Which player has been the best at the age of 35 or later? We had a thread discussing the best at 20 years old a while ago so this is the opposite....
I voted Stanley Matthews. I don't really know his performance after 1950, but I knew as a fact that some of his most famous matches were played after 1950. I don't think we should compare oufielders with keepers.
Fair point. I did consider leaving them out or doing a seperate poll as it's easier to stay among the best as a keeper at a 'late' age I suppose even if agility must decline a bit surely. Anybody who doesn't vote for a keeper but wants to choose one (of those 4 or someone else) as the best veteren keeper too, feel free to add a post to that effect. Yeah, these two performances by Matthews were after 1950 of course: I haven't decided on my own vote yet though....
Difficult to make a call but this fine PDG overview shows well how 'world class' level in certain deacdes was more likely to happen as in some others. For outfield players. What are the best calls for the 70s, 80s, (and 90s)?
Zoff and Shilton were both probably the best in the world in their position after 35, each arguably had the best years of his career after that point. I'd say Matthews or Puskas personally, both of whom excelled after that age due to a comparative lack of opportunities before then (Matthews because of the war, Puskas because he got to play in the European Cup).
I don't think goalies should be in this contest at all. Also it was easier to play as older, when the game was slower. So I voted for Totti, the modern day elderly. Also Zanetti could have a shout.
After some thoughts and small research my 50s and 60s choices (50s actually) are Matthews and Liedholm. Doubted about the Madrid couple. For the 00s and beyond Maldini, Giggs and Bergkamp are my preferred choices (Giggs tormenting City around 2009 is a good example and Bergkamp was important for the invincibles thing and early part of 2004-05). Years in between is difficult other than GKs.
For the modern games, I say Maldini, Giggs or Zanetti. Both Zanetti and Maldini remained as one of the best defenders in the world after 35. Giggs was amazing, but he was no longer the absolute best winger in the world. Romario was underrated . He was top scorer in the Brazilian league in 2001(i did not bother to check his birthday to see whether he was 34 years old when he won it). He was again the winner in 2005. He also rescued Brazil for the WCQ in 2001. If he remained in Europe or went to Japan/Korea 2002, we might have a different opinion of him.
Others may have been better than Matthews at 38 or 40, but I don't think anyone can match him for longevity. I wonder how many of today's fans know his name but don't realize how long he lasted. When he played his last game in England's top division,, then called the First Division, he was 50.
Apart from the ones already mentioned: Alan Ball (still playing First Division level at 37 for Southampton FC in 1982) Martin Peters (still playing First Division level at 37 for Norwich City in 1980) Hans Schäfer (in 1963, he was voted German Footballer of the Year at the age of 35, was integral part of the first Bundesliga champion Köln in 1963-64, played until 1965) Max Morlock (in 1961, he became German Footballer of the Year at the age of 36, that same year he led Nürnberg to the German championship, the following year also won the German Cup, played until 1964)
I agree somewhat ... But we have to distinguish the position, as rule of thumb, it's EASIER for DF and GK to keep their career longer than MF and then FW. 1- If we say who had a "peak performance" at 35-38 yrs old, I would say Puskas. At 35 to 37 I would say no one played as well as him in a big league and at UCL level . 2- But if we say who had a "reasonable good" and longevity after 35,36 (up to 40)... then Sir Mathews, Lev Yashin, Dino Zoff, Giggs ... come in mind
You're right, although I think that back then, wingers were more likely to be considered forwards than they are today. And if you do view him as a midfielder, that make his longevity even more impressive, considering the amount of running that midfielders do. In any case, he wasn't a goalkeeper. He was covering a lot of ground deep into his 40s.
You're also right. Back then from classic 2 3 5 to WM , there were no midfielders (no such term) but (center/in/out) Forwards and center/half BACKs Plus , each players has his own style in playing despite of same position. For example, Garrincha and Best were more of a FW than Gento and Mathews (same position as outside right or left)
It's worth noting that Matthews at Blackpool (aged 32 to 46) averaged just 27 league games a season (out of 42). It looks like he was either very carefully managed through his 30s and 40s or had numerous injuries - both of which would not be unexpected at his age at the time.
Matthews also won the Ballon d'Or in 1956. I did not check if he was the oldest winner of the award(or any major individual award for the matter). I actually don't know what he did in 1956. According to wiki, he considered his finest performance was a match against Arsenal that year.
Very good remark Yes Mathews won Ballon Dor in 1956 more for his "legendary playing style" and tribute for that then a year of achievement ... (in fact FIFA also noted that as a "trail blazer" ) So he was indeed the oldest to have won such prize at 41 as opposed to Ronaldo as the youngest at 20 (in 97) - and very close in 96 (at 19 lost to Sammer by 1 vote) http://www.fifa.com/ballondor/news/newsid=2195659/ 5) The trailblazer The inaugural Ballon d'Or winner was English football legend Sir Stanley Matthews, a player whose immense talent seemed almost to be inversely proportional to the amount of trophies he accumulated. But although his silverware collection was limited to the FA Cup he won with Blackpool in 1953, the right winger earned himself the nickname the 'Wizard of the dribble' and a glittering reputation that continues to endure, thanks to his talent, exemplary behaviour and impeccable lifestyle. Those qualities allowed him to keep on playing at the highest level until the age of 50, and incredibly he received the Ballon d'Or aged 41
What would your assessment be of Di Stefano at the same age (1961 and beyond) in comparison with Puskas his level at that age?
So how high was the level of Puskas at the age of 35 and beyond, in comparison with Di Stefano? Comparing players from same era and team has to be the 'easiest'. Who aged better?