Thanks. It's a good question. I don't have all the answers right now and it would take some time to discover that information. But at club level I don't think he should be strictly reprimanded. But I don't think it was the strongest South American League in his day either. Certainly from fielding top quality defenders, I don't think Brazilian clubs had the best in the continent. I'm sure it's always drawn some scepticism from Europeans. I think between 1970-1990 Brazilian sides only won 3 Copa Libertadores. It was mostly dominated by Argentinian and Uruguayan sides, probably the best defensive leagues of the continent in those decades. At the continental level he and Flamengo had achieved the unprecedented triumph at the 1981 Copa Libertadores. But this victory was surrounded by controversial decisions by the officiating in Brazil with a decisive qualifying match vs Atlético Mineiro. Atlético had 5 players sent off in the playoff encounter and it could not continue with only 6 players so the match was arbitrarily awarded to Flamengo. In addition, Flamengo avoided Argentinian and Uruguayan sides, normally the big guns that dominated that competition. In the following year in 1982 Flamengo were beaten by Peñarol, a Uruguayan side. But it's difficult to find other holes in his club career at Flamengo. Maybe some titles were dubious maybe not, but he was the king of the Maracaná, almost unbeatable. He only lost one time against a NT in that stadium, against the Soviet Union in 1980 and didn't lose much at club level either. It's as if he was untouchable there. They had some great players too, like you mentioned, plus Nunes. But the league in Brazil is somewhat a complex one to understand for some. For the National Championship there was like over 40 squads at times and it could reach 90 teams that were pitted into different groups and the winners would make it to the next phase to compete for the main prize. I think it's like in Italian football incorporating Serie A, B and C clubs all in one and they fight for the national title. Like a Coppa Italia. This makes for lots of disparity though. Then there was the state regional championships. Like all club sides within Rio de Janeiro competing for the title. It's just very difficult to compare with other top leagues around the world. But yes, further investigations are required.
One thing is certain is that the crux of most of Zico's goals in his career were from within the regional Rio state league, where he was many times top scorer. In the National Championship he was top scorer twice, in 1980 and 1982. In other words, in one season he could play over 30 state league matches and over 20 National tournament games. In such scenarios he could score well over 40 goals per season. Flamengo normally had the edge over their rivals in the state league. Their biggest threat was usually Fluminense. Generally it was a two-horse race between these two, with Vasco as the third contender. I think most of the rest of the opponents were not in the class to contend with Flamengo and Fluminense, as they usually shared the state prize. So, it's hard to assess how valuable this competition and his goals were in the context of historical review. The National Championship was another story.
Before we continue investigating his career in Flamengo, I'll quickly add that although his brief two seasons in Italian football don't have much relevance in his legacy, he was excellent in his first season at Udinese but not in his second, struggled with injuries. Edit: Zico started to make his name known around 1976-77, that's when the hype commenced, roughly. In 1977 he was South American Player of the Year. But there's questionable reasons for that. First, the National Championship didn't go well for Flamengo. Second, at the NT level he didn't make an impact against the top European sides, West Germany and England. So what was the justification? Could it have been his 4 goals vs Bolivia in the WC qualifiers? And his top scorer title in the state regional league? I don't really know but those that regarded him as a serious candidate as world player, leaves a lot to be desired.
Yes I made these points before about 1976/1977, and also that he didn't impress against European clubs in friendlies that period (only one goal too), unlike in 1979 for example. I made these points in relation to 'automatic' ideas about pipping Simonsen and Keegan for the Ballon d'Or or being perceived as the best. Which were two different things, as shown by the comments below the Ballon d'Or itself. Simonsen and Keegan won things with their club, often a crucial element for the Ballon d'Or, while Zico won nothing. Undoubtedly a fantastic player in the Brazilian context back then, but his own Placar - traditionally not unsympathetic to Flamengo - perceived Elias Figueroa as the best of the country if not the continent. And they perceived Cruijff as the best of the world, a status that was re-affirmed when he played there, or when they watched matches as the England game of 1977, providing an assist against pressing Liverpool in the UEFA Cup, or him starring against Atletico Madrid (with Brazilian stars) or Real Madrid. The main thing Zico has, is goals, but like guys as Maradona, Baggio or Lampard later on, it came with many penalties as well (neither of which applies to Platini or the aforementioned players). He was one of the best ever free kick takers, but even the best don't have conversion rate above 15-20%. Kevin Keegan might not score as many, but he did very well against Monchengladbach for example and also Italy in 1977 for the qualifiers. Like everyone else they all had weaker games (esp. in a 'rougher' era) but he stood there against the best. The sources who regarded Zico in 1977 as a world's best candidate are thin. Not Reuters, not Associated Press, not Brian Glanville, not Shoot! magazine, not Placar, not Guerin Sportivo, not L'Equipe, not The Times, not France Football themselves. L'Equipe for example explicitly went for the "best" sports people per year (not the achievements), and Cruijff was the highest listed footballer in both 1976 and 1977. The points you mentioned as well as the club friendlies I mentioned got something to do with this. And we're not talking about someone from Chile or Liberia, but from Brazil. As it is I strongly think some players get a free pass in some years, in some cases while playing a limited number of games and not playing for the national team (Zico and Maradona in 1983). I also think Platini isn't one of those. Not now, and not at the time itself. On his own continent, someone like Figueroa really has/had a double to quadruple handicap.
Most of his goals arrived in the state regional league. Only 3 or 4 other sides in that region are worthy first division squads. The rest of the 12-13 squads are second division or 3rd division type of teams. Even the National Championship consisted of second and third rate teams. For such a prolific scorer, he was only top scorer twice in the Brasileiro, feats equaled or bettered by Roberto Dinamite and Dario in the 1970s and 80s. The point is he scored a lot but a big chunk were against second and third class opponents. When facing Europe's best, his scoring dropped. Is this a coincidence? I think not. The man was accustomed at banging goals against the likes of teams of Bangu, Goytacaz, Olaria, Bonsucesso, etc... and all of a sudden you put him up against a Matthaus, Kaltz, Sansom, Neal, Vogts, Russmann, Scirea, Gentile, Bonhof, Bessonov, Chivadze, Alonso, Camacho, Forster, Briegel, Dasaev, Arconada, Clemence, Schumacher or Sepp Maier and he's virtually shutdown. The man wasn't used to that type of level and it explains why he struggled against them.
Yes, a local legend and king at the Maracaná. He was like that local kid on the street that's better than the rest but take him outside his comfort zone to compete against the world's best and he was just an average player. Was he that much better than Roberto Dinamite or Reinaldo? I'm sure many Atlético-MG and Vasco Da Gama fans and reporters considered their local star better than Zico. It's no coincidence that it took him until the age of 30 for a European side to purchase his services because prior to that there was always scepticism. Technically he was a master, but against whom? He never scored from the free kick against a world-class goalkeeper. Those goals from set-pieces vs Uruguay and Argentina were against 3rd or 4th choice goalkeepers, not in line with the first choices. On the other hand, Platini scored against Zoff, Shilton, Arconada.... Maradona against Dasaev, Zubizaretta, Fillol, Zenga, Tacconi.... The most known goalkeeper Zico scored against was Alan Rough. I think that by logic that should make the last two superior in my view, although technically they were all masters and they played in Europe for the most part of their careers. But Maradona came closer to scoring from the free kick against great goalkeepers, he hit the post against Zoff and Pfaff at the WC, neither had a chance at saving them. Zico didn't come close against Zoff or any other great keeper in the big tournaments. His great goals from the free kicks came mostly against regional 2nd level league teams, with poorly structured walls, obscure goalkeepers, etc. He did score well in Serie A from set-pieces, but again, rarely against the top sides, but mostly lower table squads like Genoa, Avellino or Catania. Zico has a cult of followers that love the Brazilian flair and artistry. It's not in their interest to be objective and scrutinize his credentials. For some he's underrated, which is ridiculous, considering he's generally a top 15-20 player. If anything he's overrated in my view.
1977 is a questionable year why he won the South American award. As you mentioned, his teams didn't win anything but that's not always necessary. However, he didn't play well against the top sides from Europe in those friendlies and in the Carioca state league he didn't impress against the top sides either. His 27 goals in the region were mostly against the lower table teams that were second and third rate quality. Against the champion, Vasco da Gama, he didn't impress, nor did he impact games against Botafogo. I think he only scored against Fluminense. Flamengo also struggled in the National Championship and Zico wasn't top scorer. Here again, he scored like 10 goals (Reinaldo was top scorer with 28) but mostly against the lower table sides, he struggled against the top table teams in the final phase. On paper his numbers look brilliant with like 37 goals but further exploration tells us that most of those goals were scored against second and third division quality clubs. He wasn't scoring against Sao Paulo, Vasco da Gama, Corinthians, Palmeiras, Atlético-MG, Botafogo, the stronger teams in Brazil. The majority of the chunk of his goals in this year and the others was exactly like this. I can only think that his award must have been based on the four goals vs Bolivia in the WC qualifiers and the 27 state league goals vs second and third rate teams. And the Brazilian press selling their next gem to the world. It must be one of the weakest winners in that decade for the award.
There's the famous game vs Italy 1978 in which Platini scored two free kicks against Zoff. The first one was disallowed but still was perfectly executed. The second one was valid.
Figueroa was a defender and players in his position tend to fall back in an historical pecking order compared to offensive players. Speaking of 1983, Maradona had his best season in Spain in his first year, with some cup titles at hand and double digit goals + assists. He probably would have ended at number 5 in a global award, so I'm not sure how out of line that would have been. But yes, he also missed some playing time and did not play for the NT (mostly due to injury and club restrictions). In Zico's case his best shot would have been probably ending at number 3 in a world Ballon d'Or that year. It's uncertain how he played in the National Brazilian Championship but Flamengo won the big title and he scored well, although perhaps not the decisive man in the final rounds. However, Flamengo were knocked out of the Copa Libertadores in the first round and Zico did not feature in the state region competition because he went to Udinese. He wasn't really in the plans to being called up for the NT anymore until Tele Santana returned several years later. I personally think his World Soccer award was generous and seemed more like a tribute award to his career but he wouldn't have beaten Platini or Falcao. Yes, Platini has done it better against upper class sides. The thing with Zico is that for all the highlight reels of his free kicks, the majority were scored against second and third division calibre club teams. Or in Serie A, against bottom table sides that are more second division calibre. His goals in 1976 against Argentina and Uruguay were against B sides with third choice goalkeepers. Technically he was a master but he didn't beat the best structured walls of top teams or the top goalkeepers (in general). I think once only against Juventus in his last season. But even in that goal, the goalkeeper was Bodini, not Tacconi. Now Bodini was a solid keeper but Tacconi was the more famous and greater keeper. Bodini was more of a backup to Zoff and then Tacconi, virtually a third choice keeper at Juve.
1979 is an interesting year which you have mentioned in the past. Zico ends 5th and Maradona 1 in the SA awards. Zico at club level doesn't excel at the National Championship but is a beast at the state level. At the NT level he has mixed reviews. Good performances at home to Argentina at the CA but a weak display with a red card in Buenos Aires. Brazil eventually bow out without him available. There is nothing particularly special in his play vs Bolivia and Uruguay this year but is great against Paraguay and highly rated against Argentina playing for FIFA. He also did well in an unofficial friendly vs Ajax. But he doesn't compete against a European NT this year. At club level here's the thing. In the National Championship he doesn't make an impact against the top sides and 4 of his 5 goals come against minnows like Gama, Sao Bento, Comercial-SP, etc. Flamengo eventually bow out to Palmeiras and end in 12th place. In the regional State league there's two editions, one normal and the other a special edition. It's here where Zico gets the bulk of his goals and Flamengo win the competitions. But how do we assess this event in comparison to other South American nominees? The State leagues consist of mostly second and third division squads, with around 4 first division calibre clubs. This situation of State leagues makes it peculiar and impossible to draw comparisons with other nominees that contend with only first division sides. It's a prestigious prize for the locals of Rio but should not be used to make a serious case against other nominees in the continent, let alone around the world. So here we are left with a dilemma: Is the State leagues worthy of an argument in Zico's favor this year or in any other? I think not. It's a bonus added but not a significant achievement. It's probably why it was not regarded as highly for the pannel of voters and never given a priority in making a final decision. The second place finish is Romero from Paraguay. Aided by his 4 goals in the youth WC and 3 goals in the CA, where Paraguay win the title, he's a revelation. It's uncertain what are his credentials at club level but at NT level he's a success. Falcao takes third place as he's voted best Brazilian player in the National Championship and National champion with Inter. So here comes first place Maradona and his arguments. Undoubtedly aided by a strong propaganda machine and the hyped up FIFA youth WC, where Argentina are Champions and he's voted as the Golden Ball with 6 goals. He was the driving force in the WC youth South American qualifiers in Montevideo, where Argentina eliminated Brazil with an influential Maradona in their 1-0 win. At the men's NT level he's played South American and European sides. In general reviews are strong with high marks against Bulgaria, Ireland, Brazil, Bolivia, Scotland, Netherlands and good/decent grades vs Italy and FIFA. He featured in the CA but AFA decides to ditch this tournament for the youth WC as main priority and Maradona is sent to Japan. At club level he's top scorer in both the National and Metropolitan Championships but Argentinos Juniors don't win any silverware. He's not available in the playoffs vs Velez Sarsfield and his club gets eliminated. He's voted best Argentinian player of the year.
What doesn't help either is a lack of surfaced games from his prime (mostly the 1974 World Cup). He played in the pre-VCR era. This affects many of the legends of the smaller countries (even JC14, but also Cubillas, Florian Albert). For guys from the bigger countries, with more fans and more people interested in past legends, markedly more full games or long highlights have surfaced. Also of the notable European Cup encounters and so. I said he gets sort of a free pass - relative to other phenomenally great players - for 1983 not for his level of play (which was strong, and even productive against the strongest opponents - compare: 1979). But because he played very few games. He played in 24 games all year (more crucially: only 13 games in league + Europe). And he did not play for the national team, which is often a dealbreaker. In those days the main priority was the league and the european cups for FCB. That's what Nunez explicitly demanded. In Europe, he did not impress against Austria Wien and they were eliminated in the quarter finals (he tried to score with his hand, but this time the ref cancelled the goal). The following season he did impress in the first round against Magdeburg - OK. All in all it was reviewed as a disappointing return, compared to the immediate years before or immediately after (FCB was better in Europe before and after). In the league in 1982-83 they came no further than 4th. So also in this respect there was a bit of a "free pass" in some way. Thing is here that FCB did better with Schuster as the main player (in the season before DM10, and the immediate season after), or previously between 1973 and 1978 with a row of consistent 2nd place finishes. It's also not that FCB did worse in the league with their foreign star out. With him they achieved 1.36 points per game in 36 matches. Without him (injured, suspended, not rested) 1.34 points per game in 32 games. So that was perhaps not the reason they finished fourth without their 'false 9' - as further substantiated by the immediate seasons before and after (1981-82 & 1984-85). Again, I am speaking about this in relation to other great players.
Yes, but World Soccer and France Football for example were not convinced yet, and personally I tend to agree (year 1980 is a different proposition). The Italy-Argentina connection is no news. Well I was more sympathetic to Zico in 1979 and the main stats show why. In my book scoring goals was a major part of Zico and Maradona's job in 1979 (and 1980). More so than 'work horse' Keegan. This is also simply demonstrated by being the direct replacement for Kempes, for the world champion. And also that Argentinos Juniors bought Pasculli to help him to score even more goals (said a World Soccer article quite clearly - in his first three Napoli seasons he had not more than 4 league assists too; his job/position was not always the same). You are right about a big part of Zico's volume coming against "cannon fodder" (like I mentioned above for 1977). You have also mentioned the widespread scepticism about South American defenses, and that inevitably Falcao and co would make the jump to Europe. But this time around, in 1979, he did score, assist and perform against true elite national teams. He also performed and scored with Flamengo against European clubs of a certain pedigree (unlike 1977). So it is not now sheer volume anymore. There's now a considerable body of work against the good teams. Meanwhile, young Maradona did not score and did not assist either at those levels in 1979 (except the FIFA showcase game), and as you say, his grades naturally took a hit when coming up against Italy, the FIFA XI defenses etc. But like I said previously, I've not those doubts about 1980. Think by this time (and the full year, not half a year) he was more universally accepted as the best, or joint-best. And I indicated this in my overview that I made.
Some interesting info I found on the Chroniques Bleues website about the 11 free-kicks Platini scored with France : The first map shows the location of each free-kick taken by Platini. As you see, he excelled in a relatively restricted area close to the box and mostly on the left side (due to the angle). He was clearly not a long distance specialist. The second map shows where the ball ended in the net. He was virtually able to put the ball wherever he wanted, being up, down, on the left or on the right. That must have been very difficult for GKs to anticipate where the ball would go. Anyway, if you want to watch those 11 free-kicks (plus the '12th' vs Zoff) , it's here : http://www.chroniquesbleues.fr/Les-onze-coups
In my view there's no comparison because 60 of Zico's goals arrived in the state league. Scoring the majority of goals against second, third or fourth rate sides is not comparable to scoring 25-30 goals vs first division squads, as Maradona or others did. How that can be used as a strong argument in Zico's favor is beyond logic in my view. People like Dearman have him at number 1 across the globe basically on the premise of his 60 goals in a state league. It's ridiculous. Hector Scotta scored 60 goals in 1975 in the Argentinian league vs first division sides, not second and third rate amateur calibre cannon fodder, but no one is mentioning him as a serious candidate for the 1975 year. Furthermore, the level of defending is extremely questionable in those state leagues, players in Brazil in general couldn't even write or read, minnows were void of the proper preparation to face the elite top sides. There was just so much disparity. For Zico, Roberto Dinamite and Reinaldo, whose talents were above the majority, it was like picking on little kids. Zico gets too much credit because he's Brazilian and was candy on the eye. But the reality is he wasn't that much better than Reinaldo, his main domestic rival, who was a precocious talent making the first division from an early age at 16, unlike Zico who was unknown prior to the age of 21. Zico only scored against one elite NT opponent in 1979. And even then, on one occasion it was against a B side of Argentina. Furthermore, in probably the most significant match in Buenos Aires he gets sent off. In sum, he really has only one top class performance against a full strength side, which is when he came on as a sub for FIFA. The rest of the sides he played B Argentinian sides, and was rather ordinary vs Bolivia and Uruguay. His best match was against Paraguay at home. But Paraguay was mostly also a B side with a different manager than the one that would defeat Brazil in the CA. And Uruguay in the 1970s, after WC70, went through their weakest period in their history. They couldn't even qualify to WC78 in a group that consisted of Venezuela and Bolivia. They had their weakest WC in 1974 and were terrible at the 1975 CA losing 3-0 to Colombia on the road and Morena botching two penalties against the Colombians in a span of 3 minutes and then getting sent off in the return leg at home. Brazilians and Argentinians always beat them. They were like a minnow back in those days. It was a dark period in their history. i don't see what would make Zico a serious candidate in 1979. The voters didn't either and I agree.
One could probably add Van Breukelen (France-Netherlands 1981) and arguably Saint Etienne's GK Ivan Curkovic who took two free-kicks from Platini in the same game in the mid-70's.
I appreciate most of these points, but like I said I thought he passed the test more in 1979 than in 1977. Also in relation to a Keegan or young Maradona for the world champion. That said, I didn't fully realize the Argentine side of 1979 was a below-strength side (despite Passarella as defensive leader and a young Maradona). By watching the game he looked better here as against England and West Germany previously. I did think most of his goals arrived against cannon fodder and low level opposition (especially relative to his dominant Flamengo team, which was by World Soccer compared to Real Madrid and Liverpool in dominance - I can post that article if you insist). But this time in 1979 he produced, and played mostly fine, against every good team he came up against (+ FIFA XI). While in 1977 the production was 1 goal (against AC Milan in a friendly; Milan finished 10th in the league this season however) and 0 assists in club friendlies or internationally with his national team. I hope you see the merit of the idea? It at least explains why Placar proclaimed others as 'the best' - of the country, continent or world. For my money also his 1983-84 season, while excellent, is a bit overhyped over time. Dearman likes to proclaim Zico had the higher grades than Platini (and Brady) but the two most respectable sources had it the other way round. Guerin Sportivo and Gazzetta dello Sport. http://www.calciomio.fr/archive/tot...-notes-de-la-gazzetta-dello-sport_217342.html http://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2014/05/memory-lane-serie-198384.html Those two are more reputable than Tuttosport or so. Furthermore, Udinese did not improve in the table or in points. If a player is so good, then at least an improvement can be expected for a 'lowish' team? And they hadn't lost one of their main players, or injuries. What is your idea on this? Perhaps I look with a too critical eye to these things, but his 19 goals included 4 penalties. It also included 6 free kick goals. Except for one against Fiorentina in February 1984, the others came against the #11 Avellino, #14 Genoa (two FKs in two games), #16 Catania (two FKs in two separate games). So four of the six free kicks against teams that got relegated. He had 2 assists this season if I'm not mistaken.
He's got more going for him in 1979 than in 1977 but still in my view nothing special. The state league as I mentioned was mostly cannon fodder. And he only scored 5 goals in the National Championship, and even then 4 out of 5 coming against second and third rate sides like Gama, Sao Bento, Comercial-SP, only 1 goal against a top side vs Palmeiras. He also blew a golden opportunity to help Brazil win the CA by getting himself sent off. It was a devalued competition which in all likelihood could have went Brazil's way had he been present in the next phase. Yes, I'd like to read that article if you have the time to share it. Thanks. As I explained to Dearman, the state league was for a top club like Flamengo, cannon fodder. With the exception of the top 3 other opponents, the rest wouldn't even belong in a Serie C in a top flight European league. I'm certain it was very important inside the confines of the Rio state but in the context of historical importance outside it holds no weight in my view. And it's no coincidence that Zico's scoring was stat-padded in such competition. There was a great disparity between his scoring in state leagues and National competitions. Up until 1983, in the State leagues he has a career average of almost 0.90 goal per game and in some years in his physical prime he could have over a goal per game, but in the National it was reduced to an average of 0.58 per game. Likewise vs top European NT sides 3 goals in 20 games = 0.15 It's very contrasting for such a prolific scorer. But the reality is that he was generally prolific in state leagues or against bottom ranked squads. The trend was similar in Serie A in Italy. Catania conceded 55 goals (most of any team) and ended in last place being relegated. Zico scored 4 goals on them. The bulk of his goals usually arrived against these type of teams. Ratings are good but I think Dearman puts too much emphasis on them to judge completely players. Sometimes players received high marks based on reputation alone. Some journalists were not imparcial and others intimidated to criticize. Then there were cases where players like Zico could be magnificent against minnows but mediocre against top opponents and in a final season rating the average would look very good. Of course this wasn't always the case, but you get the idea. Because he didn't particularly make others around him better. He was the cornerstone of the team's offense, positioned in the center up front as finisher, but he didn't direct his sides, he didn't navigate the ship, he didn't inspire others around him. At Udinese Causio and Edinho put him in ideal positions to score. And of course he was excellent at punishing the lower ranked sides. But the 1983-84 season was an outlier in goal per game average in Serie A, higher than the norm for the decade. But as you pointed out, he was getting his goods against mostly lower table sides like Catania, Avellino, Genoa, Lazio.... And while it's true these lower table sides must be beaten but he couldn't in general impact the games against the best defenses and goalkeepers. Now Platini and Maradona weren't excelling always right from their first season against the top sides, but with Zico a game without scoring was virtually a non-existent performance because he was mostly a target player, not a director or creator on the pitch. A Maradona, Falcao or Platini may not score but still have a domino effect on a match by orchestrating attacks or counterstrokes. Platini and Maradona would demand the ball from deep and drive their teams forward and generate danger. But Zico at the age of 30 would wait up front and if not supplied he'd get lost in the mist of the stoppers and sweepers. He literally could go unnoticed without touching the ball if his midfield was not providing. But inside the box he was deadly because he had the innate ability to shoot by picking corners, by placing the ball in angles where goalkeepers had little chance.
While 1977 is a suspect year for his South American award, 1982 may be his most valid, although with imperfections. He's top scorer at the Brazilian National Championship with 21 goals. He's instrumental from the beginning to end, against the minnows and top opponents and Flamengo crown themselves champs. In addition, he adds 21 more goals in the state league (although you know my take on that competition). However this time internationally Flamengo are not successful in the Copa Libertadores and are eliminated against Peñarol with a struggling Zico. At the NT level he's one of the top 5 best players at the WC, but Brazil lose in the second phase and underachieve. Zico has a good tournament but against the best defensive sides (Soviet Union and Italy) he struggles. This is not a coincidence because he's struggled prior to the WC against West Germany in Rio and through the previous years with Europe's best. He does however perform relatively well in other friendlies against second rate European sides.
Here it is mate. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/th...ers-of-all-time.1867347/page-58#post-33113228
Thanks. And I've noticed it too, Flamengo apart from being a big side was also getting favorable calls in important matches. Penalties and free kicks, red cards to opposing players and if Zico missed a PK the ref would have it repeated until he scored. Lots of irregularities.
True, and then Flamengo got some occasional call against them to maintain a veil/facade of neutrality, while in the meantime opposing stars are kicked into pieces (outside sight of the camera). Yes, that might very well be, and there are potentially more cases where that applies. For this you only need to read Declan Hill's excellent book, the foremost (and most sensible) reference work on these matters. From 1950s Real Madrid (+ relocating the Austria Wien match to home), Spain in the euro 1984 qualifiers, AC Milan & Juventus after January 1994 etc. (this also explains Del Piero, Zidane's low GI rating, and low measured effects on the results) But if in some years Zico produces and plays well against *every* strong opponent he came up against, then I am more sympathetic to his case. I.e. Zico outside his immediate context close to home (stadium). Do you see what I mean? That doesn't take away that retrospective views where his stellar stats are taken at face value, are flawed.
I see exactly what you mean. I just don't find one year where he was slaying giants or cup contenders in a consistent fashion. It's just hard to convince his followers, they won't accept criticism.
Historically what I think has occurred is that Zico had won 3 South American awards, he was obviously part of one of the most beloved Brazilians sides (1982) and has a large chunk of goals in his career. In addition, he's got the highlight reels on YouTube that pump up his image, with a pinch of exaggeration. For example, there's this one highlight that sees him waltzing through a defense from the midfield all towards goal, but what that highlight fails to address, along with most of his free kick goals, is that it was executed against one of those amateur type state region sides. But the highlights would suggest that he was doing it against first division clubs or top national teams. He's also candy on the eyes. So retrospectively people look back and say 'hey, here was an incredible player' that must have been (as Dearman believes) the best player of the late 1970s and early 1980s, but the reality is that's so far from the truth.
Continuing with the awarded years, 1981 is another strong year for Zico and possibly his only real chance at a world Ballon d'Or, but not without its controversies. Ok, let's get straight to the point by saying that his major achievement in the Copa Libertadores is glittered with the controversy of benefiting from an incredible performance from the official, Mr. Wright, with his 5 red cards against Atlético-MG, which forced the match to end and Flamengo were arbitrarily awarded the game. From then on Flamengo went on to win the competition with Zico as the decisive scorer in the finals vs Cobreloa of Chile. His contribution is 11 goals in 13 matches. But this victory is accomplished with an asterisk, due to that controversial game. Towards the end of the year, Zico's at the helm of the Intercontinental Championship vs Liverpool by setting up the goals for Nunes and company. At home, Flamengo don't do well in the National Championship and Zico has one of his least productive contributions in that tournament, with 3 goals in 8 games, two of which come against minnows Colorado. He's excellent in the state league, as usual, where he gets the chunk of his goals. But you know my take on that one. Even the National Championship has its tremendous flaws and is basically the equivalent in level to a Copa del Rey in Spain, Coppa Italia in Italy, FA Cup in England or the DFB cup in Germany, with second and third division teams involved. At the NT he finally plays really well against some top European sides. France and England are his best performances at their den but they are not fielding all of their regular starters. He also helps Brazil qualify to the WC by beating on minnows, Venezuela and Bolivia. On the other hand, he struggled vs Spain, West Germany and Chile on the road in friendlies. . Overall it's internationally his best year but domestically one of his weakest at the National level. He's crowned South American and GS player of the year but it's not unanimous.
Continuing with Zico and another successful year in 1980. Domestically Flamengo win their first ever National Championship. He’s the top scorer of the National Championship with 21 goals in 19 games. At the state level he scored an additional 19 goals. The drawback is that victory at the National Championship is subdued due to controversial referee decisions in the final vs Atlético-MG (a common occurrence when these two teams met). The first leg was won by Atlético-MG 1-0 and in the second leg at the Maracana, Atlético-MG scored 2 away goals in a 3-2 defeat, which made it level in aggregate at 3-3, which should by logic have given them the title based on away goals. But the system was so flawed that Flamengo was awarded the crown. In addition, Reinaldo, scorer of all the goals for Atlético-MG, soon after scoring the second goal was sent off in a controversial manner. Eventually Nunes would score for Flamengo the match winner. In other words, the 1980 National Championship, the 1981 Copa Libertadores, and the 1982 National Championship have all been tarnished by terrible officiating that has suspiciously favored Flamengo. At the NT level he’s had some mixed performances. Brazil lose their first game at the Maracaná in 12 years (44 games) in a 2-1 defeat to the Soviet Union. Against Poland they only manage a draw. Results are better vs the South American sides, with wins against Paraguay and Chile. He’s runner up in the South American and Americas player of the year awards, but he would have little to no chance this year in a hypothetical world Ballon d’Or.