So I'll also try to do the other way texts, since it has also hints about ideas on some other players. This above would be something like: " Since the day where Gabriel Hanot gave the first 'Ballon d'Or' to Stanley Matthews, eighteen seasons renewed the supreme values while our consultation was seen by the actors and witnesses of the adventure. The sky of Europe has seen a constellation of stars. Alfredo Di Stefano always illuminates the all time world wonders. But the brilliance of Johan Cruijff grew to see. The crew of kings and the king of the crew, is even joined by the champion of the rising generation. He was the only possessor of two F.F. Golden Balls. Johann the magnificent will say as much in a few weeks after a solemn handing that will beat all the records of enthusiasm at the Nou Camp in Barcelona. Our photo on the first page symbolizes the football elite of yesterday and today, the encounter (last summer in Nice) of two exceptional interpreters. Jacques Feran sets Johan Cruljff's unusual personality, a character, a moral and physical balance, a gentleman who invented his own football from the age of first dribbling, listening to everyone but playing at his own will. "
Sorry. if I didn't understand. I guess that was to name a second group to join the top players in Figueroa, Cubillas and Erico.
Possibly Bergkamp in for Koeman can make sense too then, to result in exactly the 20 defenders Peter was aiming for. But I can see you were making the attempt to represent defenders well as well as put a good number in from early years, and it does have a look of a legitimate historical 100 that way to be fair. I guess if any numbering will be done, it makes sense to split it fairly evenly by era too? Did you have a second 100 in mind too Peter? I guess those could even be presented as honourable mentions alphabetically or something?
I thought about highlighting a few things because certainly it is an interesting case and there are a few hints (perhaps) in there about his age (he was 32) but I see a part of his write up has been fallen away from the scan. Hopefully you can still discern a few things from that file. Anything you've noticed thus far? Indeed, I agree that in the context of a 'career Ballon d'Or' Dalglish in 1983 is an interesting case.
Just a thought, but after looking at how a (roughly) even split might work, it might seem better in some ways to place Xavi in 2010-2017 (perhaps includes 2009/10; also not dissimilar in effect to Baresi's placing in his period) because then him and Iniesta could go into a second 25 for example (if the consensus was that he should be at 26 and Iniesta at 50 to indicate a gap then that could still be done). I wasn't sure any of the others currently there seemed right that high up. Perhaps Shevchenko or Hagi could come back into the equation (without needing to be top 50 choices probably) with Lewandowsi or Modric making way?
Oh actually, we sort of misunderstood each other, but I can see how now and yes maybe it's right that there could be a career Ballon d'Or aspect to it (perhaps looking back to 1979 and seeing an unjustly low total of votes or something like that too....but the journalists had the opportunity at that time to vote for him of course even if maybe live footage and even highlights that would appear in mainland Europe might be more scarce). Also I would expect there was a season vs calendar year dilemma for some voters with him; some might think "this is for 1983 and not 1982" while some may think it's ok to judge on the previous season mainly (the same thing happens now I guess) or at least factor it in with a decent weight - the Belgium game from 1982 is even referred to I think isn't it. I had been wondering mainly about the votes though, so just looked through those for him with interest (I know Peter didn't mean it literally in naming Prague, but he got a second place from Czechoslovakia I saw lol!). Maybe the English vote indeed concentrated on 1983 and not 82/83? But yes, I had meant it might be interesting to see the votes and perhaps some comments for him in 1983 just like Mazzola in 1971, but I see how you would think I meant both could have a career aspect to them....and it's possible although I suspect if we were talking 1982/83 Dalglish might be right up justifiably challenging Platini even (just my feeling/interpretation) but not so when 1983 as a whole is considered I think.
I don't know I suppose Neuer around about the top 50 might seem feasible actually, when positional spread was factored in too and considering impact and reputation in era. That'd put him in the top half of the goalies selected though, again if those and defenders were spread fairly evenly through the list (looking at it I wondered whether that'd lead to a Moore ahead of either a Best or Garrincha; or alternatively a Krol ahead of either a Van Basten or Zico for example in the top 25 of such a list). And if Iniesta was rejected as a top 50 candidate (some might feel he should be, although others had him even higher on my old thread I remember albeit not the posters Peter has been referring to and relying on to compile the consensus - he would seem a bit of a marmite candidate anyway) then perhaps Xavi would still be 'needed' even along with Neuer as a 2010-2017 top 50 choice anyway though? To me Xavi does feel like part of the 2009 onwards sort of era, with his role in Barca's Tiki Taka team that started it's Guardiola-controlled period of success and influence at that point, and the fact he was somewhat a late bloomer in terms of his greatest influence and contributions.
I could get it for you in a bit, although I wouldn't want to muddy the waters with it really. It was just a voting thread for any poster to pick a top 50, and I kept tallies of all the points. If you would like to see it let me know and I'll PM you the link if you like, but I didn't bring it up to influence anything as I think the way you're doing it is probably good enough on it's own. It was very long in the end and several posters voted more than once (in other words updating their votes). I thought maybe you'd seen it to be honest, but yeah I think stvc saw this thread potentially as it's replacement when he first started it. I guess you would see some votes from various parts of the world and from some respected posters with a good knowledge that don't post anymore though (Fried from Brazil as one example early in the thread I remember - I think his screen-name probably was due to Friedenreich as that was his nickname I think wasn't it....?).
I've gone ahead and PM'd you it anyway now, so you should see that in your inbox. I thought it was better not to put the link on the thread so we can concentrate on this one. If anyone else really wanted to find it it's on my profile and is one of my earliest threads from 2009 anyway. Yeah, 78 pages so not at all short and not purely for voting (though it started out more like that). To find my points summaries I guess you could search for posts including the word Maradona by me on that thread for example, and probably if you searched for Maradona posted by anyone you should get to see all the votes and re-votes (plus some other random posts I guess). I didn't maintain any database of players voted for by each person or anything, but just counted things up manually.
So to complete the third piece (I was thinking of doing the Dalglish 1983 one like I said but the scan was a bit messed up I saw). This text below was by Jean-Philippe Rethacker (born 1930; Ferran is of 1920). The Ballon d'or and his successors [heir apparents] JOHAN always higher Once again, Johan Cruilff collected personal successes and titles in 1973. And he consolidated his value, his standing, his reputation as the greatest European footballer. There is no denying the influence he has had on Ajax's new triumph in the European Cup (despite his lack of consequences in Munich for the return match against Bayern), the world qualification of Holland finally ranked among the elite of the European selections, and on the rather sensational recovery of Barcelona that he restarted, from his arrival, to the top of the Spanish football ... That is a lot for a single man, but that is enough to to make the European footballer of the year 1973. His career has, however, experienced, during this period, a lot of incidents and vicissitudes. But this did not prevent him from demonstrating once again an inimitable talent. And above all a steady progression on the technical level. When reviewing the matches he played with Ajax and with the Dutch team, we see at the first review that he has rarely had a direct influence on the final success, Scoring only a few goals (especially with Ajax) and not always pointing out individual action against Bayern, it was the middle men and Keizer who made the decision (Cruijff missing the second inning), in front of Juventus in Final, it was Rep who won the victory, whereas a year ago in Rotterdam, Cruijff had made the decision alone. With the national team, same thing. But by further analyzing it, one realizes very quickly that the Cruijff 1973 played a role at least as important in the shadow of its partners. Henceforth close tightened, abused, rough, wounded, he can not always place the dribble or the decisive shot. But he possesses the intelligence and lucidity of the exceptional player (Kopa, Di Stefano, Puskas, Bobby Charlton, Pelé, Eusebio) who, by gaining age and notoriety, with the adversary on him, chooses without hesitation to become a teammate and a playmaker. Cruijff is now much more complete than before. Stefan Kovacs is there for many who made him understand his interests and his future by releasing him and advising him to move and wander without stopping to escape the point of the fight and to take more frequent, more deliberately the management of operations. So Cruijff has gotten even closer this year of his model Di Stefano which he will try to make now forget in Spain. His transfer, of course, defrayed the chronicle during the summer. First because he was preceded and almost provoked by discussions and problems between Cruijff and the other Ajax players, Keizer in particular, who did not forgive him his Munich package (before the second match of Bayern). Controversies that the Dutch may find it hard to ease the echoes and combat the fallout in the German World Cup. But it must be confessed that the transfer of Cruijff to Barcelona was mainly sensation by the enormity of the sums of money spent by the club Catalan (800 million AF). It is true that FC Barcelona regrets nothing, has already re-balanced its budget by filling its stadium Camp Nou to brim (100,000 spectators), every time its team plays at home and who even thinks to enlarge its stands to go up to 140,000 seats. For our part, we believe that Johan Cruijff has demonstrated above all his immense talent during the last three months of Spain. Because the way he, the Anglo-Saxon school soccer player, adapts without transition or difficulty to the Spanish game and his rhythm, demonstrates without discussion his class and his richness of expression. It is possible that we will talk about it again in a year, at the same time, after a showing in the spanish championship, a World Cup and a european cup that Cruijff, the Barcelonese, will eventually mark with his imprint. As Cruijff, as knight of Ajax, did before. Again @PDG1978 - feel free to give a shout on something else you'd like to see (from VI or something else).
So I asked and searched around a bit and indeed for both the number one (which I already knew) and number two Mazzola in 1971 career recognition was a major factor. 1971 wasn't individually or with the team Mazzola his best year. Interesting that Ferran returned to a comment on Mazzola in 1973, feeling that it is a major flaw apparently.
As a related observation to the post above; Although - in contrast to what is often automatically assumed - he won the 1968 Ballon d'Or with a relatively weak consensus and one of the lowest 'percentage of maximum points' ever..... Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler Ballon d'Or winners with 35% of the 1st place votes or less: Suarez (1960) 21.05% [4/19] Sammer (1996) 25.49% [13/51] Sivori (1961) 26.32% [5/19] Best (1968) 28.00% [7/25] Law (1964) 28.57% [6/21] Belanov (1986) 30.77% [8/26] Müller (1970) 30.77% [8/26] Ronaldo (2002) 30.77% [16/52] Albert (1967) 33.33% [8/24] Keegan (1978) 34.61% [9/26] Ballon d'Or winners with 65% of the maximum points or less Best (1968) 48.4% [61/125] Sivori (1961) 48.4% [46/95] Sammer (1996) 56.4% [144/255] Suarez (1960) 56.8% [54/95] Law (1964) 58.1% [61/105] Weah (1995) 58.7% [144/245] Matthews (1956) 58.8% [47/80] Müller (1970) 59.2% [77/130] Rivera (1969) 63.8% [83/130] Eusebio (1965) 63.8% [67/105] Belanov (1986) 64.6% [84/130] Beckenbauer (1972) 64.8% [81/125] Ronaldo (2002) 65.0% [169/260] Ballon d'Or winners without plurality of 1st place votes Suarez 1960 - 4 votes (Puskas 1960 5/19 votes) Law 1964 - 6 votes (Suarez 1964 6/19 votes too) Simonsen 1977 - 7 votes (Keegan 1977 11/25 votes) Sammer 1996 - 13 votes (Ronaldo 1996 16/51 votes) Figo 2000 - 20 votes (Zidane 2000 24/51 votes) Ronaldo 2002 - 16 votes (Roberto Carlos 2002 23/52 votes) ... he did become one of the youngest winners ever. Certainly in the context of that time. Recipients before their mid-20s in boldface. 1956 - Matthews 41 1957 - Di Stefano 31 1958 - Kopa 27 1959 - Di Stefano 33 1960 - Suarez 25 1961 - Sivori 26 1962 - Masopust 31 1963 - Yashin 34 1964 - Law 24 (almost 25) 1965 - Eusebio 23 1966 - Charlton 29 1967 - Albert 26 1968 - Best 22 1969 - Rivera 26 1970 - Muller 25 1971 - Cruijff 24 1972 - Beckenbauer 27 1973 - Cruijff 26 1974 - Cruijff 27 1975 - Blokhin 23 1976 - Beckenbauer 31 1977 - Simonsen 25 1978 - Keegan 27 1979 - Keegan 28 1980 - Rummenigge 25 1981 - Rummenigge 26 1982 - Rossi 26 1983 - Platini 28 1984 - Platini 29 1985 - Platini 30 1986 - Belanov 26 1987 - Gullit 25 1988 - Van Basten 24 1989 - Van Basten 25 1990 - Matthaus 29 1991 - Papin 28 1992 - Van Basten 28 1993 - Baggio 26 1994 - Stoichkov 28 1995 - Weah 29 1996 - Sammer 29 1997 - Ronaldo 21 1998 - Zidane 26 1999 - Rivaldo 27 2000 - Figo 28 2001 - Owen 22 2002 - Ronaldo 26 2003 - Nedved 31 2004 - Shevchenko 28 2005 - Ronaldinho 25 2006 - Cannavaro 33 2007 - Kaka 25 2008 - Cristiano Ronaldo 23 (almost 24) 2009 - Lionel Messi 22 Of course there are many ifs and buts attached to this, with changing contexts and voter dynamics, but it does say a bit about George Best (despite far from having a consensus behind him). Until Ronaldo Fenomeno came along, with his jaw-dropping playing style and the Nike 'best ever' steamrolling machine, he was the youngest recipient ever. In the same year he was topscorer of the league (and unlike similar technical masterpieces as Maradona and Baggio it did not come with ~10 or more penalties) and FWA player of the year of course.
South American player of the year winners below aged 25 (aged 24 max): Tostao, Cubillas, Zico, Kempes, Maradona, Francescoli, Cafu, Marcelo Salas, Javier Saviola, Riquelme, Tevez, Matias Fernandes, Neymar, Miguel Borja.
Having now seen the top 100, should we reconsider the criteria? Standouts include Henry and Neeskens not making it. Hard for me to justify how that's possible.
Yes, it seems that was at times a significant factor and consideration for voters in the earlier periods, including of course in the very first year with Stanley Matthews (not to say he didn't play outstandingly during that year at all by any means). Well done on the research.
Neeskens was not in Puck's 13-man short list of Dutch players. Apparently he is not rated as highly in the Netherlands as some others. Attitudes towards Henry are ambivalent on this forum, with some French posters not considering his NT career in the same class as those of Kopa, Platini and Zidane. He could come in for Thuram or Desailly, though there does need to be a decent number of defenders overall.
Interestingly, that could mean there was a slot for either Bergkamp or Henry then! Re-igniting best/greatest Arsenal and/or Premier League player debates maybe. As Peter's count of defensive players might be at the guideline/minimum 20 after swapping Chumpitaz for Cubillas and taking one more (Koeman or Desailly say if it was felt that removing Thuram would under-represent the right-back position) out. Both in my estimated prediction of what a top 50 could seem like in the end based on consensus, and in my own attempt at a top 50 with my views but also adjusted to factor in era/position balance etc, I felt Desailly might even be appearing...but on the other hand maybe he's not a must for the 100 even.
I suppose the other option seemingly open at the moment (perhaps with approval of Puck and/or the Netherlands in general now considering greatness in own era....although I'm not sure when compared to Bergkamp or Koeman) is Robben into the 2010-2017 period and perhaps a Hagi or Shevchenko into 1990-2009. Then on that 'greatness in own era' criteria that is the basis of Peter's idea, maybe he could actually feasibly squeeze into a top 50 if not penalising him a lot for being injured. Wheras I doubted any of Lewandowski, Modric, Lahm, Sanchez could/should/would be placed quite so highly (again others might feel they can be though, or that Iniesta and Neuer both can be).
Well, I said there isn't a consensus on him and I stand by those words. He isn't certain from making an all-time Dutch XI or National team XI. Around the turn of the century (when coincidentally also Ajax and the KNVB existed 100 years) there were many of those attempts or surveys. His placement varied from near the top 20 (lower tens) to six or eight at best. A reputable and still often cited list was by Henk Spaan in 1999 (and although he occasionally talks nonsense, it is true he has an interesting perspective and has followed the game since the early 1960s) and he placed him eighth. For this purpose eighth is already a problematic placement, with now 20 years later also others thrown in the mix (Seedorf, Robben, Vd Sar, Davids who played four Champions League finals in his career between 1995 and 2003 - back then Spaan placed Bergkamp just three places below Neeskens but his career wasn't done and he'd add a solid euro 2000, as top assister, an European final in 2000 with four non-PK goals plus some more assists, three FA Cups and two league titles afterwards). @PDG1978 had eight Dutchmen in the top 100, which simply means that even the more optimistic placings of Neeskens (in 1999, we are now two decades further ahead) makes his inclusion insecure. Other examples: Matty Verkamman is the foremost historian on the national team. His work can be truly called academic and the full NT history (plus everything that is relevant) encompasses around 10000 pages. For the right-sided midfield position - three midfielders - he placed Neeskens second. Ad van Emmenes followed the national team (and other national teams) in person from 1909 to the early 1980s. He did rate Neeskens well, but not as standing above other candidates he saw in person. He was placed in a merry-go-round. To me this varying placement (from eighth to twentieth) isn't strange, because people struggle very often with the 'Robins' or the loyal lieutenants - VI dubbed some of those like Busquets etc. "masterful servants". The most famous example, across all team sports, is nowadays probably the basketballer Scottie Pippen whose standing varies from outside the top 70 to top 25 - revolving around observations like that SP without MJ reached further in the play-offs than MJ without Pippen (and similar ideas). While understandably I like Van Hanegem more, I don't dislike Neeskens. His technical skills are even somewhat better than what he is remembered for. He was one of the earliest - maybe the earliest - practitioners of the now famous "seal dribble". Because I've seen him do it in three different matches I'm sure it was intentional. Cruijff needed 'upgraded' players (that he unquestionably helped to improve by himself) like Neeskens to transform an European Cup final (in 1969) into winning a final, or bring Holland to a final tournament. Neeskens was also very good and decisive in the 1979 Cup Winners Cup final, which is counted as the first European trophy by Barcelona. But was he really the 2nd best player of the early 1970s Ajax team? The Ballon d'Or votes don't show it. For many the so called "royal pair" signified what Ajax was about. Neeskens was certainly more consistent than a chain smoker Keizer though, who was famous for "running one in four" (i.e. one great game in four matches). I can certainly accept the idea he is in (instead of another Dutchman), and PDG has at times shown me things that impressed him, but I merely meant that there is simply no consensus on him. The other twelve/thirteen players I mentioned are not without debate too, but they are universally recognized as "great" or "one of the greatest". Then again, most of those were (main) stars in their own right, including Van Hanegem. Neeskens was born, raised and lived as a grown-up in the town where a part of my family lived. One of my uncles sat on the same school as him, with Neeskens one year above him. It's a small world (esp. the province of Holland - if the whole world knows six degrees of separation then... ???).
I don't dispute there were fans too; In 1983 Brian Glanville placed Neeskens among the 25 best players of the past 25 years. But was Neeskens really rated as well as a Gento or Careca for instance? In the player of the year votes? Higher than Boniek? I don't think so. In 1995 Guerin Sportivo listed gave a nod to Careca, as we have seen.
OK. I was looking at your post last year in the Platini v Zidane thread (copied below). I took the numbers at the bottom to mean that Kopa was 10 out of 10, above the others. ======================================================================= -Kopa, Platini and Zidane are the 3 greatest players ever from, and for France. -Platini was the best French player 1976-1986 and Zidane was the best French player 1996-2006 (Henry was a great striker but never carried the team). -Platini would have very possibly struggled in the 90s while Zidane would have been at least as fantastic as he was at his own time "transplanted" in the 80s. But him in the 2010s, I have some doubts. While I can imagine Platini like a "Xavi who would score his good share of goals" in the 2000-2010s. -Zidane was a 10-8, Platini was a 10-9 and Kopa a 10-10. That's how I see things. ========================================================================