Far be it from me to question the credentials of such highly valued players, but I'd like to play devil's advocate, anyway. I too would like to hear from Latin American posters on the matter. I can see why Walter Gomez is not highly ranked in Europe. He wasn't even in his 30s when he went there, so it's interesting if he was already past his best. At that age Di Stefano and Schiaffino, supposedly in the same class as Gomez, were just getting started. Also, as I read in World Soccer, Gomez was originally contracted to Milan, but had to be loaned to Palermo because of foreigner restrictions. Forget about comparisons to Schiaffino when he lost his spot to Per Bredesen. Walter Gomez in Europe is an example of what I like to refer to as "convenient loss of form". The football community likes to have a laugh when a player's reputation is suddenly enhanced as soon as they move to a bigger club. Turning world class on the trip to Barca and such. But the opposite is also true. It's amazing how many players have gone past their best during a plane trip.
The Uruguayan Pedro Rocha is another where input from Latin American posters would be helpful. He seems to fall somewhere between Walter Gomez and Francescoli, both in time and international recognition. Rocha did appear in four World Cups, with 1966 easily his best. An injury in Uruguay's opening match of the 1970 tournament probably cost him as his team reached the semi-finals. When Penarol could no longer afford to keep him, the Italian and Spanish leagues were restricting foreign imports so Rocha moved to Sao Paulo where he was an instant success, nicknamed El Verdugo (executioner). The flipside was that Rocha was denied the European stage afforded to Francescoli. Rocha's reputation in South America is very high, and with good reason. His 36 goals are the third highest in the history of the Copa Libertadores. In 1966 he scored ten in fourteen matches as Penarol won the competition before beating Real Madrid 4-0 on aggregate in the Intercontinental Cup. The 1967 Copa America was devalued by Brazil's absence, but its impact was enhanced as the only edition held between 1964 and 1974. Uruguay were champions with Rocha one of the best performers. It would be interesting to hear from Latin American posters where they think Rocha ranks among Uruguayan footballers.
That's the whole point. I was debating with you on how Zidane's 95/96 season was to be classified. So bringing points from your discussion with another poster into our debate did not make any sense. Rather I would request you to respond to the points that I had raised. For instance, I am yet to get a response on my query regarding the list of players whom you deem to have been world class in 95/96, who had better stats than Zidane during that season, while operating from his position. Ok, but others don't necessarily have to agree with you, especially when you offer evidence riddled with factual inaccuracies regarding one of the players, as the basis for your claims. But Zidane did better than these players on ESM and on the Balon d'Or (apart from Ronaldo9). So again, I sense a double standard here wherein a local source is used to put down Zidane while an international source which does not corraborate this claim is ignored. By the same standard btw, Zidane's performances in the French league should be just as important as his performances in Europe. Completely disagree with the current era being loaded with talent. The missing marquee defensive greats and the lack of options in almost all positions for buying clubs in the market, (which cause even older players to go for a premium) showcases the dearth of talent quite adequately. As for your critique regarding Zidane's era, I doubt Zidane could have ensured that Ronaldo9 or Del Piero do not get injured or that Figo and Rivaldo continued their good form from the late 90s. In fact, the nature of the era which allowed more harsh tackling and which had many defensive greats, actually made it a lot more difficult for attackers to remain consistent. So Zidane did prettly well for himself by remaining fit as far as possible, although in some cases it was not enough (98/99 season or WC 02). Anyway, the fact that you bring up the injuries of other players and similar other circumstances means that you are effectively penalising Zidane for aspects beyond his control. I do not think that is fair way to look at it at all. For instance, by the same token, Best can be said to have been good only in a weak era for European football (between Di Stefano/Puskas' heydays and Cruyff/Beckenbauer's full arrival with only Eusebio for real competition. Guess you agree with such reasoning then, although I don't.
Sorry for being blunt here but you interjected yourself into the conversation I was having with another poster so I (wrongly)thought you was familiar with the context in which zidane was being discussed There is a thread dedicated to this subject(the best players of 1995/1996) I don’t have to provide examples of AMs scoring 30 goals+assists if I don’t in the first place recognise ligue 1 as a top league and if I don’t think zidane was impressive against the only legitimately good opposition he faced in the uefa Cup The onus is on you to prove that ligue 1 was such a great league that producing the output zidane managed was somehow indicative of him being World class (at this stage) It seems voters weren’t convinced, as the AM who produced 30 goals+assists finished 28th place in the ballon D’Or with 0 ESM team of the month rankings You can be assured if let’s say Zidane ever managed this in Italy during the 90s he would be a runway winner for the ballon D’Or I’m sorry to say that in terms of offensive talent the era of zidane was hardly impressive Here I have to be very specific because during zidanes playing career there were many players who reached spectacular heights When I’m talking about “zidanes era” I’m referring to the period during which he was dominant So that is from euro 2000 till around 2002/03(even this could be a stretch considering the seasons nedved,Thierry Henry and even R9 had) Without being particularly otherworldly in any one year I would say he was the best overall player during this period (2000-2003) I’m not blaming zizou for other players injury woes but it is clear before Del Piero tore his knee ligaments who was the top dog at juventus ADP was only bettered by R9 in italy during 1997/98 and for one it isn’t even clear zidane was performing at a higher level than Dennis bergkamp during 1997/98 My problem is zidane only truly shone when the coast was clear for him to dominate Before this he was just one of many great creative players in the late 90s. In an era of scarily consistent athletes like Neymar,robben (when he wasn’t injured),Messi,Cristiano amongst others I’m not sure how zidane would gain the same recognition( except probably in a World Cup year where voters usually engage in huge wankfest over 2 or 3 performances) Btw your wrong about the late 60s The era of George best was stacked to the brim with all time talent and I don’t even profess to know the ins and outs of his era(at least not entirely) The had a GOAT level winger In dragan dzajic(many say his performance in Euro 68 is the best ever seen He had the most devastating combination of dribbling+crossing by any European player(even on black and white footage you can easily see how much of a genuine terror he was on the wing) There is Eusébio(post injury) who you mentioned There is a young and supremely gifted Johan Cruyff,with searing pace,agility,dribbling and deadly finishing There is bobby Charlton, Pele (past his prime )but still a great player and by most accounts one of the best players in the world And others like Rivera,Sandro mazzola,facchetti and others With the exception of arguably Luis Figo which other prime players from “zidanes era” were at the level of these players
The context is irrelevant considering that I interjected to respond to a particular claim of your's which was made in the post that I responded to. You certainly do have to provide the examples that I requested, as otherwise your claim, like many others including those in the thread that you are referring to, is based on perception rather than facts. As for Zidane's Balon d'Or ranking and ESM appearances, yes if he had achieved the same output in the Serie A he would have had a higher ranking and ESM appearances, but that is because of the difference in the relative popularity of the two leagues at that time, more than anything else. As mentioned earlier in this thread, almost 80% of France's Euro squad came from Ligue 1 and the UEFA coefficient of the league at that time is proof as well which I shared earlier. And in any case, you weren't even aware that Zidane made the Balon d'Or shortlist when you arrived at your opinion, so your bringing up his position in the Balon d'Or now seems really odd. Disagree entirely. You are underselling key aspects of Zidane's era too much while hyping up those of other eras. Every great had circumstances which helped them including injuries to opponents and downturn in their opponent's form. It is not something that Zidane alone benefitted from. Of my own opinion, I was never suggesting that the era during Best's peak was low on talent. It was done on the basis of your line of thinking. My point was that your line of thinking can be extended to call the era of Best's peak as a weak era. Basically, anybody can put together a few tall claims and "alternate" facts to suggest such things.
Good post again but I miss something that illustrates a big difference in assesment within a specific region and the outside world. Rocha is btw a bit underwhelming on actual game footage/highlights.
We will hopefully get something from a Latin American poster to confirm Rocha's high standing in the region. In the 1990s Placar rated him 76th, and he was 37th in IFFHS's South American list. Sports Mole (link below) places him tenth among Uruguayans. He doesn't appear to be ranked anywhere else. https://www.sportsmole.co.uk/footba...uruguayan-footballers-of-all-time_156514.html
What defines Gomez as a player? I'll use this metric, from 1-10 Acceleration - 10 (not top speed) One-two with Lostau - 10 (short pass + ball control + accuracy) Match winner - 10 Dribbling - 8/9 Finishing - 8/9 Mentality - 8/9 His weakest point, he was too Lazy
Maybe, He seems to played well, even with harder markers, also having a explosive temperament. It said, not only in that article, that Gomez used to being lazy most of the game, almost like a ghost walking in the pitch. But, suddenly when his team needed him the most, it looked like he put a new chip into him and carried his team to win the game. And this, in 5-10 minutes, in the article, compared Gomez to Pele, as the only players able to change a result, when they desired, when his mood changed.
Some idea of Fritz Szepan's reputation in Germany during the 1930s can be gained from this quotation from Tor! The Story of German Football by Ulrich Hesse-Lichtenberger: “Schalke's Fritz Szepan, many observers felt, was a football genius on a par with Sindelar, but he seemed to be paralysed when playing for Germany.” The reason Szepan is not appreciated more widely has much to do with the organisation of the German national team. Some of this has been discussed in another thread. German team manager Otto Nerz was a big fan of English football and its new tactics based on a physical WM. He imposed the system on the national team and instructed German clubs to follow suit. All did so apart from Schalke 04, from the industrial Ruhr, who stuck to their short passing game in 2-3-5 formation. The method was not unlike that of the Austrian Wunderteam, but faster and known as Kreisel (Spinning Top). Nerz's response was to omit Schalke players, some of whom, Szepan included, had Polish ancestry. The folly of this became apparent when Schalke became the most successful club side in Germany. The quote by Hesse-Lichtenberger above describes the situation around 1933. Szepan was 26 at the time and had only played three internationals, having been out of the side for over two years. With the 1934 World Cup approaching and Hitler now in power, Nerz felt reluctantly obliged to recall the best player in the country. But he didn't want the headstrong Pole running his team, so Nerz played him out of position at stopper centre-half where he would exert less influence. Szepan was quite slow but had the technique and vision to play anywhere, and received decent reviews. But was wasted at centre-half in a WM system. Germany nevertheless reached the semi-finals of the World Cup. Two years later came the Berlin Olympics and considerable political pressure on Nerz to succeed. The Nazis had blocked plans to professionalise football and Germany could legitimately field a full-strength amateur team. It is unclear why Szepan was not in the side. He had refused to play for Nerz before and may have done so again. Luxembourg were beaten easily enough to set up a meeting with Norway, the one and only football match Hitler ever attended. He brought Goring, Goebells and Hess with him. Unfortunately for Nerz, Germany lost two-nil and he promptly received orders to organise a phased handover to assistant Sepp Herberger. Sensibly Herberger began building the team around Schalke players and employing their tactics. Szepan was restored to his favoured inside-forward position and made captain. The team was briefly transformed, with the culmination an 8-0 victory over Denmark in May 1937 at Breslau (now Wroclaw in Poland), which has gone done in German footballing folklore. But in March 1938 the Anschluss disrupted Herberger's plans as he was forced to fill half his team with Austrians. The two groups of players did not get on, and Greater Germany were knocked out in the first round of that year's World Cup by Switzerland. Szepan played 34 matches for his country over a period of ten years. During that time the national team only functioned to its full potential for a little over twelve months. In different circumstances under different management, comparisons with Sindelar would have extended far beyond the Ruhr. Szepan ranked 100th in IFFHS's European list.
Thanks again and good post again but unlike the Bican case (that's very well explained), or Kubala, I'm not fully convinced to be honest. That there's a boost by local press is not surprising, even less so in an un-free society and censored press environment. The conclusion is more of an 'what if' nature (what could have been - not sure whether he was seen as 'magical' as Sindelar but circumstances didn't help) than that there is a peculiar/particular region where he's adored much higher than anywhere else - although maybe the Germany based IIFHS is the beginning of a hint to this direction. Good post anyway
Some links to Liedholm, including an obituary by Brian Glanville. The third link suggests that Liedholm was more important in Italy as a manager than as a player. He was voted best Swedish footballer of the 20th century by a leading Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet. He ranked 43 with Guerin Sportivo and was in Venerdi's alphabetical Top 100, both Italian publications. He was also 58th in the IFFHS European list. Sweden's policy of excluding from their national team professionals based abroad cost Liedholm nine years of international football and reduced his exposure outside his native country and Italy. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2007/nov/06/guardianobituaries.obituaries http://www.channel4.com/sport/football_italia/articles/liedholmgg.html https://thesefootballtimes.co/2015/12/08/nils-liedholm-the-swede-who-conquered-calcio/
Do you happen to have the Aftonbladet poll? I did see the ones you cited for Bican: Best player of Czechia, XX century (czech sport weekly "Gol", december 2000): 1.Josef Masopust - 591 pts 2.Josef Bican - 524 3.Ivo Viktor - 370 4.František Plánička - 361 5.Pavel Nedvěd - 251 6.Antonín Panenka - 231 7.Ladislav Novák - 145 8.Karol Dobiaš - 127 9.Andrej Kvašňák - 112 10.Zdeněk Nehoda - 101 Best czech player ever (Newspaper "Mladá fronta Dnes", voting among specialists and journalists, 2009): 1.Josef Bican - 106 pts, 2.Josef Masopust - 96, 3.Pavel Nedvěd - 92, 4.Ivo Viktor - 52, 5.Antonín Panenka - 48, 6.Andrej Kvašňák - 38, 7.František Plánička - 29, 8.Karel Pešek-Káďa - 28, 9.Tomáš Rosický - 19, 10.Karel Poborský - 17, 11.Petr Čech - 16, 12-13.Jan Koller, Svatopluk Pluskal - 14, 14.Jan Berger - 13, 15.Antonín Puč - 8, 16.Karol Dobiaš - 7, 17.Oldřich Nejedlý - 5, 18.Zdeněk Nehoda - 3. Yes I agree Liedholm is also important as a manager, especially at Roma, and from just watching it, it is not a myth. https://www.asroma.com/it/notizie/2016/03/cruyff-la-roma-di-liedholm-e-il-calcio-totale Less so at Milan, Baresi said at the end of 1988: "Under Nils Liedholm we played the zone system but we were still essentially a very defensive team. We still played the ball from the back and held it in midfield rather than pressing forward [and winning the ball back]. But when Arrigo Sacchi took over he decided to take things a step forward. So he allows us to use a more open style and we can go forward and attack."
All I have been able to find from that poll is that Liedholm came first. The same newspaper conducted a poll of journalists and pundits in 2015 to determine the best Scandinavian footballers. The Top 5 were Michael Laudrup, Ibrahimovic, Schmeichel, Simonsen and Litmanen. Link below. Litmanen is said to round off the Top 50, but it appears to be a typo. https://www.thelocal.dk/20150609/laudrup-named-best-nordic-footballer-ever
Links to Ben Barek. He is held in high esteem in France, Spain and Morocco, and by Pele. But he has not appeared in any of the main all-time rankings. The Second World War interrupted his career, and as one of the first black Africans to play in Europe there was also a racial barrier to contend with. http://www.theafricareport.com/Sports/africas-football-legends-moroccos-ben-barek.html https://www.worldsoccer.com/blogs/the-original-black-pearl-336949 https://www.africa.com/africas-greatest-football-legends/
I might be wrong but thought he was always/commonly seen as one of the most important foreigners to play in Spain during the 1950s. Mentioned recently that a 1973 Placar article named Ben Barek, Wilkes, Kubala, Puskas, Kopa, Didi and Di Stefano as the most important foreigners to pass through Spain in the 1950s. I agree Ben Barek isn't put in top 100 all-time things, but would i.e. Morocco put him that high? How do we spot a great difference in evaluation? Pele's opinion might have some credence.
Five of the other six (apart from Wilkes) named by Placar made both their Top 50 and the IFFHS World Top 50 in the 1990s. Ben Barek is one of africa.com 's Top 10 Africans but does not feature in other lists. In Phil Ball's Morbo, history of Spanish football, Ben Barek is never mentioned. This seems a bit of an oversight.
What do you mean by racial barrier? Andrade was already seen as like the best in the world in the mid-20s, so clearly there wasn't a barrier in terms of recognition. Maybe he got a couple of hoots from some hillbillies in the stands, but we're not talking about pre -civil rights US here. If we're talking about later recognition, I think he's handicapped from being a pre-television era player, like many others.
Last paragraph of first link in previous post: Adored by French, Spanish and Moroccan football fans, he was an early victim of racism in sport and struggled with issues related to his team integration. In 1938, during his first match for France against Italy, he was violently booed by the Napolitan crowd, not known for its cosmopolitan views. His life ended on a sorry note, too. Forgotten by the footballing fraternity, he died in lonely isolation on 16 September 1992. His body was discovered a week later.
I don't know where to put it but this is a nice account + website. https://twitter.com/soccerlit (not all with same quality but some are very good)
Similarly, I will re-visit the DBS Calcio average rating lists for 94/95 and 01/02 again soon: Firstly as I realise that Dennis Wise had a rating over 18 registered appearances that is slightly ahead of the top rating otherwise of McMananman. I'll need to remind myself if that would be enough to get the 'award' as DBS Calcio Player of the Season or qualify for being listed in the final summary, but it would be enough to get a mention as top rated player and for the baseline average to be adjusted for that year too potentially (in terms of 'normalising' the ratings to try to make them comparable year to year, whether or not that's better than looking at the straight ratings - I was doing both of course). And secondly because when adding together Benito Carbone's appearances for Derby and Middlesbrough in 01/02, he has both enough appearances to qualify for inclusion on any basis according to what I was doing before, and a top 10 overall average rating for that season, just slotting in behind Ljungberg.
So, adjusting 1994/95 again to include Wise. My list of DBS Calcio Players of the Year was based on 50% of games played at least though so no need to alter that, and in a way it kind of seems more representative for Klinsmann to be among the names than Wise even, but nevertheless based on the precedence with Suarez/Van Persie etc, Wise does top the list of averages. The adjusted rating for McManaman goes down slightly as the baseline average for 1994/95 now becomes 6.63. 1994/95 Dennis Wise (6.87, 6.90) - top rated midfielder Steve McManaman (6.85, 6.88) - 2nd rated midfielder Paul Ince (6.81, 6.84) Alan Shearer (6.80, 6.83) - top rated attacker Colin Hendry (6.71, 6.74) - top rated defender Warren Barton (6.68, 6.71) - 2nd rated defender Steve Watson (6.65, 6.68) Mark Draper (6.63, 6.66) Gary McAllister (6.62, 6.65) Eric Cantona (6.59, 6.62) - 2nd rated attacker John Barnes (6.59, 6.62) Gary Pallister (6.57, 6.60) Peter Beardsley (6.57, 6.60) Danny Maddix (6.55, 6.58) Les Ferdinand (6.54, 6.57) Steve Stone (6.53, 6.56) Hans Segers (6.52, 6.55) - top rated GK John Newsome (6.49, 6.52) Peter Schmeichel (6.49, 6.52) - 2nd rated GK Jamie Redknapp (6.48, 6.51)
Adjusting 2001/02 to include Carbone too now. 2001/02 Robert Pires (7.05, 7.05) - top rated midfielder Roy Keane (6.86, 6.88) - 2nd rated midfielder Ryan Giggs (6.82, 6.82) Thierry Henry (6.78, 6.78) - top rated attacker Patrick Vieira (6.77, 6.77) Steed Malbranque (6.71, 6.71) Dean Kiely (6.70, 6.70) - top rated GK Damien Duff (6.69, 6.69) Freddie Ljungberg (6.63, 6.63) Benito Carbone (6.62, 6.62) - 2nd rated attacker Rio Ferdinand (6.60, 6.60) - top rated defender Marcel Desailly (6.59, 6.59) - 2nd rated defender Craig Bellamy (6.59, 6.59) Nolberto Solano (6.53, 6.53) David Dunn (6.52, 6.52) Gudni Bergsson (6.50, 6.50) Steven Gerrard (6.48, 6.48) Dietmar Hamann (6.48, 6.48) Dennis Bergkamp (6.46, 6.46) Gareth Southgate (6.45, 6.45) * 2nd rated GK was Shay Given (6.40, 6.40) So these two changes have taken a 'top 2 highest rated midfielder' slot off Ince for 94/95 and wiped him off the list completely for 01/02! As you can see 01/02 now becomes an example of a season where the ratings seem to be pretty much exactly in line with the average over the whole period, and so the adjusted ratings aren't actually adjusted from the real ratings at all.