Ok Everyone this is a well talked about topic on the other forums i go to so who do you think was a better soccer player Maradona or Pele'??? I saw maradona because he played in Europe and that's where the real action was and he learned Italian soccer (with Napoli) and he also learned German soccer (with Bayern Munich). Pele' was the best from Brazil but diden't really have good competition (diden't play in Europe). what do you guys think?
Having seen both play, which you apparently didn't, Pele blows Maradona away by a country mile. And I think Pele had plenty of good competition in them there World Cup matches - you know the one where they kept handing him the trophy at the end of the tournament.
Damn can you get anymore ignorant... the talent level in the brazilian league at that time was better than that of any european league thats for sure. And "learning" european styles of soccer...give me a break, if anything he was giving lessons.
Wow that's a shame you really belive that. Why would you say Brazilian soccer is better then the rest of the world just out of curiousity??
They were both great players at the top of their game, and a respectable argument can be made for either one. But to say that either of these legends was better than the other 'by a country mile' is absurd. GianPaolo, we've had this discussion a number of times here at BigSoccer since I've been here. I am sure somewhere in the archives of both 'The Beautiful Game' and 'Rivalries' you can dig up a lot on this topic.
He could have won another, but he was beaten gangsta' style in one of the World Cups, cant remember which one though.
At that time there weren't nearly as many players going off to play in foreign leagues. Brazil won two world cups (should have been three) and they did it with teams that were just stacked with great players. Where did most of these players play? -In BRAZIL Therefore at that time the Brazilian league was the best in the world, the level of competition in that league was higher than any league in europe.
I think that the biggest controversy with this comes from Argentina. Of course many Argentineans would say that Maradona was better. Playing in Europe is good for exposure to other parts of the world but Pelé didn’t need it. He is the most famous player for a reason. His skill was unmatched and I think that leadership was another part of the game that he mastered brilliantly. Pelé was in several movies but there is one that I think you should watch. It is called Victory. This was made about ten years after his playing days but it is a nice soccer movie that shows how much grace he still had. They where of course both brilliant in their own ways and perhaps on some level it is hard to compare, but you said yourself that Pelé never played in Europe, so even with less exposure he managed to become more famous.
Crap - Pele was a great player, Maralardarse was a good player, who looked better than he was because he was playing in a sh!te side. No it is not - Pele was a star among stars, in different eras, how can he possibly be compared to MFB? Fatcheater has fallen by the wayside, returned like the prodigal son into open arms, on several occasions, then shat in the faces of everyone who has supported him, time after time! I find it hard to feel anything but contempt for a man who rose from the gutter, to become an icon amongst his people, only to keep letting them down - the supporters deserve more than that!
Can I just say that Maradona never played for Bayern Munich. His clubs were Argentinos Juniors, Boca Juniors, Barcelona, Napoli, Sevilla and Newells Old Boys. Both were great players, for me Pele was better through his consistent excellence. Also that film with Pele in is called Escape to Victory. It also features Bobby Moore, Ardiles, John Wark and Sly Stallone.
I can't believe most of you think Pele was the better player. Maradona was an absolute genius and the era he played in was much tougher (Italian defenders of the 80's) and more tactically aware. Maradona was a cheating twat but also the best and most creative player that ever lived. I remember Pele for his three misses, header saved by Banks, shot from the halfway line and his outrageous dummy on a keeper. Of course I could say I remember him for his three world cup victories but I don''t want to. Maradona was better and that's that ........ fact.
Well you could say that Maradona's era was tougher or you could point to the disgraceful treatment that Pele received in 62 and 66.
I don't necassarily mean tougher as in who got kicked more, I mean a combination of intelligence with a no nonsense approach, add to this the fact that defenders of that era were far better athletes than those of the 60s, just watch a game from the 60's....... walking pace. The Pele, Maradona debate is like comparing a great player that has gone to the Scottish league and another who has gone to the Italian, even though the Scottish league is probably the most physical on the planet a star player can run rings around them, remember what Gazza, Laudrup and Larsson have done, those guys looked like gods there. Many great players have tried and failed in Italy but Maradona made it look easy. Don't think I'm confusing the Scottish teams with the Brazil teams of 60's and 70's, more a comparison of the kind of defending you might have had in that era.
You can only play against what is in front of you and witness Pele's displays in the WC final of 1970. He was palying against the denfence which had basicaly invented catenaccio, and included in Facchetti one of the greatest defenders ever. Pele made them look pedestrian.
Maradona in my opinion was a better player He single "hand"edly won Argentina the world cup in 86, Pele played with great players when he won. Anyway Ive seen a few of brazils games in the 70 world cup, and he hit row Z a few times. Suppose he was way past his best then anyway.
well, that exposure thing is not really true. Pele played a hell of a lot of exhibition games all around the world. he was used of course, it went even that far that when he was just too tired to play the organizers replaced him with another player pretending to be him... which was of course impossible. i've got to agree with Sir Martin Keown, i'd go for Maradona too. not because he played in europe, but just watch the games of Peles time, defenders where often just standing around and watched how Pele went past them. everbody made it realy easy for him to score. that doesn't mean of course that he wasn't a great player though.
Depends on what you like. Pele was a team player and all his work was for the progress and betterment of his team. Maradona was a one man show, he was the focal point of his team.
George Best is the greatest then? (not that I wouldn't agree with you) Sadly, we'll now hear how he never did anything on the "world stage", geeze, it's not his fault he was from Northern Ireland... hehe...
Well, not singlehandedly, but I agree that Pele had a better supporting cast. That does not necesarily make Maradona better. All it means is that Maradona was more important for Argentina winning the cup than Pele was for Brasil winning the cup. I can make a strong argument that Maradona was the best player based on my personal experience, because I have watched him play since he made his debut at 16. I didn't have the pleasure to watch Pele play quite as much, so my opinion may be skewed by that fact. But they were both great players who dominated their era. We can base our opinions on what we saw, or we can read what the top experts from their time and the players who played with them have to say about them. Either way, we need to give both their due. Anybody who demeans the skills of either one is ignorant about the game.