All Time overrated Player´s

It's very clear what is going on here.

Based on an event that occurred in December 2022 (Messi winning the WC), you've retroactively changed your criteria for what a "GOAT" is in order to exclude Ronaldo from the conversation
(strangely enough, in your original post, you excluded literal world cup legends from "GOAT" on arbitrary and undefined grounds - guys like R9 for example who has a far better WC CV than Messi).

Of course, it is acceptable to have the WC as a key criteria for "GOAT" - it is a defensible position and nobody is arguing with that criteria.

We just want to be clear, does that mean that prior to December 2022, we would not have been able to count Messi as one of the "three GOATs" as you say?

It's not a trick question, just a need to clarify your honesty and integrity.

 

That would be the same as me saying that "you need to win the champions league to truly be considered the GOAT. Without it you're an almost GOAT but not really". In order to exclude Pelé and Maradona from the conversation.

 

I think all of this can be explained by the following:

He does not think Messi was GOAT-level prior to WC 2022, because he’d not won the World Cup, and he believes that in order to be a GOAT-level player overall you need to have won the World Cup. He does not, however, believe that in order to be a GOAT-level player at a specific position you need to have won the World Cup (so the Maldini stuff doesn’t really go to the precise question). I think you can think that’s inconsistent, but I don’t know that it’s really inconsistent to have a different standard for being GOAT-level overall compared to GOAT-level at a specific position (especially one of the relatively less influential positions on the pitch—obviously when we get to forwards and attacking midfielders, the GOATs of those positions are the overall GOATs too, so perhaps the standards there would merge together). GOAT-level overall is definitely a higher bar, which could justify a more stringent standard of admission IMO.

Ultimately, I feel like if you want to demonstrate that Loco is being inconsistent, you’d probably need to dig up pre-WC-2022 posts of him calling Messi GOAT-level. If those exist (maybe they do, I have no idea!), then that’d show inconsistency or at least a shift in criteria, but otherwise, I think you’re just arguing against something that seems internally consistent to me (even if it’s not something you or I would actually agree with).

 

@Loco said exactly this here right before the 2022 world cup final:

"I already have Messi as the Greatest soccer player ever."

https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/2...entina-vs-france.2123922/page-8#post-41060860

 

@Loco what happened? In the end, you don't need to "win the world cup to truly be considered a GOAT and without that you're just an almost goat but not really"

 

@SayWhatIWant @lessthanjake

 

Are you surprised? He concocted an argument in order to able to exclude Ronaldo.
I think putting Messi in the same sentence as Ali (or Jordan even) says everything.

 

Paul Scholes

 

Bollox

 

the offtopic took the place, I tought it was about underated already.

 

Ahhh

That explains it then

 

Why do you think Scholes is overrated? I think Scholes is actually underrated. Most people put him far below Gerrard/Lampard level. Maybe that's just people in my bubble

 

I have been reading the debate carefully. And the argument that you have to win the World Cup to enter the goat debate seems nonsense to me. Vavá won 2 World Cups scoring in both finals and is not even close to the debate. In women's football, almost no one disputes Marta's goat status and she didn't win the World Cup, in fact, she doesn't even have a great club career.

 

I was semi-surprised that you said almost nobody disputes Marta as female GOAT mate, thinking about Mia Hamm, but this list from 2016 does have them in that order (Marta first):
The 20 greatest female football players of all time | Women's football | The Guardian

I guess in some respects Hamm was even a bit more like Pele (or was Pele more akin to being a mixture of Marta and Hamm really?).

I'm not sure how good that list was overall as I'm not educated enough on women's football in general, like I said when @IceBlood34 was asking about that topic (for ideas about historical choices for theoretical Ballon d'Or winners). Whether Akers really should have been/should be quite so high (she did make the FIFA 100 list as well as Hamm of course, but I'm not sure if that was due to Pele so much, or more due to whoever gave him the shortlist - I guess Pele did see her playing though at times, as he was certainly familiar with Hamm apparently, according to the quote below) I wouldn't have a good idea about for example.

Likewise whether Jennings-Gabarra can go higher (or lower even), or whether there are too many goalkeepers there for example, realistically, I'm really not sure! I do guess some players playing since 2016 can enter the contenders list, albeit I'm not sure there is a new number 1 GOAT contender that has emerged as such (and I tend to think Kelly Smith's claims as the best ever English player for example might still be valid, despite the England team going to new heights recently collectively).

 

I think we're missing the point of the conversation. I'll give you another example. Cannavaro won WC and Ballon d'Or, however almost no one is going to consider Cannavaro better than Maldini.

 

Yes, sure, I was going further off topic a little (I just found it kind of interesting, but I wasn't aiming any criticism at your comments, just exploring a little the Marta/Hamm avenue....).

 

We cannot base our opinion of football solely on the World Cup. The fact that the top scorer in World Cup history is Klose is an insult to football. Nobody considers Klose among the great scorers in history.

 

History has proven to us that for the most part, even the greatest players don't just "figured out a way." This is a result-based fallacy where because something did happen, we think that it was the only way it could've happened even if something else changed.

Playing better with the best player in the world in the form of his life is not at all a guarantee that your team will just figure it out.

You seem to be under the impression that if I bring up an incident of Maradona cheating it must mean we need to cover the topic of cheating in football in general. Getting elbowed in the head doesn't make a handball okay.

Point is, there are asterisks to every great football achievements and it is important we don't act like there isn't.

Karma don't exist in football dude. Portugal (among others, tbf) robbed us of peak Pele in 1966 and karma gave them one of their greatest ever WC runs. It wouldn't surprise me if nothing comes of 115 FFP charges against City either.

Even then, two wrongs don't make a right like that, as I mentioned above.

I don't. My post was merely in response to the idea of "how" matters, and not about ghost goals in general.

 

Overall I understand what Loco was saying about Maldini (making a distinction between GOAT left back and GOAT footballer), albeit it seems according to the quotes found he may have jumped the gun a bit on Messi being GOAT according to his criteria (maybe that makes it 1-1 and everyone can shake hands and be friends lol!).

I would say Loco though that while actually I am inclined to agree about English players challenges/fouls on Maradona (some of the play was certainly on the rough side - although none of that was attempted during the 'Goal of the Century' run of course), without wanting to get myself back into arguments about it again (or speculating about any conspiracy or anything like that - poet's point can certainly be extended to refereeing decisions in general though - even with VAR we apparently have a wrong offside call in Tottenham vs Liverpool recently for example), if we talk about over the top foul play (without sufficient punishment, or with lenient treatment compared to modern, perhaps not only modern, standards) then some of the Argentina fouls of 2022 should be considered too (made along the path to Messi lifting the World Cup)....

 

But you brought up cheating. With dirty hands, you try to rob Diego of his glory? Ha! Go back and watch the 1986 game between Argentina v England, and be objective at what you see. Count how many elbows to the head Diego takes (spoiler alert, the tally is 3). Diego was fouled during the whole game, and in reality, he was butchered during the entire tournament. And you want to hang the WC outcome on the wristball goal? You're a hypocrite. And I am tire of pretending that there is merit in the whining English that bring up the wristball while not acknowledging the horrible behavior of their players during that game. You know what you guys got that day, YOU GOT WHAT YOU DESERVED. Getting Rattin kicked out of the '66 WC and the ghost goal are unmentionables to you guys.

I am not sorry that I don't agree with you. Diego was fabulous that day. The 1986 WC run by Diego Maradona stands as the greatest run by a player in a team sport. The second goal against England remains as the greatest goal in soccer history. And I loved the first one as well. There was no way the Brits were going to beat Maradona on that day. Even your players said it. But YOU sitting in front of a computer knows better than the actual British players that were on the pitch. HA!

This threat is about overrated players, and the list should start with the entire 1966 English team.

 

One point to considered, the reason Diego can't get fouled at the end of the run (Goal of the Century), its because Terry Fenwick was already on a yellow and would've been a Red.

The reason he wasn't tackled to ground in that run, imo, its clearly b/c the English defenders were already on yellows.

And again, the last 3 seconds of that run is an amazing quick glance of Diego's genius. Think about that; at Aztec stadium in front of the biggest crowd to watch a WC game, Diego is on this amazing run of ball where he started on his own half, and right when he gets to the penalty box, Diego has the god-given-ability to (1) look at Valdano who was running on the left side, (2) Diego slows down to allow Peter Shilton to come up and challenge Diego, (3) Maradona opens his hips - just enough to fool Shilton into thinking that perhaps Diego was going to pass to Valdano, (4) Diego sees Fenwick, but b/c Diego knows that Fenwick is carrying the yellow, soft steps him aside and allows Fenwick to mark him from behind (at that point all Fenwick could do would've a straight red), and then (5) Diego softly floats it to near post.

WTF?!!?!?Are people here saying that he is overrated?!? And that is only 3 seconds of his genius

 

What about Ronaldo's run in the 16/17 UCL K.O. stages?

 

Seriously, just take a breath and read my post carefully. It was not some dirty attempt to steal Maradona's glory.

I won't get mad because I reckon English isn't your first language. It's not mine either so I do apologize if you I have misled you.

There is no need to try and bring up the whole "yeah, but look at what you, English did!" I'm not English so you can blame them for COVID-19 for all I care

Let me rephrase my original point in the hope that you can jump off this crazy negative roller-coaster: You mentioned HOW winning a World Cup matters, and I was merely question YOUR logic by using Maradona as an example. I was not criticizing Maradona himself. I was question YOUR logic. You could change Maradona to anyone else, but I merely used him because he was already being referenced. If how matters, then [insert questionable WC victory here]. It could be Germany 1954 it could be Italy 1938. Does't matter at all to me or to the point.

The point is that when someone brings up a logic on how to rate if someone is over/under rated (the subject of this thread, in case we forget) then it is only natural that we explore if that logic stand up to the test.

P.S. I've seen enough of ex-UK players to know that even the greatest ones can be very wrong about the game, so they can also be wrong about their experience.

 

Do you think Maradona is overrated?

 

All-time overrated as impact players trio for me (for their peaks especially):

Zidane, Maradona, Cristiano. Al three were mentioned and even advocated here. They all have dumbest and berserkest fans in the world, especiall Mara and CR7.

People often overrated their impact and strenght as a players and for each player there are explanations:

Zidane and Maradona were very beautiful to watch and have controversial characters, people like such a celebrities.

Cristiano has both qualities too (maybe less beautiful game), but also had really strong longevity and narcissism also, which is often liked by fanboys.