Is it certain for example Neymar deserves a top 100 spot above Rivaldo factoring in international performances(I’m of the opinion Neymar is of now clearly ahead based on club performances-not so much on the international stage) Gareth bale would surely warrant an inclusion in the honourable mentions list for British players ahead of Gary Lineker for example(purely for being a more dominant prime player There is even a case that his best level was of a higher standard than Ryan Giggs (but I would have no problem with the latter being ranked marginally ahead based on longevity) I would swap nedved/bozsik with savecivic/hagi(just my personal preference here but I’m certain that nedved was the least talented out of this group by a clear margin Generally I think gento became overrated with the passage of time. I have no reason to believe he was more talented than Ryan Giggs for example Raul seems to generally underrated nowadays probably due to all of his records being dismantled by either Cristiano Ronaldo or Lionel Messi(or even David Villa for the NT) It’s worth bearing in mind that at one point Raul was the top Scorer in the history of Real Madrid,the top Scorer in the history of the champions league and the top Scorer of the Spanish NT He no longer holds any of these records so he risks being forgotten with the passage of time(there are many fans nowadays who even question if he was actually a top Player) there was a point in the early 2000s during which he was widely considered to be one of the top 5 players in the world (2000-2003) And on his day arguably even the best player in the world https://www.xtratime.org/forum/72-r...ne-ra%FAl-figo-who-most-important-madrid.html
Raul was like Thomas Müller with better technique, in his playing style. As such not everyone was actually convinced about his importance Example: http://soccer-europe.com/Biographies/Raul.html I agree that later successes by Spain and Spanish clubs haven't helped
I think it's a bit confusing since I went back to something from page 42, but the main thing is that it was a response to an idea by Peterhrt to make historical selections with quotas for each era and each position (GK/def/mid/att), so that will help to explain once you study the discussion from that page I think - it will show that a straight swap between Rivaldo and Neymar in my selection would be invalid for example (even though sure, a selection could be made that contains Rivaldo and not Neymar of course). I'd also used some already proposed ideas about who were definitely making it in, even though now going away from it slightly more than then even. But that would have made me lean towards Nedved rather than Savicevic likewise (if that swap would even be valid position/era wise which is doubtful but I forget without going back to check). I was also looking at consistency/longevity a bit more than I typically would, as I think it was set to be a big consideration for this 'project'/vote if Peterhrt had received a lot of similar lists, and we were aiming to form a consensus I suppose. I did say that Savicevic and Neeskens were the two that I'd put in my regular type of 100 player selection the most clearly, that I wasn't finding room for here, but I feel they are ok omissions (and inclusions in a second 100 of mine) for this exercise anyway (some might argue for different types of selection too, but I might not go that way myself as suggested). So yeah, my usual preference (some might say 'bias' even) would put more players in from the 80s and 90s and perhaps 50s and 60s even too, but those were not options. It was a matter of fitting a set template, so choice had to be made between players from the same era (and consideration of which nation they represented has to occur too).
My perception would also be that it's doubtful Gento was more talented (or as talented?) as Giggs to be fair, but even moreso maybe I would place Giggs over Bale for talent and prime form. Again some might say that is era bias even lol, but I don't see really what prime Bale has over prime Giggs and I see that prime Giggs is a better dribbler (skill wise, and rhythm wise, plus more elusive) and with a more cultured left foot etc. I know you are young even though following Man Utd, so I'm not sure how aware you were of Giggs in the 90s? I'm not really sure I'd say Bale is more skilful than Lineker was but still he is more dynamic and more of a threat running with the ball in general I understand to be fair (but Lineker was a far better poacher and suchlike of course).
Yes despite my young age I’m aware he was considered to be a phenomenon talent(being heralded the new George best,even Johan Cruyff saying he was clearly better than cantona I do remember watching early 90s highlights of Manchester United on MUTV and getting the feeling that Giggs was involved in at least half the goals scored by cantona in 92/93 and 93/94) Personally I don’t think he lived up to his potential(I’m unsure about what you mean when you say Giggs had a more “cultured left foot”) Bale led the line with a team of unknowns at Tottenham (Clint Dempsey and whoever else they had -I can’t recall) and nearly scored 30 goals in all competitions As a finisher Gareth bale is demonstrably superior-period In accuracy,power,technique bale is a superior scorer/shooter In other aspects I feel yes Giggs is a better playmaker,more selfless and team oriented etc Giggs fits the mould of a classical type great player Bale represents the modern elite footballer (with outstanding athletic qualities,strength,speed but lacking finesse) I don’t feel one style is inherently greater than the other.what I see is a player in Gareth bale who has struggled with injuries for sustained periods of time When he has got a run of form he is a undisputed top 10 player in the world I don’t recall Giggs ever reaching that level(despite being more talented,despite playing first team football at Manchester United for 20+ years etc) There are many fans who consider Gareth bale the greatest British talent since George best (Like I said before he is different-a freak but not a great player in the mould of a Paul gascgoine,Chris waddle,Barnes,scholes etc) There is also his ability to dominate in big matches with arguably a MOTM in 2 CL final( 15/16 and 17/18) The winning goal in the CL final in 2014 The copa Del Rey final goal in 2014 Players like zidane/iniesta built their entire legacy(or most of it) on less than this. Being a decisive match winner in big matches is surely a factor to consider in these comparisons As for Lineker you would have to show me footage evidence of his skills(bale isn’t exactly a technical genius but saying Lineker is more skilled surely requires evidence to substantiate this)
I don't want to make any definitive claim about Lineker being more skilled mate or get into an argument about it (it would come down to individual interpretation anyway maybe) but I suppose the 2nd goal here shows him running with the ball after a bit of interplay with a team-mate (it is not a typical goal though I'd have to admit, as far as he is concerned, and yes Bale will have more individual goals in total, but I'd feel in terms of controlling the ball, playing short passes etc Lineker isn't necessarily inferior in that comparison): I don't say Giggs's left foot was ultra reliable (I think his crossing could be a bit variable and he could be liable to over-hit them on the run at times etc - but still he is right up at/near the top for both PL assists and CL assists, even if yes longevity plays a big part and on a per game basis it's not the same even if he'd still compare decently to a lot of notable names and for something like this then longevity of career/output is obviously a plus factor). But in terms of cultured (or precise without being simple delivery we could say I guess), and what he could be capable of in that respect here are a few examples for him too: (2:50) (0:47)
Lineker was a goal poacher similar to Gerd Muller .. he wasn't skilful or technically gifted that's for certain .. he knew were to be in the box and came alive in the penalty area .
First, I suppose it would be opportune to clarify what I mean with "world-class". According to my parameters for the late 1990's it would fit for the top 20-25 players in the world in about one season and I think Zidane was comfortably in that group. Then, it's true, he didn't start well and was used as a type of deep-lying playmaker until Conte was injured and the team changed to a 4-4-2 tactic, but that happened relatively fast as far as I remember (at the end of October, not until the middle of the season) with a turning point in the match against Inter played on October 20, 1996 (for the 6th date of the Serie A): Then, I think he completed almost all the campaign on the rise.
That would be a bit point to the uncertainty of the level competition, but of course there is a way to decide about it: looking him (as much as possible) and contrasting some sources. In the 1995-96 he was voted as the Ligue 1 Player of the Year and is commonly cited as a starred player in the UEFA Cup against other big names (from Bayern Munich, Barcelona, AC Milan, PSV Eindhoven, Sevilla, etc.). It's not that his case was crazy to include by the side of the sources, in my opinion.
When exactly did he play against PSV, Barcelona and Sevilla? http://www.webdelcule.com/partidos/pa1995-96.html http://www.rsssf.com/players/zidane-in-ec.html Not for the first time, you invent your own facts.
I think he might mean that those teams took part in the competition and he was a star of the UEFA cup with many top players participating. I'm not sure why that matters much if they don't play each other, but that's how I would interpret his post.
From just looking at him at Bordeaux I don’t get the feeling he was a higher quality talent than Eden Hazard in Lille Nobody was calling hazard a World class player in 2010/11 and 2011/12 even though he propelled Lille to a domestic double and won back to back ligue player of the year awards. He was at this stage still a world class talent with potential to become a world class player(and the same is true of zidane pre 1997 IMO) George best had 5 consecutive 20+ goal seasons playing as a inverted winger and for a team that ranked anywhere from 1st to 18th in the league He could also play any position ranging from AM to FW (and even CF) He was more versatile,more productive,more talented etc Zidane was only definitely World class performer in 1996/97(borderline here) 1997/98 1999/2000 2001/02 2002/03 In arguably none of these club seasons was he challenging for top 3 player in the Europe (Maybe only 1997/98 post WC final hysteria) I think it would be a privilege for zidane to be ranked in the same category as George best whilst the opposite is impossible(George best had a similar length prime as a elite footballer but his peak was considerably higher Not to mention he played on inferior teams and contributed more to team titles)
Thanks for this. The most recent version of the by-era Top 100 is at the head of Page 48. A few all-time lists have been appearing in various formats, both within BigSoccer and externally. An attempt to combine them gives a picture something like this: Most recent Top 30s include the following 23 players: Pele, Garrincha, Zico, Ronaldo Di Stefano, Maradona , Messi Beckenbauer, G Muller, Matthaus Cruyff, Gullit, van Basten Baresi, Maldini Platini, Zidane Eusebio, C Ronaldo Puskas Charlton Best Yashin When several lists came out during the 1990s, the 12 players below appeared in most Top 30s. They often rank lower now: Didi, Romario F Walter, Rummenigge Meazza, Rivera Matthews, Moore Moreno Schiaffino Kopa Sindelar (Continued in next post)
(Continued from previous post) There was less consistency in who appeared between positions 50 and 100, but twenty years ago the following were often to be found there, and still are: Djalma Santos, Nilton Santos, Carlos Alberto, Jairzinho, Rivelino, Falcao Seeler, Netzer, Breitner Sivori, Passarella Facchetti, Zoff Gento, Suarez Krol, Rijkaard Obdulio Varela Nordahl Charles Keegan Law Hugo Sanchez They now face challenges from footballers who have established themselves during the past three decades, including: Ronaldinho, Neymar Xavi, Iniesta R Baggio, Buffon Bergkamp, Robben M Laudrup Weah Figo Henry Nedved Suarez Modric (Continued in next post)
(Continued from previous post) Of the footballers mentioned so far, all but three have featured since 1950, which represents an inbalance. Between 1915, when football outside Britain began to develop to a good standard, and the late 1940s, there were plenty of other players held in high esteem, including these: Buchan, Dean, Bastin, Carter, Lawton Orsi, Monti, Sastre, Pedernera Piendibene, Scarone, JL Andrade, Nasazzi Morton, James, H Gallacher Friedenreich, Leonidas, Zizinho Orth, Sarosi V Mazzola Zamora Erico Braine And a pre-1914 Top 10 might read: Kinnaird, C Campbell, Arnott, N Ross, Bobby Walker Cobbold, GO Smith, Needham, Bloomer Meredith All these British players were regarded as exceptional footballers at the time and performed in front of large enthusiastic crowds. (Continued in next post)
(Continued from previous post) Similar to those pre-1914 British men are footballers with a very high local reputation, in their own country, region or club, who are not recognised to the same extent in the wider world. Some notable examples are: Walter Gomez, Rocha, Francescoli Finney, Edwards Kubala Liedholm van Hanegem Dalglish Van Himst Bican Szepan Susic Figueroa Cubillas Valderrama Alberto Spencer Magico Gonzalez Ben Barek In addition to these, Eastern Europe is a region where players have tended to be underrated, partly through lack of visibility. Hungary was an exception at one time, though the glamour of Hidegkuti, Kocsis, Bozsic and Albert is fading. The following are among those to rank higher within the region than outside: Pesek, Nejedly, Planicka, Masopust Netto, Blokhin, Dasaev, Shevchenko Lubanski, Deyna, Boniek, Lewandowski Bobek, Vukas, Zebec, Sekularac, Djajic Stoichkov Hagi Other underrated groups of course are defenders and goalkeepers. 150 footballers have been mentioned so far, of which only twenty are defenders and six goalkeepers. A properly representative list would need higher proportions than that. Exactly what constitutes a representative list is a subjective judgement, which will depend partly on how old you are and which part of the world you come from. However, such a list would need to take the pre-1950 generations fully into account.
I feel this needs a better check. For example: which ones exactly placed Rummenigge in the top 30? Going by the ones you generally cite: IFFHS didn't, Placar didn't, Guerin Sportivo didn't, FourFourTwo didn't, The Times didn't, Venerdi didn't, World Soccer didn't, the vote among former Ballon d'Or winners didn't (at least, not among the 25 players to receive votes). Your own calculated top 30 Ballon d'Or votes percentage does (of which you said yourself it was like Keegan remarkably high). ITV from early 90s had him at #24. Now I'm just using your own cited 90s lists. I said it before but in my humble observation someone like KHR (but also Zico) has been slightly upgraded - spearheaded by the Anglogerman axis within the 'cartel' running world football. Edit: corrected ITV
Rummenigge was in ITV's Top 30 – at Number 24. The Venerdi and Planete Foot lists were in alphabetical order so we don't know whether he was in their Top 30 or not. Same applies to Pele's list. IFFHS had him at Number 35. Adding up all the votes for the Top 50 players, he is 0.1% away from the Top 30 and 0.8% away from the Top 20. World Soccer also listed him at 35. Guerin Sportivo placed him at 40, and Placar at 42. The Ballon d'Or calculation was simply adding up each year's percentages of the Top 5 vote since the start in 1956. By 1999 Rummenigge ranked 5th of all time in this exercise. That was surprisingly high, but it would be even more surprising now. In 2017 FourFourTwo magazine ranked Rummenigge 57th.
Schiaffino ranked Number 8 with Guerin Sportivo, 10 with The Times, 15 with ITV and 17 with IFFHS. Placar had him at 63 and World Soccer at 68. He appeared in Venerdi's alphabetical list but not in Planete Foot's. PDG recently reproduced David Brooks's list from 2002. Schiaffino was 14th there. In 2017 FourFourTwo ranked Schiaffino 46th
I'd like to see your explanation/thought for Walter Gomez, Rocha, Liedholm, Szepan, Bican and Ben Barek. I'm not doubtful perse & some others like Dalglish have been explained by you previously.
Actually, I've to ask the question: where do I say what you ask? I mentioned that he was commonly considered a starred player at the end of the tournament against other big names from clubs with other important players at that time, not that he played against the aforementioned clubs. It's not the first time, you rush to claim inventions without having read/understood well an answer.
That's because it's a response to a previous comment: According to the uncertainty of his recognition in France because the French League was not highly competitive, while he was also recognized in the UEFA Cup, a tournament that was also played by top players in Europe at that time. It's not a reliable measure, of course, but I think that shows that @carlito86's argument does not point to anything as clear as he seems to believe about the level of Zidane in 1995-96.
It is irrelevant that zidane participated in a competition that featured many great teams if he did not face any/most of those great teams There only great highlight I recall was his wonder goal against real betis but that’s it Against Milan in the QF he had 0 goals,1 deflected assist from a set piece and 0 pre assists Besides this he faced many obscure Eastern European teams Vardar(Slovakian team) Rotor volograd(Russian team) Milan(he hardly did anything here) Slavia Prague(Czech team) Bayern Munich(his team were comprehensively thrashed 5-1 across both legs) As far as I’m concerned there is no evidence from this fixture list alluding towards zidane being a world class player in 1995/96 A very talented one(most probably) But a proven world class player I’m not convinced
I previously described how I precise what is "world-class" and I did it because it's not an objective description, but it changes according to the parameters of each one who analyzes it to make comparisons. From that point of view I think Hazard is also a feasible candidate, but especially in 2011-12. I think you categorize this as a higher level in a list of them than me. I just explained what the point was and for it it's relevant. It shows the inconsistency of the previous argument you mentioned.