@PDG1978 Is there any particulary good thread, with nice discussion, you can remember of, that i could read more on that topic? About the stat thing, it would be ridiculous to suggest that this is the only era where one or two players have been dominating goalscoring wise. Eusebio, Seeler, Muller, Pele, Romario,.. there always was, there is, and there always will be players who score more goals than anybody else. It's down to an era, how many of them they will score, but that's why you don't compare goal to goal,.. you have to compare their level of dominance relative to their era respectively and draw conclusion from that I agree, that it'ss ridiculous to say for example in Maradona-Messi comparison, that Messi is way better goalscorer because he has scored at most 50 in a single la liga season, while Maradona 16 in single Serie A season, but let's put it this way. Messi's 50 is most by any player in this era and other than Cristiano and Suarez who are an incredible goalscorers, nobody came close to that. The closest, "normal strikers" have come to that is, Forlan 32, Eto'o 30, Higuain 27, Falcao 28, Costa 27,.. While Maradona has been outscored almost always while being the main penalty taker scoring around 5 penalties every season. As i said, most he has ever scored was 16. If your argument is that one played for not so great Napoli team, and other one for Barcelona, let me just say that the same season Maradona hit the highest goal tally, he was outscored by 22 years old Baggio in Fiorentina so my words are not based on how much they've scored, but how well both did respectively to their era, "their level of dominance"... so it is easy conclude, despite the differences that Messi was better and more talented goalscorer than Maradona. The point of this text is to show you that argument such is "this era was tougher than this so it's incomparable" can easily be dodged if another perspective is taken and you go into detailed enough analysis. Oh have i mentioned already that Ronaldo in his first season in Inter, when he was basically fully fit, got outscored by Beirhoff and, with two games more in legs, was only 3 goals above Baggio who has never been recognized as a goalscorer?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997–98_Serie_A That doesn't mean Beirhoff was a better goalscorer or anything of that matter because many factors aren't included in this short text, but you see where this is going.. Maybe it is tougher era, but it is tougher for everybody else as well not only Ronaldo, which means that despite the differences, they should be on the same level of dominance as players today. If Ronaldo scored 35+ goals in that Serie A era while nobody else got to 30, i believe he would have the case, but now all you can do is say "what if he hadn't..." or throw bunch of arguments to claim it's not comparable. ... btw Carl Lewis' time of 9:86 still remains as an amazing performance even by modern standards and it would beat majority of sprinters nowadays, just like Maradona, Cruyff would do the same in football
I think it's been touched on in many topics, but possibly a thread entitled something like "Are Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo the best ever?" would be a major one. Like I hinted I don't think I'd want to go into it too much again to be honest lol, and maybe it's an easy topic for posters to annoy each other on somehow, while also being somewhat unresolvable I think. I suppose Messi, Cristiano and Suarez have all been playing for those super clubs when scoring so many, and we don't know how many those 'normal' strikers would score in other eras or how highly they'd be regarded in general. While it depends if you look at R9's Barca year or the Inter one (as the Barca one was an outlier scoring wise moreso, wheras at Inter he possibly played almost as support striker in some respects? I know Messi has been playing as false 9, but possibly in his top scoring year, of the not so false variety?) I thought I'd better add the one reply but yeah hope you understand I never wanted to re-enter the debate really, but just felt the stats looking different is an obvious way that different rules on fouls leading to red and yellow cards makes a difference. In terms of quality of goals, I suppose it can also be that when defenders fear being sent more, or when they have been sent off when they felt they still wanted to commit the heavy foul or last man foul or whatever, it's more likely players can get more solo goals or impressive individual goals too, but certainly overall scoring tally is not going to be harmed by harsher penalisation of fouls (I think you do accept that though of course from what you say). Yes, I don't know whether now people believe Lewis was absolutely 'clean' himself, but I know that former runners could out-do some of the current stars, although I do think in more of a limited sport like that that 'progress' in terms of times achieved (although only equating to a slight gap over a full 100m of course) is inevitable, though it could be a while before Bolt is surpassed even so (the question might be when he is, would the guy have done it in the same era as Bolt). I don't know enough about the sport to consider whether there will finally be a ceiling that is hard to surpass in terms of perfecting training/diet etc etc, but we are looking at marginal gains and still in a purely athletic sport some of the former stars like Michael Johnson still stand out don't they? Hope this reply is ok, but yeah don't want to get more into it again really lol! The thread I mentioned will be in the main Beautiful Game section, if you go back enough pages I would think (but will be extremely long!). You could also search "Messi Ronaldo Best Ever Big Soccer" in a search engine perhaps to find it quick. Like I say it's not the only thread touching on the topic by any means though.
This is far better argument than the difference in eras, but i agree this is not place for this so ill just stop. If we exclude Bolt, general quality of sprinters in past decade has raised. There are sprinters like Gatlin (although old), DeGrasse who are closing that gap between Bolt and the rest of the world. Now it remains to be seen what are our actual limits.
"It is not a popular observation to say: but what is often forgotten and consciously ignored is that Maradona was actually better protected by referees (at World Cup, UEFA level and in Serie A, that is) than and relative to other top stars during the stretch of the decade. Havelange - as specific example - explicitly said before the 1986WC that the referees should hand out yellow cards quickly whenever Maradona was impeded and so they did when he was (un)intentionally drawing fouls, hacked and dived his way through goal. Even in the 1980s they weren't completely stupid; you don't kill the golden goose that communicates so well to all different continents." 29-05-1986 "The 36 arbiters for the World Cup World Cup matches are strictly instructed by Harry Cavan, Vice President of the Fifa and Chairman of the Referee Commission. Cavan emphasized that the arbitrators must ensure that the players strictly adhere to the rules and that the referees need to take the top players to extra protection." http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010641717:mpeg21:a0123 30-05-1986 "1986 was declared by the FIFA the year of the referee. The leaders of the international football organization know that football can only be saved if rottenness is pushed out and the referees are adequately covered. It is only for that reason that it will be expected that this tournament will be sharpened. In summary, the chairman of the referee committee, Northern Ireland Harry Cavan, held a press conference last Wednesday, stressing that the technically gifted players are being protected. So far, you do not even have to agree. Protection of what kind of footballers is also unnecessary if the rules are actually applied strictly." http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010948810:mpeg21:a0333 The 'classiest' quality paper of the low countries had also a bold(ish) headline: 07-06-1986 "Football nations from Latin America again getting favored at the World Cup" http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=KBNRC01:000029348:mpeg21:a0094 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NRC_Handelsblad Or an English source: Referees to stamp out violence MEXICO CITY. Monday: Referees in the World Cup finals will be under strict orders to protect the game's artists from violent or cynical fouls. "Referees will take firm measures in this Cup. We will not permit stars being stopped from playing," Mr Harry Cavan, a vice-president of FIFA, the world governing body of soccer, said yesterday. "The undertaking was aimed at reassuring players such as Brazil's Zico and Argentina's Diego Maradona, who still complain about how they were systematically obstructed and fouled during the 1982 World Cup in Spain."But Mr Cavan, chairman of ElFA's referees' committee, admitted that his biggest problem was getting match officials to interpret Rule 12 on violence consistently. "There is nothing more irritating for star players than to have exactly the same foul lead to a caution in one game and yet be ignored in another," he said. The 36 World Cup referees, who come from every continent, begin a two-day course here tomorrow aimed at preparing them for the intensely difficult job ahead. Five players were sent off in Spain including Maradona and there were 99 bookings, but many observers felt that too few sanctions were imposed, not too many. Perhaps the worst unpunished foul came when West German goal-keeper Harald Schumacher charged recklessly into France's Patrick Battiston, knocking him unconscious. Mr Cavan said the referee in that match maintained that he had not seen the foul. "But that incident will certainly come up in our training course as the type of thing that must stop," he said. Mr Cavan answered cautiously when he was asked whether a worse level of violence was accepted in Latin America, which has four teams in the 24-nation finals, than Europe in intercontinental encounters. "Don't forget it's a difficult thing to bring uniformity to world football played in 150 countries with 150 different cultures," he said. He confirmed that it would be illegal during this World Cup for exultant players to leave the field after scoring a goal, thus provoking the passions of spectators. "You'll see players applying the brakes when they reach the touch-line," he said. https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/123835901/ Invariably the (single) Dutch referee received a question before the World Cup. He replied: "Although the FIFA did not impose a [official] gagging order on the referees, Keizer refuses any interview in Mexico. "I know that interviews are not appreciated by the FIFA. Many international stories have already appeared in the international press. If I say something wrong, I cut into my own meat and I'll pass for that", said the arbiter." http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010948809:mpeg21:a0193 From the New York Times archive: "FIFA decreed 1986 as The Year of the Referee, with the hope they would barely be noticed, yet that is impossible once the players are kicking at each others' ankles, falling with great demonstration of mortal pain, and kicking rockets toward the goal. In the opening game in Guadalajara, with Socha acting as a linesman, a Spanish shot hit the crossbar and bounced down to the goal line. It was impossible to tell from the television shots if the ball had totally crossed the goal. After Christopher Bambridge of Australia did not allow a goal, and Brazil won, 1-0, many journalists insisted the ball had been a goal. Socrates, the worldly medical doctor and midfielder of Brazil, was later quoted as saying officials might be swayed in some slight way because ''political and commercial interests favor the advancement of Brazil and Mexico.'' Socrates has since been told by Brazilian officials to save his remarks for a future updating of Plato's ''Republic.'' ------ ''Football must be a clean game,'' Havelange said in an interview with El Grafico, an Argentine sports magazine, last month. Recalling the kick-boxing exhibition by Gentile, Havelange added: ''Why wasn't he expelled? This doesn't happen anymore. Now first he is warned, and then the red card.'' The legalist approach was challenged by Jack Charlton, now the coach of Ireland and a stalwart on England's rugged 1966 cup champions. ''They are encouraging gamesmanship in this competition to a degree I don't like,'' Charlton said the other day. ''Referees will be on a hair trigger. ''I'm sure that from the first kickoff, there will be people rolling over and over as if they had been decapitated. Within two minutes, they'll be up and running around with a smile on their face because they've probably got a free kick or a player booked.'' --------------- Diego had to work for his money yesterday, diving and stumbling and grimacing, raising his total to 35 fouls called against him in four games. When Maradona wasn't acting, he was looking for help, but the game was a swarm of yellow shirts playing soccer with their toes, their knees, their foreheads and their minds. To be continued.
So this is what I said: "It is not a popular observation to say: but what is often forgotten and consciously ignored is that Maradona was actually better protected by referees (at World Cup, UEFA level and in Serie A, that is) than and relative to other top stars during the stretch of the decade. Havelange - as specific example - explicitly said before the 1986WC that the referees should hand out yellow cards quickly whenever Maradona was impeded and so they did when he was (un)intentionally drawing fouls, hacked and dived his way through goal. Even in the 1980s they weren't completely stupid; you don't kill the golden goose that communicates so well to all different continents. Actually, the 'red card' rule for 'brutal fouls' was introduced in 1982-83 (think of Jimmy Johnstone his famous game vs Atletico Madrid). Before you might misinterpret my words: if one thinks about relative dominance then I think also about - within the scope of this subject - about relative star treatment (the lack of referee protection as compared to other stars or 'regular' pros). In which, mind you, football was not alone. Many other team sports and contact sports introduced explicit/implicit star treatment policies as well at one point in the 1980s. It was a development - with ups and downs - that ran parallel to other sports." Here the remainder (addition to post #48 and post # 54). It's more than enough, and I bet it is more than understood why it took four days to answer this question. ----------------- 08/06/1986 (Rob Hughes) Other things, of course, come over more clearly. For example, that there are far too many [out of form] prima donnas and too few Maradonas. And, for that matter, that Maradona is a dreadful prima donna himself. He has set two standards this week. His goal against Italy was an absolute masterpiece of that fine judgment and unique balance which make Maradona a joy to behold. And yet against those remarkable battling South Koreans he spent more time throwing himself to the turf, trying to claim that each and every one of them was bullying him and torturing his limbs. In truth he was cheating, trying to con the referees, to place a marker obliging them to protect him in the future, but also to steal time in the sun. For every time the prima donna went down out came the drinks for his friends. The sadness is that by now the cameras were fully focused; by the end of the week even England were proving that they know how to feign injury and before the summer is out the devious little trick will doubtless despoil our school playing fields. ------------------- 16/06/1986 (i.e. before the round of 16 game) Was it not improper, Mexican journalist asked, for the president of the Uruguayan federation hysterically to have condemned the Press for unfair criticism of the Uraguayans? Dr Havelange said he required written confirmation of Uruguay's accusations. Laughter greeted this: the morning papers had little else. It was left to Herman Neuberger, of West Germany, chairman of the FIFA organizing committee, to disclose that the Uruguayan federation had been cautioned, fined 25,000 Swiss francs, threatened with expulsion if their disorder continued, and their manager, Omar Borras, banned from the bench against Argentina for calling the French referee, Quiniou, 'a murderer,' ------- 18/07/1992 Selling the golden goose - Football Here comes the bizarrest twist yet to the Maradona story. We now have an alliance to daunt the strongest heart: Diego Maradona and Joao Havelange, the autocratic president of Fifa and the most powerful man in football. The two men hated each other for years. ``When he dies, no one will worry," Maradona once announced publicly. Now, as Marseilles negotiate for his services and Naples scream that they have a right to their boy, or failing that, a right to pounce on Pounds 3.5 million, Havelange intervenes in an extraordinary and unprecedented fashion. ``I consider Maradona the greatest player of the last ten years," he said. ``He made a decisive contribution to the last two World Cups. He must play where he likes without conditions." Maradona, who has always held such a view himself, said: ``I can be useful to Fifa. Havelange will not tolerate another season of inactivity for me." Useful to Fifa? You bet. The 1994 World Cup, in the United States, is the most colossal gamble ever made by a leading sporting body. Fifa needs every advantage to make the thing work, and the biggest name in football is the strongest card it possesses. Maradona is nothing less than Fifa's golden goose. ------- 23/07/1992 Maradona too valuable to lose Joao Havelange, president of the world soccer's governing body (Fifa) said that Diego Maradona was "too valuable to lose" and promised on Tuesday to find a solution to his contract dispute. Havelange said Fifa was prepared to mediate between Maradona and Napoli to end the [...] http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/issue/straitstimes19920723-1 -------- --------- (note: some reputable investigative journalists claim that FIFA money was used to broker the deal, however, I leave this out because I'm not entirely sure; again, public statements in a press conference can be verified, "classified" documents can not) -------- 08/07/1994 FIFA boss admits he shielded Diego FIFA president Joao Havelange told a Spanish paper yesterday that he made personally sure that Argentinian Diego Maradona [...] -------- -------- And the final bombshell with regards to (relative!) protection and star treatment (compare: 08/07/1994 news report): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tina-took-drugs-1994-World-Cup-qualifier.html http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-05-24/we-played-socceroos-while-on-drugs-maradona/2728108 http://www.goal.com/en/news/585/arg...i-removed-doping-tests-in-argentina-australia -------- Important note: as you can see in post #54, then referee boss Harry Cavan also mentions Zico as example he had in mind. So to varying - and probably inconsistent - degrees it also applied to other (big) players and/or (big) nations (cf. Socrates).
It is superfluous but this one for example: http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/49/9/599 Potentially in the future we will also see this era as a 'harder' one given the various proposals that are underway. Some of those proposed changes are actually very good I'd say, in the sense of increasing referee integrity and uniform standards (instead of arbitrarily handing out yellows for time wasting, arbitrarily add minutes, just stop the clock - it is so simple). Other ideas are imho not good, such as infinitely increasing the number of substitutions. That only plays in the hands of the bigger and wealthier teams, with bigger squad depth and bigger staffing.
12 years after retiring, the great Batigol struggles to walk. Expect more stories like this in the coming years.https://t.co/OkEsKAFgXp— Jonathan O'Brien (@obrien_jonathan) July 10, 2017 Could be any/all. He also played in the 1990s, when defenders could kick strikers hard – that may also have been a factor.— Jonathan O'Brien (@obrien_jonathan) July 11, 2017
Maybe a more interesting question: who would rival Garrincha for that generation or era (or thereabouts) as best dribbler? Who would perhaps question the often assumed supremacy? Not the most consistent player - neither was Garrincha - and 33 sending offs in a career is horrendous but Sivori for example? He is also someone for that 2nd half of 1950s and 1st half of 1960s bracket. Skoglund?
If he is put in that category (as well as others - it is not his prime category be age and not a category he fully covers even) Pele maybe - some people, including Brazilians say perhaps he rivals Garrincha for dribbling in a different way? Although some say Garrincha rivalled Pele as a player even of course on the other hand! Good calls by you I think certainly. Maybe Julinho and Canhoteiro would be other well regarded Brazilian dribblers but not likely thought of as rivals in that category to Garrincha (Julinho was a rival for a while for a place in the team though). Florian Albert (perhaps too young to consider there too anyway)? Maybe Sekularac has a reputation for dribbling? Anyway I don't think I saw this yet, in full anyway, but perhaps interesting to add it: Masopust was renowed for slalom runs wasn't he, but I doubt he'd be considered a rival to Garrincha dribbling wise really.
On Batigol story, it's awful to hear anyone struggle to such extant that they would rather pee in their bed than to stand up and go to bathroom that's 3 meters away, but regardless, this is not because he was kicked in his career but because he didn't take proper precautions before and after games/trainings. I didn't see Mike Tyson, Mohammed Ali, etc., 12 years after they finished their careers barely walking, and you can't argue they weren't kicked. Batigol is clearly an exception. Do you really think something like that would ever happen to athletes like Lebron James, Cristiano Ronaldo, Kobe Bryant (..) that actually take care of their body? Dude, you have those legends friendly games all the time and majority seems just fine.. stop feeding the myth.
For "the way football is changed" you don't even have to be an (ex-)player. Somewhat more behind the scenes this is also such a man. Launching the careers of a handful top class managers and a number of academies. Cybernetics, Cesarean Sections and Soccer’s Most Magnificent Mind https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/...s-and-soccers-most-magnificent-mind.html?_r=0 There is a long 'complicated' and detailed chapter on him in this recent book (which I checked because I accidentally saw a review in The Economist). https://books.google.nl/books?id=9aPRDgAAQBAJ&lpg=PT45&dq=frade mourinho&hl=nl&pg=PT49#v=onepage&q&f=false He also notes however (among other references to him, and references to other figures): Frade makes a great point on being flexible (going as far as playing with one center back) and yet establishing an unquestionable (playing) "identity", which so many wealthy club teams like Chelsea and Man City like to have (they even sacked Ancelotti and Mancini for primarily this reason - the lack of trying to establish a beginning of an "identity", which was the by Abramovich job description). Anyway, this is quite a bit offtopic (what Garrincha, Pelé and others "changed" or did not change). Imho it is more interesting to think of Garrincha's contemporaries in a dribbling sense. Also: how Garrincha was really perceived in the time itself, and how his career trajectory was perceived (not by definition relevant for the 'dribbling' question). Sivori plays and dribbles above against Real Madrid, which was on the wane but still the #1 team in Europe (maybe the world?).
Really don't know where to start and end but here is already a hint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Ali_vs._Antonio_Inoki#Aftermath Second paragraph
My point was that if we ignore his latest part of career when he fought exclusively for money that he was just fine physically years after far more exhausting career than Batigol, yeah eventually time got him, but it gets to us all regardless of our careers, doesn't it? Okay, let me propose another example. Mike Tyson, 12 years since he retired, how well is he doing? Joe Fraizer continued to be a coach years after he retired and that's all in extreme sport such is boxing where hits in head and knees are daily thing. I perhapse gave a bad example, but it still doesn't change the fact that majority of footballers don't suffer long-term injuries, i mean, there is no direct evidence of 90s being physically that much more exhausting than modern football.
You ignore the evidence that is in post #56. Click that link please. http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/49/9/599 Batigol is just an example (one example). Muhammad Ali is a bad counter example by you. He clearly started to have problems to walk (and speak) after around ~1975. You can see him being less bright in his talk from 1977 onward, progressively worsening. From the mid 1980s onward he struggled to walk really. Besides, he was typically not hit or kicked at his legs, and once he did fight someone who was allowed to kick his legs, he was close to amputation. I rest my case. Batistuta was also relatively tall for his time, and about those players we know referees adjust accordingly (just search around the web, it is proven many times in studies).
Thanks mate. Keep up the good work. Your sources and articles gave me a fresh respective on my questions and previous knowledge. Hope for more of the same in the future! Just a quick question on that point about professional fouls being red-card offense in 1990. I know that FIFA instructed the refs to send off people who inflict professional fouls at that time. But I notice that similar offenses to Maradona's handball vs USSR are also not given red cards at Italia 90. At 5:32 of the video, is the handball offense carried out by Villaroya of Spain against Uruguay. He used his hands to clear Jose Herrera's header off the line to save a goal in a similar fashion to what Maradona did against USSR. The referee gave Uruguay a penalty (which was missed), but not a red card or even a caution against Villaroya. The referee in that match, Helmut Kohl, was later given the task of refereeing Brazil vs Scotland and Czechoslovakia vs West Germany QF tie and to my knowledge wasn't punished by that missed handball.
My theory on professional fouls and red cards in the 1990 world cup is that referees haven't formed a consensus on whether giving out red cards should be mandatory in all situations. It is similar to the tackle from behind in 1994 and 1998 world cups, despite FIFA wanting to ban those, in practical circumstances there are still significant tackles from behind that were let go.
@PuckVanHeel Why do you preassume that quantity of injuries through years is depended soley on the toughness of tackles. Surely, referees are less tolerable when it comes to booking and fouls today, for a good reasons tho, as well as the fact that it was more physical game, no denying, but where is 'the match preparation' in the equation? Where this article breaks down quality of preparation that players go through before attending a World cup? It makes huge difference if players underwent mdoern preparation in 2014 or the one in 2002. Although this is the most impressive article on the topic that i have read so far it's still ignores vital things. For example, it ignores that overal physical condition of players of weaker nations has drastically improved, which definitely change numbers by a bit. I am pretty sure that physical preparation of Honduras in 2014 WC was at way higher standard than Senegal back in 2002, which results in way less injuries in nations of lower standards. That's common sense because the leve of professionalism is way higher today within weaker nations, and things like that are included in averages. So the analysis should be between top 5, top 10 nations for more accurate results. Furthemore (this may be a bit off topic), they explicitly said that hits in head and injuries like that are sanctionated with red cards immidiately by new rules, which drastically lowered their amount, but they still included them in average numbers. That's misleading in some sense. Why that system of analysis is wrong is because toughness of tackles is depended on the rules restrictions, but not phyiscality of the game. So when you include the rules restrictions you get seemingly higher difference in physicality of the game then it actually is because if there was no rules restriction in modern football whatsoever, the difference between physicality of the game would be lower than it is by including them because players would play different without those new rules, and with "physicality" (in the sense, how physical did players approach the game) being the subject of study (or not, idk, that's why it's off topic), they shouldn't have been included. it's like wondering why basketball players in era where they didn't have a three point line weren't shoting as long shots as they do in modern basketball. If you tell a player he will get a red card for hiting heads he will do it less often. So there are two things that have to be seperated: Overal physical difficulty to play in era and overal aggressivness of players (their approach relative to the rules of an era) The first thing is undeniable because of different rules, players before could play tougher so they did, but the second thing is debateable, because it is independent of the first thing and depended on the changes in the rules. So it doesn't mean that players are soft today. They play within different rules and how tough they are is meassured relative to their rules and i still haven't found any reason to buy the stereotypic bullshit people talk about that players back then where in general tougher than they are today. Btw, Messi has played under two of those world cups that were tougher than today's 'soft' football and he is still going pretty strong after 10 years at very peak of football (as well as many other players). At the end of the day, i am not arguing that todays football is as physical as it was back in the days, my overal point is that Batistuta could prevent the injuries if he took proper precautions in his career, as we can see, there are plenty of tall players from the same era having no problem with walking whatsoever, some of them are even managers who daily train with their team.
Yes, I agree with this and also with the other post (good post, well done). In the very same Argentina vs Soviet Union match Fredriksson dismissed last defender Bessonov for that "professional foul" instruction (straight red, against Caniggia), but the referees were not consistent. Villaroya received a yellow card as well as a penalty against him.
This is an imbalanced point because surely this is even more the case for the bigger countries, where after all almost all financial gains have been concentrated (according to Deloitte 90-95% and maybe more of the financial gains have gone to the top 20 clubs and top 10 countries). Then you talk about legal and illegal means. He added that money was the only difference between being caught and becoming a multimillionaire: ‘Athletes with little money use simple steroids and hope they don’t get tested. The stars earn $50,000 a month, not including starting bonuses and shoe sponsorships. The very best invest $100,000 [in doping]. I’ll then build you a designer drug that can’t be detected.’ https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/most-sportsmen-cheat-theyd-be-mad-not-to/ Good, because also at Champions League and Spanish league level this is the case. Or does Senegal and Honduras compete in those ones too? http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/47/12/748 https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/33171918.pdf In the Premier League there has been a decrease of 27% in fouls per game between 2001-02 and 2010-11. This is a quantitative fact. Between 2006 and 2013 there was a 22% decrease. http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/22253531 Of course there's a difference between leagues, as Cristiano Ronaldo commented in 2010 and 2011. How hard the tackling was in the Premiership, hence a drop in level by him in 2008-09. How many of those managers were strikers? Gianluca Vialli quit management for (partially) the same reason. Ronaldo Fenomeno cannot train or coach without medicines. I already said Batistuta is an extreme case and only one example. One example is not the same as evidence. As an outsider and layman it is difficult to say but you might have a point. "Years of hard running and brutal defensive attention, however took its toll on the long-haired assassin. Football left him with a chronic ankle problem, aggravated presumably by years of playing with the aid of cortisone injections, which caused him so much pain he once asked his personal physician to “cut them both off, like [South African athlete Oscar] Pistorius”. “There is no cartilage or tendons left in there. My 86 kilos are balancing on bone, and that causes me great pain.” That drastic situation was averted, but Bati was forced to cut short his polo career and pursue a more sedate post-football life." Past week Michel d'Hooghe warned on television on the overuse of anti-inflammatories and painkillers - and cortisone can/will break down the body. Ibuprofen is overused. Footballers use painkillers/anti-inflammatory still too much with (tissue) recovery aids as testosterone, steroids and hormones not available. The laws of the game are still amendable to change, and some big changes might happen in the near future. He's one to take seriously and was high up in the trees.
Garrincha at this time and with all its advantages would be as great or better than it was. It is absurd to look at the legends of the past with the advantages of the present, if we do it the other way around, Messi would be smaller (without hormones), and he would have fractured it at least twice. Pure speculation, zero certainty
Probably the most extensive comp dribbling comp on Mane garrincha It is unusual in fact almost impossible to find this much footage for a player of his period Great footage nonetheless but has reinforced pre conceived notions I had Re garrincha Specifically regarding him not being as great as he was purported to be. I think jairzinho although arguably less talented was no less effectual. Alot of the dribble of garrincha had no purpose and lead to no end product Thankfully we don't have to rely on the word on old timers and have enough footage to base an opinion on If not the traditional line at least was garrincha was greater than Pele, could dribbled 10 players in 1 run and was the most naturally gifted player ever The footage above points to him being a great talent but no greater on the wing than arjen Robben or even Figo on his best days Clearly Not some extraterrestrial level performer (like a Messi or Maradona-he was at least based on this footage nowhere near their league in talent or career achievement)
Would be a nice solo goal vs Portugal here What the footage (which are few) do not show is that Garrincha had an incredible acceleration and great changes of rhythm (cambios de ritmo)... in fact his statistics with almost 33 years ago, only about dribbling, is looking superior than players like Jairzinho, Pelé, Maradona who are also regarded as top dribblers. Too bad that Opta does not show the stats of 1958 and 1962WC.
Can I ask on what you base this? The Doppelgangers tool shows this: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/world-cup-comparisons/garrincha-1966/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/world-cup-comparisons/diego-maradona-1986/ Standardized by tournament (that means: in 1966 there were more shots per game than in 1990), the 33 years old Garrincha is indeed not so far behind in 'progressive dribbles', but he is behind in take-ons. Just a question.