, ran a fashion store in the then hip Kinkerstraat in Amsterdam-Oud-West. She knew what was going on and as soon as Johan was allowed to hold her hand, he had to exchange his silly costumes with high water for something more modern.

    With its jewelry and its almost androgynous appearance, Cruijff perfectly matched the glam rock of the mid-1970s. And he played a LP of David Bowie sometimes. But at home with troublemaker Cruijff, the Jordanian anthem also sounded according to the wishes of his parents. Cruijff was the typical individualist in the emerging 'I-era', but with a desire to make it clear to civil society that the times were a changin it had not much to do. Rather with the emerged materialism and self-development.

    3. CRUIJFF WAS A REAL AJAX MAN
    Of course he lived practically opposite the stadium in Watergraafsmeer and Cruijff grew up, as it were, in De Meer Stadium. And indeed he was always attracted to the club. But very often it was others, his followers, who pulled him to get involved with Ajax. Not for nothing was his first departure from Amsterdam, in 1973, surrounded by conflicts. Cruijff felt misunderstood by the club management - for which little was needed - and - which went much deeper - by his fellow players. They didn't have him, but the older and socially skilled Piet Keizer elected captain. As is the case in the Netherlands, many other Ajax players were a bit fed up with the noise of know-it-all Cruijff and they took a certain pleasure in putting him in his place: a little less far above the ground.

    Insulted and offended, Cruijff flew to Barcelona. In dictator Franco's Spain, Johan was already El Salvador on arrival at the airport. That appealed to him. His fellow players also placed him directly on a pedestal - Johan liked that too.

    In Barcelona, no one said he should stop with moaning and complaining, he climbed to the status of artist, an artist on boots. The climate was nicer and, not unimportant, the taxes much nicer. He didn't come to Ajax more often than necessary, with exhibition matches for the club's shirt in 1976 and 1978 as a rare gem. In 1981 it was not so much love that drove him back to Amsterdam, but money shortage. He had given the Bulgarian trader and charmer Michel Basilevitch permission to invest assets, estimated at ten million guilders, collected during 14 years of professional football. Thanks to a fruitful combination of wrong investments and scams, nothing was left of the capital after a few years. Cruijff needed Ajax to help build that capital, it was that simple. And Ajax benefited: the spectators flocked in and the club experienced a few beautiful years. He guided players as Rijkaard, scouted children as Seedorf and De Boer brothers, and the rest is history.

    But see: it took very little, as is often the case with Cruijff, to make the eternal rebel angry and resentful. After the unclear exchanges and accusations known to him, the "Ajax player" left in 1983 to Rotterdam South. To make Feyenoord champion there. Because he now needed Feyenoord to put a heel on Ajax, which had insulted him. A true Ajax player would have been driven less by resentment than Cruijff. He would have accepted more out of club love. Like the only true Mr. Ajax, Sjaak Swart, for example.

    4. DANNY BANNED JOHAN FROM GOING TO ARGENTINA
    This a true classic. It is also nice to say at birthday parties. The woman as an atmosphere poison. To call Danny Cruijff the Yoko Ono of Orange. The truth is more nuanced. Already during the 1974 World Cup Johan told Voetbal International that he would never again participate in a tournament as this, and he expected it wouldn't be better four years later. The undisputed leader thought it was "inhumane" to be away from home for five weeks and to feel the pressure of massive expectations and responsibility on his pointed shoulders all the time. It was hard for the family man. That sounds absurd by current standards, but that was how it was for Cruijff during the, in retrospect, most important sport weeks of his life. He missed his wife and Jordi. The accompaniment and staff was amateurish, there were more players who wanted to go home in West Germany halfway through the tournament.

    On the other hand, it is true that Cruijff re-confirmed his refusal to ever go to a World Cup after the so-called swimming pool incident. So that seems to have played a role. The night before, he allegedly had been playing in the Waldhotel Krautkrämer's swimming pool with naked girls for a while; this was an altogether less prudish decade. Not only a few teammates had been there; a German journalist also swamped undercover in the water and he wanted to make that public. That would give a lot of trouble because Danny never wanted to be the typical football lady. What she did well in 1974. Danny called her husband from Barcelona so often to account on the phone that on Sunday, July 7, he walked into the field with dark circles under his eyes. We don't need to talk about the rest.

    In short: Johan said before the telephones of Danny that he would not go to the 1978 World Cup. At the same time, he must have understood that Danny would keep him to his promise in a Jordanian, thus straight forward, manner of speaking.

    5. CRUIJFF WAS A BUSYBODY
    In fact it is hard to deny that he liked to put his nose so gratefully blown up by cartoonists. Cruijff sometimes called himself "an annoying meddling person", so it is not entirely untrue. But what is particularly striking is the eagerness with which his adepts always involved him again. Especially since his departure as a trainer in 1996, he was endlessly consulted in both Barcelona and Amsterdam and he had to say "it" because he knew how "it" had to be solved. Now Cruijff felt certainly he knew a few things, but the pattern was just as often that others approached him rather than he voluntarily came and cleaned the ship. It was usually the case that when Johan was asked for an opinion, he would also give it if he had better keep his mouth shut. A Cruijff without opinion, that was of course also not possible in his own idea of "evading responsibility". And if his opinion rattled on all sides, it sounded on his Cruijffs that if he wanted the other person to understand, he would have explained it better. Then the opinion, whether or not clearly expressed, came to the press and he had "interfered" with it.

    The very lowest point was of course the so-called Velvet Revolution. Once again there were Cruyffians who could not do without him: only with the influence of the ever-suspicious Johan could Ajax reap international success. And Cruijff was persuaded again to let the club function in "his" way: with more attention for the youth and more emphasis on individual coaching of young players in order to teach them better ball treatment and better insight into the game. Cruyff was once again busy and the result was an unseen soap of suspicion and allegations.

    In addition, it is undoubtedly the case that the touching, funny, irritating, inspiring, ordinary but also unusual street boy from Betondorp himself was there when he was persuaded to fight again. A lot of people are unnecessarily damaged in that ordinary throwing and punching job. In other words: if he is now the 'playmaker in the hereafter', as the English newspapers wrote so beautifully after his death, then he will regret this: that he has let himself be used for various carts instead of having fun and eat tapas. Comfort: everyone will soon forget all that hassle in the boardrooms. The many playground fields in urban areas laid out in his name will last a lot longer. Fortunately.

    ------

    Will keep an eye on the final work...
     
    ko242, Vegan10 and comme repped this.
  20. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011

    It’s a fascinating topic.

    Yesterday I was listening to an Argentinian journalist (Alejandro Fantino) that goes against the system; he’s been shunned by the political powers from above due to not conforming with conventional wisdom and speaking out against the corrupt Argentinian FA. He was saying how the best player he ever viewed in person was Juan Ramon Riquelme. In his view he was technically superior to Messi, in the shot, in the ability to control the game and more importantly at being more intelligent as a cerebral maestro. Many Argentinians think like him but are afraid to express that view.

    The point is we all have different viewpoints like you’ve said.

    In regards to your criteria about the sustainability of brilliance: Is the difference really significant ? What is the criteria ?

    I can accept the cases of Cruijff and Maradona, one moved to a semipro league at the age of 31 while the other one was suspended for most of his career after the age of 30. But given the fact that Messi is 32 years old, is the prolonged sustained brilliance that significant ?

    It’s been discussed and questioned on this board about Maradona’s supposed sustainability as one of the premier performers in the game during his generation. In a recap, with the exception of 1982 and 1984, from 1978-1990 he was regarded to be ranked in different sources anywhere between 1-5 as an elite performer in his league or in South America/Europe and the world. That would in theory have put him 10 years as one of the best. As for the 1990s, let’s be frank here, don’t be fooled by the South American 1992 and 1993 awards that placed Maradona as number 1 or in the top 10. That was mostly based on reputation. With the exception of one highly rated half season at Boca Juniors at the age of 35 in 1995, and ranked in the top 2 in South America, he didn’t really stand out past the age of 30.

    Cruijff really relinquished his crown as the world’s best after 1978 at the age of 31 when he moved to the United States. When he did move back to Europe he was already viewed behind in the world’s pecking order of Europe’s best.

    I can’t speak for Beckenbauer but in Di Stefano’s case did Messi sustain a longer period at the top ?

    It’s undeniable due to the nature of different environments and eras (way less marketing) that Di Stefano was not viewed as one of the world’s best at a young age. He became generally accepted as the premier player in Europe by the age of 27 when he moved abroad. But I think from 1947 to at least 1961 Di Stefano was regarded at being exceptional in South American and European football. That puts him until at least the age of 35 as still a top performer in Europe. In theory that’s 14 years strong on different continents. Of course it’s difficult to gauge the quality of that Colombian league and it’s not entirely certain if every season was top-notch, he most likely had some low spells in form in Argentina and Spain but being regarded as one of the top 5-6 Ballon d’Or finishers in the early 1960s gives a certain hint to his longevity. However it’s uncertain if reputation played a part in these votes that he received at a later stage in his career.

    On topic though, it’s very probable that Messi is ranked in the 2019 Ballon d’Or anywhere in the top 3. That would put him 13 years in a row ranked anywhere in the top 5 in the world since the age of 20. It’s another era of course but I can understand the logic behind your reasoning. However, what about Cristiano Ronaldo ? 14 years running and still strong. Why is he not mentioned in your first or second tier of legends ?

    One point I had forgotten to mention was how Moreno benefited at the NT by playing with all home-bound teammates which consisted of various from his own club.
     
  21. celito

    celito Moderator
    Staff Member

    Palmeiras
    Brazil
    Feb 28, 2005
    USA
    Club:
    Palmeiras Sao Paulo
    Nat'l Team:
    Brazil
    Riquelme was a different type of player . They are not comparable . Riquelme defintely had some skills Messi doesn’t ... but the opposite is also true . Many mistaken Messi for some sort of midfielder ... or that he can play that role . But he is a forward that has play making skills .
     
  22. poetgooner

    poetgooner Member+

    Arsenal
    Nov 20, 2014
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I don't understand how any of what you said has anything to do with my original point.

    I defined C.Ronaldo's 'completeness' as a goalscorer in terms of skillsets.

    I defined Messi's dominance as simply his ability to sustain his top competitiveness in terms of dribbling/playmaking/scoring. I've simply never seen anyone be in contention for best in the world in all 3 categories for as long as Messi.

    That's all man.
     
  23. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    One of the more remarkable/phenomenal aspects of his 'aura' was how it went to behind the Iron Curtain and to Africa. He was the role model and youth idol of Oleh Blokhin and current chancellor Angela Merkel; George Weah played with the same shirt number as a tribute, other African players as Abega (scroll down below) did the same too. Of course also enhanced by the technology, as opposed to the early 1950s.


    He was 34 and a half years old when he returned to Europe. An incredible 73% of 'De Telegraaf' readers thought he couldn't cut it any more (when the Eredivisie was #3 in the UEFA coefficients). This was an Amsterdam paper.

    His strange spell at Levante and injured guest appearance for AC Milan raised eyebrows, and he was by some seen as a "money wolf" for going to the USA. There he was superb (the press association elected him twice player of the year, for two different teams; looking at the end product and the statistical influence on those teams this was probably merited) but it didn't really register here. In the 'Shoot!' magazine there was recurring attention for what happened in the NASL but not so much here. Magazines as 'Placar' estimated he was the best paid player in the world when he was in the USA. Meanwhile, his brief spell as Ajax technical director in 1980 (with those famous images of him correcting Beenhakker) had led to the first EC semi final since his departure as player, the club debuting some youngsters, so logically some thought his future was more in that area.

    While his second year (1982-83, winning the double) was a bit ordinary for his standards, suffering from the unexpected harsh tackles by opponents who wanted to prove themselves (it's on video), overall his return was a huge success. In the first season Ajax was five points behind the leader at his return in december, they finished champion five points in front. Funny anecdote is here he helped the Belgium NT to prepare for their Argentina match (the opening game against the world champion); he played with Ajax a test match and training session with the Belgian national team.

    The last season at Feyenoord was evidently also a big success (first league title in a decade, also the double). Some foreign players as Kevin Keegan, Michel Platini and magazines as France Football, Guerin Sportivo (in 1983, 1984) noticed this. He played consistently well, and was consistently productive, against (dogged) international big sides as Celtic (video here), Tottenham, Liverpool, AS Roma (this was a friendly, but they certainly didn't play that way), CWC finalists Standard Liege, Manchester United. While not being the world's best player any more, the objective conclusion should be there were still some remarkable things. The common rebuttal 'but it was the Dutch league' is cancelled by his various displays against international top opponents, and also the league being #3 in the coefficients at his return.
     
  24. comme

    comme Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 21, 2003
    This also stems from the unusual circumstances that Messi has never played club football in Argentina. That inevitably has a big impact on the way that he is viewed in his 'home' country.

    Riquelme was obviously a tremendous player, one of the best playmakers of the last 20 years, but the idea that he is in the same conversation as Messi would be unlikely to most European viewers.

    However, we have to realise the viewpoint makes a big difference. There are people in England who doubt Messi because he's never played in the Premier League, despite his remarkable record against English sides in Europe. Transport that thousands of miles away to a country where people are typically in work when the Champions League is on and you can imagine the difference.

    It's not just the longevity, it's the consistency and the level he has reached. Messi has not just been 'one of the best' players in the world. In the last 11 seasons he has been either the best or second best in all but one (IMO) which was 2014, a year in which he vastly outperformed his rivals (Ronaldo, Suarez, Costa) in the World Cup. That season I still put him in the top 5.

    As good as the likes of Maradona and co were they didn't enjoy the level of consistent dominance that he has. Maradona might have been one of the best players in the world on a number of seasons over the course of a decade but he wasn't at the pinnacle for that time and he was rarely undisputed.

    Moreover, his margin over his peers is remarkable. He's not just the best, he's the best by miles. This season he was the top scorer in the top European leagues, top scorer in the Champions League and still came up with 13 assists in the league. He was the best attacker by a complete distance and he was last year as well.

    It's reductive to just talk about his goals because he is so much more than that, but his output (goals, assists, key passes, dribbles) is prodigious. He blends artistry with efficacy in a remarkable way.

    The point about Ronaldo only strengthens his case. Ronaldo clearly now belongs in that next tier down (the one with Maradona et al) in recognition of his brilliance and consistency and yet Messi has consistently shone brighter than his rival.
     
    Edhardy repped this.

Share This Page