Honestly, I don't agree some players accquire a good reputation as greatest of all time footballer, I think these players are a bit overrated. yes, it is totally, totally, totally, 'subjective'. George Best - I know he was one of greatest dribbler, but... I think dribbling is not everything. IMO, his fame is made by British media. especially, was he really greatest of the age? http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/placar-greatest-footballers-1981-1999.1987390/page-2 Gaetano Scirea - when I heard his name for the first time, many people said he was greatest libero of his generation. but I don't feel he was outstanding, even 1982WC. I think Krol, Pezzey, Tresor, Passarella can compare with Scirea, and they are better than him. Michael Laudrup - I agree he was great player. but I think he was just one of world class player, not top of his generation. many people put Laudrup in own Top 30-50 player, it makes me surprised. Michael Ballack - some people say he was carrying Germany NT to 02WC final. I don't think so, I think 02Germany was Kahn's team, and Ballack was one of his fellow. actually, I can't understand how he was included WC/EC best team 4 times. + G. Rivera & G. Riva & S. Mazzola - It doesn't mean they are overrated, just disagree about their reputation. It is hard for me to rank them, but many people choice Rivera easily. sure he won 1 Ballon d'or, but I think they are almost same class. Once again, it is totally, totally, totally, 'subjective'. however, who is your overrated?
1. Cronaldo, 3 time Ballon d'Or winner, 1 stolen, champion of diving, pointless tap-ins and referee gifted penalties, media manufactured reality. 2. Pele, 3 time WC winner, never the best player of the team, over 1000 goals, in exhibitions and nazi movies. 3. Maradona, carried "weak team" to first league title, like Aguero did it with ManC
He left Manchester united when he was only 27 years old. He started to fade even before that. When he was at the top, he was great, but he lacked longevity.
yeah, he faded too early. that is why I don't think he is best of best. and long time ago, he was regarded below than B. Charlton & Matthews, but nowaday he is greatest British player. it is awkward. I think his tragedy attracts media, and make him more popular. I think Tostao is more unlucky, and more dreadful player.
Zidane always struck me as overrated, especially in his Real Madrid years. I mean, he was a wonderful player and certainly one of the most elegant footballers ever, but I've seen plenty of people putting him in the top 10 or top 15 of all time. Top 10 of all time, considering all positions? C'mon. I'll admit he definitely was a clutch player, though.
George Best was a great,great player. Perhaps the most gifted player britain has had. Not overrated at all. Easily better than Charlton . He just wasted his talent, but he Still had a decade at man utd. His legacy has nothing to do with his tragic demise. He was recognised as a genius during his playing days.
easily better than Charlton? hmm... confused. I have to watch more their games. nevertheless, It is hard for me to agree Best is near top 10 footballers. I want to put him in top 30-40.
best had great dribbling and character, combined with good crossing and finishing. his vision and decision making were far from legendary though. people who rate him highly tend to rate garrincha aswell.
Best was gifted for sure. I am 100% sure that he would have been ranked higher than Charlton and Matthews, but he faded away too quick in which I have to put him below Matthews and Charlton. A lot of players were punished because their peaks were too short. Ronaldinho, Kaka, etc came to mind, but Best seemed to get away with it. He was a shadow of himself by 25 or 26. I don't think he was overrated, but things should be considered I also have question marks on Romario. He belonged to a lot of peoples' player pool for the top 25 ever and i do NOT disagree. However, when I put Stoichkov into perspective, then, Romario suddenly seemed overrated (or Stoichkov being underrated). Both of them starred together at Barcelona. Stoichkov played longer, but Romario won the Pichichi. Both players carried their national to great results at USA 1994. Stoichkov was the top scorer. In the end, Romario was often in the top 25, but Stoichkov was seldom mentioned. Perhaps, if Stoichkov was Brazilian, he might be ahead of Romario the Bulgarian.
Maybe his nationality is advantage for Romario. it seems reasonable. but, let's change viewpoint. Romario and Stoichkov are the same age, Stoichkov retired in 2003(NT retired 1999), and became a NT manager since 2004, however, Romario was still playing, even his last NT match was held 2005. he was showing his quality. Ro-Ro attack was fantastic(though he couldn't participate main tournament), when Selecao staggerd in 02WCQ, people called his name. so maybe Romario is overrated, but ahead of Stoichkov is not surprised. oh, it's my opinion.
Correct, compared with Romario he is not overrated as a footballer. He was quite clever and composed. Despite being the glamour boy he wasn't always going for his own glory... He even made sliding tackles in midfield when lined up as '#8' or "#10"... Because of how many mistakes he made during a game I often thought as the technique of Romario as quite overrated - or 'deceptive' to give it a better word. Great if it works, but the spectacular trappings didn't always work for prime and fully-fit Romario. Sometimes not at all in a match. It results in great highlight reels. I can see what you mean with George Best. However, like Romario it's a good question how high his peak really was. Sometimes it's made higher than it perhaps was. http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/the-worst-ballon-dor-winner.2012564/page-4#post-31353053
I have to agree with this. Whenever there's an all-time team, there are generally two types of people. 1. Those who are fans of wingplay and include both Garrincha and Best. 2. Those that includes neither and tries to fit three to four no.10s in their team such as Pele, Maradona, and Cruyff.
Best was a .. i just can't understand how a gifted player like Best can be called overrated. In his era, in his best years he was the an absolutely brilliant player - regardless of how high his peak was he was rated highly by cruyff , pele etc. Beckenbauer says he was the best player to never play at a world cup. Best in my opinion had just as much ability as any other great from his era.. yes at times he was a self indulgent crowd pleaser but that was part of his charm. the great football writer Hugh mcilvanney said watching Best in his zenith was seeing football played at a level that only 2 or 3 players have achieved in its history..
regarding george best apart from the 2 briliant interceptions he makes, this is what i also see: at 0:32 he didn't see the opportunity for the pass at 1:31 again didn't see the opportunity for the pass at 1:47 what is he thinking? at 2:42 again didn't see the opportunity for the pass
I wouldn't call Gaetano Scirea overrated. He usually figures amongst the names mentioned after Beckenbauer, alongside Pasarella, Figueroa, Krol, Moore, Baresi. I don't think he is a level below these names and therefore rightly rated.
no need to get defensive/sarcastic. i never said he was crap/bad, did i? may we analyze instead of obscure? seriously, did you want to have him compared to charlton, or whatever all-time competition, or not?
I was only joking mate ! Sorry if i seemed as though i was being defensive.. i just dont believe that Best deserves to be mentioned as overrated.. if i was claiming him to be the greatest ever then he would be overrated. Ask anybody who watched Best at his peak or any ex professional who played with or against him and they will tell you the same as me - he was a gifted player.
I have an idea that 'to evalue and rank legendary footballers' talent accurately is impossible'. If we compare Messi with ordinary footballer, we can easily choice Messi. but greatest vs greatest? for example, Zico vs Platini, someone prefers Zico, another one choices Platini. how can say 'Zico is more talented' or 'Platini is gifted player than Zico'? gifted footballer or talented footballer is too ideal emblazonment. oh, I know talent is very very important factor to become athlete, but IMO, gap of legendary footballers' talent is really narrow. so, peak performance is important factor to evalue footballer, we have to consider his consistency and achievement. I know Best was one of greatest dribbler, and he was really gifted. I agree he was great footballer. but he is not only. we can consider another names like Matthews, Gento, Jairzinho, etc. they were talented too, showed great performance for long time, made remarkable achievement. nevertheless, media always have said Best's talent only. Scirea, M. Laudrup are too(yeah Scirea had many trophies, but I think his performance was just one of good libero at the age). anyway, I'm not good using English, so explaining my opinion is too hard. I hope you can understand what I saying...
My comment on the Best discussion is as follows .........and this is coming from a Man United fan. Had Best been less marketable, handsome and charismatic and had a longer career he would not be held in as high asteem. He was fantastic for a period and as we know did not have longevity, when players such as these it peaks for a period people tend to romanticise them. An example of a comparision outside of football is a a musican never becomes so iconic and revered as when they die young and are taken away at their prime i.e Hendrix, Cobain, etc... Re the marketable piece, Best was the first sports superstar in the UK and did loads of advertising and people knew he he was whether you liked football or not so this all adds to the mystique. A comparison today is with someone like Beckham, many younger people who missed out on the prime of Beckham's career and don't follow the football closely seem to think Beckahm was the Pele or Messi of the day, which as we know far from the truth but due to his celebrity staus and brand. Anyway, my last point is I am not knocking Best at all, he was fantastic, won the ballon d'or nad was at the pinnacle of the game for a few years, however many Brits do look at him through rose tinted glasses and would have him in thier top three of all time of even the best (pardon the pun) which personallly I feel is not the case.
Im not romanticising George Best at all.. i know he had a short peak.. i just dont think that his peak was overrated.. Best was known for his ability first and foremost . He was recognised as a legend long before his death.
This was not dig at you at all, your comments were fair enough and very valid and I agree he is a legend and was before his death. The point was trying to make that there are other factors that enhance his reputation.