It looks like the rationale behind some of his under-dog votes is hinted at in an article a bit below when he explains why he would choose Streich as his 1983 Footballer of the Year, and not Platini...."Firstly, Platini is not going to be impressed by any plaudits from me" etc.
I thought Heinz Hermann (listed as Swiss Player of the Year in that article) was a midfielder rather than a defender as listed though.
The opposite is the Guerin Sportivo list, where Denmark is by a distance the runaway winner for team of the year (42 vs 5 and 4 points), but few players of them get the nod. The best one is Lerby with 10 inclusions, Simonsen has 8 (of 65 voters). I wouldn't call him an 'underdog writer' though.
Yes, probably contrary is a better description indeed. But for Streich at least he does seem to be trying to credit a lesser-known player, safe in the knowledge Platini would be getting plenty of acknowledgement - maybe Tigana (although pretty famous after 1984) received similar consideration when he voted for him in 1985.
Here you can read all ofc: http://beyondthelastman.com/category/regular-features/eric-batty/ He had for each year a write-up indeed. http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/the-worst-ballon-dor-winner.2012564/page-6#post-31761777
After the mid 70s he started to claim that Di Stefano, Beckenbauer and also Puskas were the original "total footballers" and complete players (familiar ), and the respective teams did it earlier. Before that he wrote a few times, already in the early 60s really, that the whole "the Whirl" nonsense never materialized or put into practice. In many ways it is really weird. Also how he covered the Brazil 1970 team, and how negatively he observed the offside trap (which of course had no relationship to 'the Whirl', in his eyes). Also BLTM notes in a byline: If you look at his most selected players, it is only to an extent contrary. Beckenbauer 11, Müller 9, Pelé 7, Facchetti 6, Shilton 6. Said it before but I think however that it is good he had his own independent opinions and views, even if they seem contrary and contradictory (contradicting himself). Glanville, for comparison, feels to me as too much of a 'money whore'. He himself has admitted in his columns the influence of his friendships and the management of players helping him to sell and promote his (older) books.
As for being contrary, you can also read that he regarded 1967 and 1968 as a 'weak' period. In the link to the 'google document' above (with the 1966WC article) he says it had been possible to win five European Cups in a row, if the peak of some great club teams had started in 1968 rather than a few years later. See also. " Forest will slaughter Malmo by Eric Batty NOTTINGHAM FOREST will slaughter Sweden's Malmo FF in the European Cup final in Munich on May 30. There is no way that Forest can lose. The plain fact is that English football is strong in the face of declining standards in Europe. So, it is only natural for a British club to step in and grab glory. That's how it was in 1967 and 1968 when Glasgow Celtic and Manchester United won the trophy. After Bayern Munich lost Franz Beckenbauer they declined to let Liverpool in. [...] " I found an interesting newspaper archive with some articles from him (though his contributions end in 1981) and he did certainly also write positive/empathic articles about stars like Platini (cause his name is mentioned here) and Cruijff. He was also critical about Kempes, who he "never rated" and labelled as "a hammer with some skill". Though criticism about 'saving the legs' is interchanged with praise, and sometimes it is contradictory. Still interesting though. http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Page/newnation19780226-1.1.27.aspx (about France, Platini) http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19811220-1.2.61.aspx (Maradona...) Compare: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Page/newnation19770313-1.1.25.aspx (from March 13 1977) vs http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19780122-1.2.84.11.aspx (22 Jan 1978 - completely different tone less than a year later) Where he shows sympathy: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19751109-1.2.46.aspx http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19801005-1.2.66.aspx http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19780416-1.2.76.14.aspx Criticism: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19770612-1.2.92.aspx http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19761219-1.2.71.aspx http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19760711-1.2.78.aspx http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19771009-1.2.76.aspx This from 1979 is also interesting, where 'stars' advised Keegan to not go to Spain: http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/Digitised/Article/newnation19791204-1.2.49.1.aspx (it are interesting reads about various topics nonetheless however) ....
An international polls about "desired team" and "Ideal teams" of Europe had been asked, so it is not unusual. The Italian sports newspaper "Guerin Sportivo" once came to a different idea: their international jury of Europe elected "team of the future". Future Team: Arconada (Spain) - McGrain (Scotland), Giuseppe Baresi (Italy), Karlheinz Förster (W.Germany), Franco Baresi (Italy) - Blagojevic (Yugoslavia), Brady (Ireland), Woodcock (England) - Tahamata (Netherlands), Birtles (England), Cunningham (England) Reserves: Hartwig (W.Germany), Bum-Kun Cha (South Korea), Klaus Allofs (W.Germany), Carrasco (Spain) - Kicker 1980, No.4, p. 15, "Future Team of Europe" I don't know how McGrain was elected 'Future Team'. Danny McGrain was born in 1950.
Sorry for not seeing this before. I've taken note of the top 10 each year based on team selections. 1979 no team was selected. There is no top 10 chosen. Only Maradona is number one. Possibly Keegan number two by the illustration of Maradona holding the globe with Keegan inside of it. 1980 1.) Rummenigge 23 points 2.) Kaltz 20 points 3.) Maradona 18 points 4.) Krol 16 points 5.) Antognoni 12 points Pezzey 12 points Schuster 12 points 8.) Zico 12 points 9.) Arconada 9 Gentile 9 Hrubesch 9 1981 1.) Zico 26 points 2.) Maradona 26 points 3.) Rummenigge 26 points 4.) Kaltz 22 points 5.) Blochine 18 points 6.) Krol 16 7.) Breitner 15 Junior 15 9.) Shuster 14 Pezzey 14 1982 1.) Rossi 31 points 2.) Scirea 29 points 3.) K.H. Foerster 25 points Falcao 25 points 5.) Conti 23 points Gentile 23 points 7.) Dasaev 21 points 8.) Junior 17 9.) Maradona 16 10.) Rummenigge 15 I'll get to the rest of the years soon.
As previously mentioned, in 1983 the method of reaching a winner changed with correspondents being asked to pick the best player of the year. 1983 1.) Falcao 23 points 2.) Zico 16 points 3.) Platini 12 points 4.) Rummenigge 5 points 5.) Maradona 2 points Socrates 2 points 7.) Cabrini 1 Vercauteren Robson 1 Magath 1 Rodriguez 1 Also previously mentioned, if we go by the previous method of how they reached their conclusions, then Falcao was the most named player in the best XI of the year with 56 votes out of 65 - so he would have won regardless - but then things would look very different, since Rummenigge would have ended in second place with 51 votes, Zico would be third with 50 votes, Platini 4th with 45 votes and Cabrini would land into 5th spot with 39 votes, while Maradona would drop to 6th spot with 27 votes. 1983 1.) Falcao 56 points 2.) Rummenigge 51 points 3.) Zico 50 points 4.) Platini 45 points 5.) Cabrini 39 points 6.) Maradona 27 points 7.) Gerets 21 8.) Dasaev 19 9.) K.H. Foerster 18 10.) Hysen 14 1984 (Based on first place votes) 1.) Platini 63 points 2.) Ian Rush 3 points 3.) Maradona 2 points 4.) Souness 1 point No one else was voted. But if we go by the previous method of how they reached their conclusions, then below was the order of the most voted into the best XI of the year. 1984 1.) Platini 70 points 2.) Rummenigge 48 points 3.) Ian Rush 47 points 4.) Briegel 43 points 5.) Tigana 38 points 6.) K.H Foerster 26 7.) Schumacher 25 8.) Bossis 22 9.) Robson 18 10.) Souness 17 1985 no team selected, only best player chosen based on first place votes: 1985 1.) Platini 77 points 2.) Maradona 20 points 3.) Francescoli 4 points 4.) Rummenigge 2 points Elkjaer 2 points 6.) Boniek 1 point Lineker 1 point Tigana 1 point Borghi 1 point Manfredonia 1 point 1986 1.) Maradona 95 votes 2.) Amoros 61 votes 3.) Burruchaga 48 votes 4.) Josemar 44 votes 5.) Belanov 41 6.) Butragueno 39 7.) Julio Cesar 38 8.) K.H. Foerster 37 9.) M. Olsen 36 10.) Dasaev 31
A summary of the most selected top players that made a top 10 each year. Rummenigge 1980, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 Maradona 1979 No team selected but is the winner. 1980, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86 K.H. Foerster 1982, 83, 84, 86 Zico 1980, 81, 83 Platini 1983, 84, 85 Dasaev 1982, 83, 86 Summary of total of yearly selections of these players from 1980 to 1986 (1979 I'll exclude because there was only a winner mentioned). Maradona 6 Rummenigge 6 K.H. Foerster 4 Zico 3 Platini 3 Dasaev 3 It still remains to some degree a mystery how Rummenigge is retroactively relegated well behind Platini and Zico in all time rankings when he was viewed more valuable and consistently held in high regard throughout his generation.
I think style points count for a lot here, at least among casual fans. I think a number of German legends suffer from this. I see the same problem when talking to more casual fans about the greatest striker of all time, and rarely Gerd Muller is mentioned. I'm sadly quite confident that Thomas Muller won't be properly appreciated either.
So, we can reach a consensus of the ideal team of the first half of the 1980s based on player selections and points combined. Shuster and Pezzey came close but missed out. The ideal team from 1980-1986 Dasaev; K.H Foerster, Gentile, Kaltz; Krol, Falcao, Junior; Platini, Maradona, Zico, Rummenigge Indeed it's a discussion that's been addressed here in the past and I agree with your view.
First of all you need to look at the selection method, which does him and Maradona a huge favor. Neither Platini or Zico were likely to be shoe-horned in as a center forward or as winger or side-midfielder. This rarely, if not never, happened. They were handicapped, and Platini was also in other respects handicapped (on which I pass for now). This was also not an era where the prominent teams played with wingers, yet Guerin Sportivo asked voters to designate one. At the same time, the 'number ten' position is a stacked position and it is not odd to see Platini lose out against Juve donning Liam Brady in the early 1980s (in the eyes of European voters) for example. This tendency is still happening today. Secondly, one has to look at multiple sources - not just one source. There were throughout comments (in Shoot! in France Football) that Keegan and Rummenigge were below the standards of previous multiple Ballon d'Or winners. This is evidently the reality. Neither of them scored well in France Football their 1984 (their 2000th issue), 1989 and 1990 survey (all with a different method). It is not like this downgrade happened 5 or 10 years or decades after the facts. In my view one cannot have both. In the other thread you said: "Because let's be frank here, the likes of Di Stefano and Cruyff never won a World Cup title but they weren't as blessed with Maradona's talent, they weren't as highly spoken of as a prodigious wonder kid." https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/copa-america-historical-all-star-teams.2031461/page-4#post-35779046 Read: easthatics or "style points" (poetgooner his words). Because that is how the nebulous concept of 'talent' is commonly applied. Also, in the early 1980s - the period we are talking about here - the French (!!!) magazine Onze Mondial had a couple of times an interesting poll (carried out by IFOP) where they interestingly asked the public on both the "best" and "their favorite" players. The marketed and prominent West German players actually scored noticeably and clearly higher in the "favorites" list than in the "best" list. I am sorry to say but that was the outcome.
There is no explanation why each selection is chosen. In any event, in the case of Platini, he is recognized once he moves to Juventus after WC82. But if Platini was "handicapped" like you say, then he certainly made tremendous ground after he retired because retroactively he leapfrogged both Rummenigge and Zico in all time rankings. In the end the handicapped turned out to be the German. I have already addressed in the Zico vs Maradona thread years ago why I think Platini was retroactively placed in higher positions over Rummenigge and Zico. Most of it had to do with his political position in the hierarchy. I still stand by that view. I also don't regard him superior to Rummenigge or Zico and they all are pretty even in my book, as was the views in their generation. I have looked at different sources but only Guerin Sportivo incorporated at the same time European + South Americans in a poll conducted by world journalists. World Soccer and Onze has very little value, since it was a readers poll, locally based, with limited options. The Ballon d'Or would have changed dramatically had South American/rest of the world journalists been eligible to choose any player around the globe, as evidenced by Guerin Sportivo in 1983. But that's a fact, Maradona was regarded as a wonder kid. You said it yourself years ago, that he may have been the most talented player. I agree with poetgooner, Germans are not as venerated. Thomas Muller won't go down in history as an all time great; Rummenigge has been relegated to a top 40 or 50 player when he was viewed equal and better than other main competitors of his time.
To further address this point: it is to my understanding, Mondial and World Soccer utilized local-based readers to choose the top players based on a list that the magazine arbitrarily chose as the main candidates. In other words, specifically for the British publication, the reader could only pick from what the source selected. To make matters even more limited, this was a local Anglo-read source, rarely anyone outside of the American and British territory casted their votes. The same applied for the French publication, the majority of readers were French or spoke the language. And they were not journalists, just readers that had limited access to what was transpiring across the globe other than what the local source provided. When the French source used to choose the best XI every year, it was limited and did not use South American players that played across the Atlantic. Contrary to this, Guerin Sportivo included any player in the world. It was the closest to a real worldwide Ballon d'Or as we had in that era, as mentioned in the opening of this thread. When we look at the selected best XI each year with Guerin Sportivo, the selections differ dramatically. In essence, the British and French sources were limited to their own criterias, it was only locally based and did not incorporate the views of other world correspondents. This information is imperatively important to address because many uninformed people use these sources as references or proof of what was the views at that time to judge players. But the fact in reality is that those sources (Onze and World Soccer) are limited and don't tell the truth in its entirety. And some of their choices, like in the British source in 1983 with Zico as the winner, is bizarre to say the least. More than likely Falcao would have won this year but for some reason Zico gets the readers vote. He never had a chance in a poll conducted by world journalists and was not viewed as the best player in the game either. I think at best he ends at number 2 and at worst at number 3 or 4.
1983 is an interesting year because El Grafico Picked 52 European journalists and Guerin Sportivo 65 to select the best player, over 100 in total. What I've noticed is that they used different correspondents to choose the top performer and from more variety of countries. Unfortunately El Gráfico did not use South American journalists and there was no Asian/African correspondents yet involved. But By combining the two sources, with points combined, I reached an interesting conclusion but with one flaw: Guerin Sportivo did not rank players from 1 to 5. They only picked their top player, so it's possible that the presumed points of a second option (their 2nd best player) may have accumulated into sufficient points to surpass the first option. Remember, first place votes received 5 points, second place received 4 and so on. So, with that flaw in mind but only going by the points from each player of each source, I reached this conclusion. Platini El Grafico 165 points Guerin Sportivo 12 points Total 177 Falcao El Gráfico 117 points Guerin Sportivo 23 points Total 140 Zico El Gráfico 65 points Guerin Sportivo 16 points Total 81 Rummenigge El Gráfico 59 points Guerin Sportivo 5 points Total 64 Maradona El Gráfico 43 points Guerin Sportivo 2 points Total 45 Final rankings 1.) Platini 177 2.) Falcao 140 3.) Zico 81 4.) Rummenigge 64 5.) Maradona 45 In addition, if we added the team selection points, the outcome would be the same. These were the points for each team selection: Falcao 56 Platini 45 Rummenigge 51 Zico 50 Maradona 27 Add this to the previous point total and the outcome is this: Platini 222 Falcao 196 Zico 131 Rummenigge 115 Maradona 72 It's now pretty obvious that Zico would not have won this year and that Falcao and Platini would have fought for the award. Specifically in Zico's case, it's very hard to see him winning a Ballon d'Or in any year. 1982 is probably not going to him (except for instance most of South Americas voters would have picked him, but they could well have decided to vote for Rossi; even then European votes would have been too strong), neither would have 1983, his best chance would have been in 1981, but even then highly challenged by Maradona and Rummenigge.
In conclusion, the most likely scenarios between 1979-1986 for the world crown would be like this. 1979 Maradona-Keegan 1980 Rummenigge-Maradona 1981 Zico-Maradona-Rummenigge 1982 Probably Rossi 1983 Platini-Falcao 1984 Platini surely 1985 Platini surely 1986 Maradona surely Now for fun, the rest of the years from 1987 to 1990 could be guessed...I'll leave that for another moment.
More investigations are required but a possible scenario between 1987-1990 1987 probably Maradona 1988 Gullit-Van Basten-Maradona 1989 probably Van Basten 1990 Matthaus-Maradona (probably Matthaus) Reasoning behind these selections. 1987: Maradona is regarded as the best in the game and inspires Napoli to their first Scudetto in what is viewed as the most difficult championship in the world. 1988: Italian football is the top league in the world for many, Maradona and Gullit fight for the world crown. Van Basten is in the mix as star at the Euro championship. 1989: Van Basten is the frontman in AC Milan's triumphs in Europe and at the intercontinental cup. To a lesser extent, defenders like Baresi and Rijkaard are highly nominated this year. Bebeto is the revelation in the Copa América but it's Ruben Sosa that is chosen as the best player. Maradona and Careca inspire Napoli to the UEFA Cup, with Careca scoring many goals while Maradona setting up most of them. 1990: Matthaus captains West Germany to the World Cup title. Maradona is runner-up and inspires Napoli to another Scudetto. In conclusion, possible scenario between the years of 1979 to 1990 1979 Maradona-Keegan 1980 Rummenigge-Maradona 1981 Zico-Maradona-Rummenigge 1982 Probably Rossi 1983 Platini-Falcao 1984 Platini surely 1985 Platini surely 1986 Maradona surely 1987 probably Maradona 1988 Gullit-Van Basten-Maradona 1989 probably Van Basten 1990 Matthaus-Maradona (probably Matthaus) That's how it plausibly could have panned out in all likelihood.
So, in all likelihood Zico wins one at best (1981) but has to fight for it. Rummenigge may have obtained 1 or 2 at best (1980 and 1981) or is left with nothing at the expense of the South Americans winning. Maradona would have won probably or certainly at least 2 (1986 and 1987) and had a good shot at 5 (1979, 1980 and a punchers chance in 1981). Some have argued for his claim in 1990, but he cannot overcome Matthaus in their final showdown at the World Cup. Kevin Keegan has legitimate chances in 1979. He won't get the South American votes but will rely on Europe's panel to get him past Maradona. It all depends how much is Europe divided on their views between him and the Argentinian. If it's 50-50, the South American voters would settle the difference in Maradona's favour. Platini earns 2 certainly (1984 and 1985) and has a great chance in 1983 for 3. Falcao has to fight for the 1983 award with stiff competition. Matthaus probably wins in 1990. The World Cup triumph, as the fulcrum to their success, gives him the strongest chance of taking the crown away from Maradona. Rossi gets in all likelihood the crown for 1982. The WC triumph seals victory over any main competition. Van Basten has a great chance in 1988 and even better in 1989, taken him to 2 awards. By the time he retired he may have had 3 wins (1992 is a certainty). Gullit's best chance is in 1988, but has to wrestle it away from his countryman.
While I'm at it the 1970s would probably have stayed about the same. Only changes probably would have been Kempes over Keegan in 1978 and Pelé over Muller in 1970. Zico has an outside chance in 1977 over Simonsen and Keegan (both the Europeans were close in the final votes). The question is would Zico have received sufficient European votes to give him a punchers chance? Cruijff's wins in 1971, 1973 and 1974 are locks. Beckenbauer had more fame and worldwide recognition than Cubillas and Figueroa in 1972 and 1976. In 1975 Blochine has tremendous edge in the final results over the second place finisher, Beckenauer. Figueroa is South America's winner but would he have a chance against Blochine?
So, possible scenarios from 1970-1990 1970 Pelé surely 1971 Cruijff surely 1972 probably Beckenbauer 1973 Cruijff surely 1974 Cruijff surely 1975 probably Blochine 1976 probably Beckenbauer 1977 Simonsen-Keegan-Zico 1978 probably Kempes 1979 Maradona-Keegan 1980 Rummenigge-Maradona 1981 Zico-Maradona-Rummenigge 1982 Probably Rossi 1983 Platini-Falcao 1984 Platini surely 1985 Platini surely 1986 Maradona surely 1987 probably Maradona 1988 Gullit-Van Basten-Maradona 1989 probably Van Basten 1990 Matthaus-Maradona (probably Matthaus)
If so, what does that say about the ultimate value of this Guerin Sportivo exercise? What is the value of using this as foremost guide and dismissing the rest? This is not the case, I think. The voter comments at the 1980 and 1981 Ballon d'Or are already very revealing. I have shown you this before but you choose to ignore it entirely. The comments on the individual merit and 'talent' of players are just as revealing, arguably more revealing, than the results itself. That the Ballon d'Or doesn't ask South American voters falls by the wayside - those only distort the outcome in this case. This is to me the world turned on its head. If anything, if this applies, it was the other way around. Platini was as much a breakthrough figure (despite early comments by Ballon d'Or voters on his massive talent initially not backed by multinational sponsors) than someone who was from the beginning high in the hierarchy, or a product of this hierarchy. During their playing days it was, if anything, certainly Rummenigge who was the beneficiary of political perks, inside knowledge by the governors of the game, and the close knitted Adidas-Puma publicity machinery, the influential German sports media and publicity nexus that received medals from FIFA (not the French, not Italian media) and even at timed ended high up at FIFA and UEFA (hello Niersbach). France or Platini himself had not a higher "political position in the hierarchy" and relationship to the UEFA and FIFA - at that time. This much has to be pretty obvious. And how is that exactly supposed to work after their playing days? Journalists are directly instructed or intimidated by the political hierarchy? How do you see that playing out really? This is a serious question and I would like to see a serious answer. So ultimately only one source is looked at. And you ignore here the point on the all-time lists in the 1980s itself, and that neither Keegan or Rummenigge were perceived as strong winners. This is mere conjecture. We don't exactly know how it would look. Guerin Sportivo also ran the 'Bravo Award' for the best under-24 player in Europe. It was voted by a pool of European journalists and the differences with the under-24 players in the Ballon d'Or are stark. It all depends on the voter pool. It is too simple to derive strong conclusions since a parallel Guerin Sportivo vote (40+ voters), involving European players and European voters, already resulted in strongly deviating outcomes from the Ballon d'Or. This is from 1979: "Interesting (and perhaps also a relevant small piece in the puzzle for the retrospective Ballon d'Or thread, where the late 70s and early 80s got discussed) is that this collaboration between three magazines with markedly different backgrounds and circumstances/demography they operated in, resulted in a 22-men selection with 6 South Americans and 16 European players. 19 players were playing in Europe, 3 players in South America (Fillol, Toninho, Passarella - those three all of them in the first XI)." This doesn't take away what I said above. "Talent" is generally conflated with 'style points' or aesthetic considerations. One cannot take both positions here. I'm very sure both Di Stefano and Cruijff had a range of talents (in some cases necessary talents for the careers they had) that Maradona did not possess. Maradona used handballs at each of his major accomplishments. Had those been spotted (or sanctioned by the weak Havelange/Grondona/Ferlaino appointed referees) then he's in far fewer years in the running. I suppose this very much depends on the country. In some countries and regions this is correct, in other countries and regions someone like dr. Josef Mengele received a heroes welcome. Then certainly it is not out of reach for a mere footballer or sports person to receive tribal appreciation. We are not dealing with the 2010s and Thomas Muller but with the early 1980s. I already said something about that IFOP poll (in France!) - and that it is not illogical to see someone lose out by style points or 'talent' pretty much follows from your own previous comments. It cannot be that it (nearly) trumps everything in case of one player, and is then perceived as an injustice at another one.
The rest didn't utilize journalists/managers/players, etc, to reach a conclusion. In a hypothetical world Ballon d'Or, the only source that would have determined a winner would have been Guerin Sportivo, not World Soccer or Onze, because it was a poll conducted with world correspondents, not some random local readers. Not saying it's perfect but that's how the awards are given. If that's the case, what stopped them? How can it be that he never retroactively shared the same honors as Platini ? Why has he been banished from that quadruple list of star players of the 1980s? Why is it he ranks far away from them, when in his days he was ranked at times equal or above them? To make matters even more interesting, neither Zico or Platini could ever settle things on the same pitch in a high profile event against him to say, "hey, I beat him." Only Maradona could when the world title was on the line. There is absolutely no logical reason that he should be ranked so far behind them in historical terms. Now to address Platini specifically. Platini has only 1983-1986 as the flagship of his career to stand on. The rest of his career he is considered a second rate star in the grand scope of things. A talented, elegant player, but overlooked until after World Cup 1982, which brought him to world prominence once he was sold to Juventus. How is it possible that those years are sufficiently strong enough to make him a top 10-15 candidate of all time? Rummenigge and Zico have similar years fighting at the top but are nowadays ranked behind him. In his time Rummenigge is consistently regarded more valuable but is historically relegated further back. How is this possible? Which brings me to your question: Platini's position in UEFA and FIFA cannot be overlooked. Do you believe that Platini did not benefit from being one of the top brass men in UEFA and FIFA? During the end of the 1990s, he was appointed part of FIFA, and coincidentally when the 1999 top 10 lists were circulating, through varios different world publications, Platini was making either the top 5 or top 10 of all time. Was this a coincidence or was he really that great? He wasn't universally regarded as a precocious talent as some of the elite historical figures. He didn't excel at the World Cup level. His playing time in France was hidden under the radar. He jumped into a team in Turin that were defending league champs, only to make them stronger. His Euro in 1984 was a masterpiece, but it was at home, and people overlook that he failed to help France qualify to other Euro tournaments. He retired relatively still young. Is he a great champion? Yes. But he is overrated compared to Rummenigge or Zico in an all-time ranking. Bottom line: his top years at the very summit was rather short lived, so how is it possible that he is ranked so high? What criterias have been used in his favor? I believe the cat was locked up (a saying) and once his name started to make top 10 lists from the 1990s onward, others became conformists that swam with the tide and regurgitated what previous lists had stated. It's the only source that utilized votes from journalists/players across the globe that included all players being eligible worldwide. Yes, but we are just trying to reach a plausible conclusion from what we could find. When was that poll conducted? During which month in 1979? What are the specifics? How many correspondents from across the world participated?