I was the first to agree that Messi did not deserve the award. But to say that he had a poor tournament is ludicrous. He was bad by his standards, but still one of the top 10 players of the WC. Imo, only Robben, James and Neuer were better. Others, like Bravo and Ochoa, had too few games. And Muller was a step behind.
You know canis, I usually tend to agree with you but not on Messi I am afraid Of course you have a point in that he is being measured against another standards but I have never seen Messi walk this much and perform this way overal. It is a WC and the competition for the golden ball is and should be though. Messi just didn't deserve it imho.
That´s a good thing or there would be no debates Messi has never performed as an offensive midfielder. He had to accept playing as one for the sake of the team. I would have liked to have Pastore or Lamela there, and play Messi as a forward, instead of fatty Higuain or woodleg Aguero, but it was what it was. I think he was lost in the pitch most of the time, and shined only when he found himself close to the box (as usual). So I agree he didn´t deserve the award, but even then, he managed to be decisive in 3 games out of 7. Not many players have done so. Ofc, he is Messi, so everyone expected him to pull a Maradona, which was never going to happen playing as a midfielder.
What strange comment. You forget C Ronaldo had a serious keen problem? The way he was limited by the injury, Ronaldo and Portugal would've probably been better off sitting him out.
Just answering in kind to the hater. However, it's almost certain that for C Ronaldo any chance at WC greatness is now gone.
Don't be ridiculous. Neymar clearly contributed more to the overall games. Even just looking at raw statistics and he, at worst, equalled Messi despite playing almost four hours less football.
How so? He still has another WC and is usually a very fit guy. Hopefully they get a better coach who can choose a better team. Up to now though, it's interesting to note Messi and CR7 have had somewhat similar results in their 3 WCs: they both have about the same goals and assists, have reached the final and semi respectively, and each have won a worthless FIFA WC award. The bottom line though, both have greatly under-performed relative to their club form and for this ,unfortunately, they both will always be just great club players in the history of football when talking about the all time greats, at least according to many.
The fact that he single-handedly kept them in the match (and thus the tournament for an extra 4 days) with his late cross against the USA says otherwise.
Neymar only had two good matches, against Croatia and Cameroon. Messi has four good matches, against Bosnia, Nigeria, Iran and Switzerland. Clearly, Messi was better. I don't think C Ronaldo's WC06 is comparable to Messi's WC14. Ronaldo was good but certainly not the leading player for Portugal, and he was never really in contention for the Golden Ball. Messi was Argentina's focal player and while overall falling short of expectations, still one of the top three candidates for the award (although I feel Rodriguez deserved it more).
You have clearly stretched the definition of good to suit your agenda. Messi was largely anonymous for the majority of the tournament bar his goals. It directly contrasts with last time when he was heavily involved but had no end product.
I'm sorry, but giving the golden ball to Messi was just ridiculous. He wasn't bad, but he was nowhere near the best. Even Argentinian legends Kempes and Maradona said so. Schweinsteiger, Neuer, Kross, Müller, Lahm, Mascherano, Robben, James all deserved it more and these are just the most obvious cases. As has been pointed out, a good argument could be made about Neymar...heck, why not Shaqiri while we're at it? Personally, I'd go for Kroos I guess, but I wouldn't have had any problems with any of those mentioned above winning it. But Messi? Come on! Messi got it because of his name and that's a disgrace. It totally cheapens the award. And in the end, I think this award will harm Messi's image more than it helps him, because EVERYBODY knows that he didn't deserve it. It might not be his fault, but he'll forever be implicated.
Germany wasn't that much better than any of its opponents in the knockout stages except Brazil, beating all the others by one goal and having had to play two extra time periods. You mentioning five players more deserving than Messi is absurd, and while Messi did not deserve the Golden Ball, he was still better than any single Germany player at the tournament, especially Muller who crapped himself when he was in the same field as Messi, so much for a challenge. The two players that deserved it more than him were Rodriguez and Robben, however, and I wished FIFA just hadn't gone for the biggest name for the award.
Sorry but i think that Messi was weaker then: Mascharano Robben James Neuer and was in the same range as Neymar Van Persie Kroos Hummels he wasn´t even the best Player in his own Team... I like Messi a lot, he is for me the best Player in the world, but his Performance in this WC was weak. Even in the games where he saved Argentine he was nearly invisbile until one moment each...
@Pipiolo Considering Kroos was statistically the #1 rated player in the tournament, this claim is ridiculous. The Castrol Index also puts Messi outside the top 10, fwiw. And given that 3 Germans are in the top 10, it makes your claim even that much more ridiculous, honestly. http://metro.co.uk/2014/07/14/stats...onel-messi-wasnt-even-in-the-top-ten-4798149/ Now, you can argue the Castrol Index is flawed, but you have several other options to consider. Look at Messi' heatmaps (in multiple matches he is caught out too far in the wing unable to generate offense by his preferred methods), look at his 1 assist in 4 Argentina goals not scored by him (considering he's the primary creative midfielder - yes I know some of that is finishing but honestly), etc.
So, your argument is Messi deserved it more because Argentina dominated all their games and outscored every opponent by big margins o0?
As a caveat, I don't count defensive players for these awards, I just feel they are meant for creative/attacking players. So I won't discuss Mascherano and Neuer, both of whom had outstanding tournaments of course. Hummels was owned by Messi a few times in the final, and was lucky not to be sent off, that alone should put him out of the discussion. Van Persie had some shockers, Netherlands were down against Mexico while he was on the field in fact, and only overcame the score after his departure. He was also largely responsible for the match against Costa Rica going to penalties. Neymar was very good and I rate him as #4 ahead of Muller and just behind Messi. Overall, I think we largely agree if we take out the defensive players from consideration, with the exception of Van Persie. I don't think that a player has to be felt the entire match to make a mark, the "moment of genius" is as much a mark of excellence as a consistent operator. Lies, damned lies and stats. Kroos played well in a well-oiled machine, put him with a sputtering team like Argentina and I would be shocked if he did any better than Enzo Perez. If Kroos was so good he should have challenged Messi in the final, instead of hiding behind the structure of the team. Truth is, many expected a matchup of Muller versus Messi in the final, but Muller cowed away with an indistinct performance. Kroos did not take up the challenge either. I have argued in other threads that Messi's performance falls short of the legendary WC names of before, but he was still very good, the player with the most gravitas on the field in every match, and I just didn't see anyone else take the mantle away from him, certainly not Kroos.
I Agree with Jari Litmanen: "After critisizing Brazil there seems to be a new trend in town: mocking Messi. First of all, Messi didn't pick himself as the best player of the tournament, he was chosen by a panel of professional coaches. Their unanimous view was that Messi was the best. I don't know how they justified their choice but I can imagine it going something like this. Messi was involved in every goal that Argentina made, either by shooting, passing or setting it up. Without Messi, it would've been tough for them to qualify from their group. Messi didn't score any more goals in the playoff stage, however his presence was constantly affecting the game at a decisive level. He was involved in everything that happened when Argentina was attacking and he was guarded by at least two players in every match - even the fantastic German team had to make special measures to contain him. The fact was that Messi didn't have enough help around him this time. For example when playing for Barcelona, no team could defend against them the same way that Holland and Germany did against Argentina and Messi, because Barca would instantly capitalize on the space created by using their other star players. In these games, no player had as big of a role in their teams attack than Messi had in Argentina's - and you play for the result in this sport. Messi took his team to the final. Since Aguero wasn't 100% and Di Maria got injured, Messi didn't have enough firepower around him. When Argentina won in 1986, Maradona had Burruchaga and Valdano who where top players. Messi didn't have help of this caliber and this is why the team fell short of the biggest prize. You could very well have chosen some other player as the best player of the tournament, but it's also very easy to justify choosing Messi and with very clear arguments: without Messi, Argentina wouldn't have been close to getting to the final. That's a good point to remember by the critics. Based on these arguments, choosing Messi as the best was the correct choice, but you could also have chosen someone else. What's funny is that in some estimates Messi wouldn't make the best 11 of the games. That tells more about someone's desire to seek attention rather than understanding anything about football, since no team had a player that was as influential to their team's success as Messi was for Argentina. Argentina wen to the final, where a TEAM destroyed their dream, but even Germany in all its excellence had to take special measures to contain Messi, sometimes even with several players."
Where was Hummels in danger of getting sent off`? Boateng took the ball away from Messi in two 1on1 situations, so per your definition Boateng owned Messi, despite the attacker having the advantage in 1on1s. If Messi was so good he should have challenged Özil (or Müller,Schürle,Klose) in the final. Strange logic there.
Using several players to defend one attacker is normal, even Özil got closed down by 2 or 3 Argentine everytime he had the ball in the final third
Hummels studs up challenge in the first half could well have been a red card. And Messi was better than any of them, Ozil, Muller (lmao!), etc. in the final.