Best peak ever

Discussion in 'Players & Legends' started by Gregoire1, Dec 15, 2020.

?

Best peak ever

  1. Pele

  2. Messi

  3. Maradona

  4. Fenomeno

  5. Ronaldinho

  6. Cristiano

  7. Zidane

  8. Cruyff

  9. Zico

  10. Platini

  11. other

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Tropeiro

    Tropeiro Member

    Jun 1, 2018
    #26 Tropeiro, Jan 8, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2021
    Observation:

    I don't really rate that much the Argentinian League of the end of 70s. Maradona's average participation dropped a lot while playing in Europe and his goal contribution for the Argentina NT wasn't nearly as good as his Argentinos Juniors or Boca Juniors supposed numbers at that time.

    He showed glimpses of his talent, that's true... but not enough to be the best in the world at that time and he wasn't in most his period in Europe or in his big tournaments (not in La Liga, not in 1979 Copa América, not in the 78 or 82 World Cup).

    ==> Data is uncertain for many players from the past (and not only from the past too).

    In Europe (acc Spanish Wiki) Maradona played 346 matches with 161 goals (around 51 PK) and 115 assists (around 328 90s) His teams scored at rate of 1.63 GF per game
    0.686 / 1.63 = ~42% non-PK goals + assists while in Europe.

    For Argentina he had 34 goals (3 PK?) + 28(?) assists in 91 matches (137 Goals scored)
    Even if it is not correct you still can see that his average goal contribution average for Argentina was still closer to his european numbers than to his early argentina period!

    But let's says the data is correct... it is more easily verifiable / reliable for the National Teams and big competitions btw..



    About 10 years-peak (Pelé 1957-1966)

    Brazilian NT

    Potentially 32 assists acc Tomas Rosalino (minimum of minimum 19, including some games with no counted and bad counted) = (estimated 25 assists) + 57 Goals (53 non-PK Goals)... 54.91 90s
    for Brazilian NT
    151 Goals (59 matches) in those matches

    G+A p90 max: 1.621
    G+A p90 min: 1.384
    G+A p90 avg: 1.493
    Non-PKG + A p90 max: 1.548
    Non-PKG + A p90 min: 1.311
    Non-PKG + A p90 avg: 1.42

    Estimated G+A p90 contribution: 1.493 / 2.559 = 58.34% (54.08% to 63.34%)
    Estimated npkG+A p90 contribtion: 1.42 / 2.559 = 55.49% (51.23% to 60.49%)

    On-Off:
    Estimated G+A contribution: 1.493 / 2.395 = 62.33% (57.78% to 67.68%)
    Estimated npkG+A contribtution: 1.42 / 2.395 = 59.29% (54.73% to 64.63%)

    Santos:

    476 Goals (51 PK) and estimated 178 assists in estimated 42631 minutes (360.9 90s)
    1208 Santos Goals in 365 matches (3.309)

    Estimated G+A p90 contribution: 1.812 / 3.309 = 54.76%
    Estimated npkG + A p90 contribution
    : 1.671 / 3.309 = 50.49%

    On-Off

    Estimated G+A contribution: 1.812 / (1464/474) = 58.67%
    Estimated npkG + A contribution: 1.671 / (1464/474) = 54.10%


    Pelé Overall Brazil and Santos (1957-1966):
    533 Goals (55PK) and 203 assists in estimated 415.8 90s

    Estimated G+A p90 rate: 1.77
    Estimated npkG + A p90 rate: 1.638

    Estimated G+A
    contribution / on-off contribution: 55.22% / 59.15%
    Estimated npkG+A
    contribution / on-off contribution: 51.18% / 54.82%


    That's huge rate and contribution considering that Pelé was part of a Brazilian team (two-time World Champions) that was ranked number one on average for that time and a Santos who was the best team in Brazil (in this period) and possibly, on average, TOP3 in the world between 1957-1966. World Champion with club and NT, both first title for Brazil in all history.


    I did the same for Messi in his peak numbers...

    Messi Overall Argentina and Barcelona (2010/2011 - 2019/2020) 564 Goals (82 PK) and 240 assists 51095 (567.7 90s)

    G+A p90 rate: 1.416
    npkG + A p90 rate: 1.272


    G+A contribution / on-off contribution: 56.96% / 57.07%
    npkG+A
    contribution / on-off contribution: 51.17% / 51.22%

    A bit of context:

    While Messi did well in his Goalcontribution peak for Barcelona between 10-11 to 19-20 (but arguably less well than Pelé at Santos playing for a stronger Barcelona, it was vastly discussed here.... it of course ended with Messi fanboys calling me low IQ, retarded, dumb etc... so I in fact don't like this thread anymore, but it is open to people see).....

    ..... Messi failed to lead Argentina to the World Title or to the Copa America title, with a lot of more chances of achieving success (3 WCs all of them with no injuries etc, 4 Copas) and more.. in fact he didn't elevated Argentina at all according Elo rating average for the decade: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Football_Elo_Ratings#Averages_by_decade
    as you can see the same position.
    Nice to see too.

    You can argue that Messi played more, but I am not sure of that. Pelé played 697 matches between 1957-1966 if you include the non-official matches (many of them having to travel great distances to be tackled in poor pitches).

    Anyway, I can describe Messi as one of the most efficient/accurate players in the last third of the pitch. Pelé, however, the most complete and effective.
     
    Gregoire1 repped this.
  2. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Yes Maradona numbers droped in Europe is obvius, if he had stayed in Argentina he would probably have better numbers. The same with Pelé if he had played in a league with more level he would probably have worse numbers

    what is that on-off contribution? how you calculate that?
     
  3. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    This is what I have

    Pelé 1957 to 1966

    In Club played 32479 minutes, scored 476 goals (51 PK) and 178 assists
    365 games, GF: 1208 (3.310 pg)- GA: 524 (1.436 pg)

    1.671/3.170= 52.71
    Non-PK G+A: 1.671 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 52.71%

    In NT played 4847 minutes, scored 57 goals (4 PK) and 18 assists
    59 games, GF: 152 (2.576 pg)- GA: 55 (0.932 pg)

    1.318/2.508= 52.56
    Non-PK G+A: 1.318 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 52.56%

    In Total played 37326 minutes, scored 533 goals (55 PK) and 196 assists
    424 games, GF: 1360 (3.208 pg)- GA: 579 (1.366 pg)

    1.625/3.078= 52.80
    Non-PK G+A: 1.625 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 52.80%
     
  4. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Lionel Messi 2010/11 to 2019/20

    In Club played 43648 minutes, scored 507 goals (64 PK) and 209 assists
    517 games, GF: 1336 (2.584 pg)- GA: 445 (0.861 pg)

    1.344/2.460= 54.64
    Non-PK G+A: 1.344 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 54.64%

    In NT played 7442 minutes, scored 57 goals (12 PK) and 31 assists
    88 games, GF: 168 (1.909 pg)- GA: 65 (0.739 pg)

    0.919/1.773= 51.85
    Non-PK G+A: 0.919 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 51.85%

    In Total played 51090 minutes, scored 564 goals (76 PK) and 240 assists
    605 games, GF: 1504 (2.486 pg)- GA: 510 (0.843 pg)

    1.282/2.360= 54.33
    Non-PK G+A: 1.282 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 54.33%
     
  5. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Diego Maradona 1976 to 1986

    In Club played 29096 minutes, scored 212 goals (48 PK) and 119 assists
    331 games, GF: 552 (1.668 pg)- GA: 362 (1.094 pg)

    0.875/1.523= 57.49
    Non-PK G+A: 0.875 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 57.49%

    In NT played 3826 minutes, scored 24 goals (1 PK) and 17 assists
    44 games, GF: 84 (1.909 pg)- GA: 42 (0.955 pg)

    0.941/1.886= 49.88
    Non-PK G+A: 0.941 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 49.88%

    In Total played 32922 minutes, scored 236 goals (49 PK) and 136 assists
    375 games, GF: 636 (1.696 pg)- GA: 404 (1.077 pg)

    0.883/1.565= 56.41
    Non-PK G+A: 0.883 per 90m
    Non-PK G+A contribution: 56.41%
     
  6. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Ten consecutive seasons clubs and national team:
    Diego Maradona (76-86): 0.883/1.565= 56.41%
    Lionel Messi (10-20): 1.282/2.360= 54.33%
    Pelé (57-66): 1.625/3.078= 52.80%
     
  7. Gregoire1

    Gregoire1 Member

    Dec 4, 2020
    Exactly this. I dont trust stats for Maradona (in Arg. Juniors especially) to be honest. Its obviously some kind of arbitrary in case of assists, PK and goals by the team, not to mention substitutions (minutes). His NT stats and european leagues more reliable, but still not on Messi's level of verification...
    In the case of Pele assists stats and goals by the team (not to mention minutes, subs ect) are just arbitrary for the club. There are no source. its just extrapolation (biased). There are only his NT stats counted - from 47 to 60 assists in NT games. So, yes, if we talk about Pele its fair to take his NT assists stats and extrapolate for club level (for each 77 goals - 47-60 assists) or just dont take it. But in table of poster its biased opinion in favor of Maradona, his favorite.
     
    Tropeiro repped this.
  8. Gregoire1

    Gregoire1 Member

    Dec 4, 2020
    Thanks! I just think real and fair assists stats for Pele (Santos) dont exist, its sad... There are no videotape of each goal, not to mention someone have to count it. But we have his NT stats, its very good. In my humble opinion if we just talk about raw stats (G+A) impact, not overall skill level, maybe his peak is 58-60 or 60-62 or 61-63 (if talking about 3 year peak).
     
  9. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    As of yet I haven't seen even one piece of primary source material going into any great detail about Peles club assist record

    Spanish wiki is at best a corroborating source(Tropiero admits to screenshoting Peles assists before they mysteriously disappeared)
    I personally prefer other methods when comparing players

    I know for a fact Tropiero defintely believes Pele at worst is as good a playmaker as Messi
    That is a starting point

    'Pythagoras in the boots' is great website link if you're interested in classical players and football tactics
    Here they attempt to make the case for Pele being the most complete attacker of all time
    There is typically some preconceived biases that I won't go into any great detail about

    The categories explored are as follows
    • Long-range shooting
    • Long-range passing
    • Press resistance
    • Heading
    • Set-Pieces
    • Controlling the tempo
    • Killer passes
    • Finishing
    • Dribbling
    • Hold up play
    • Movement off the ball
    • Athleticism
    • Ambidexterity

    LONG-RANGE PASSING
    Long-Range passing incorporates the ability to spread the play and crossing. It is an area of the game where Pele falls short. His style of play just didn't incorporate long range passing/crossing, as he preferred shorter passes for quick-fired combination play. through central areas. In this category, Maradona, Zico reign supreme with their wonderful mastery of long passing as well as crossing, although for outside of the foot crosses - Cruyff was King. CR7 is underrated with regards to his crossing but not really renowned as a long-range passer. None of the other forwards are worth a mention in this regard.


    CONTROLLING THE TEMPO

    The best players in this regard run the game in the final third, effectively taking over from the Regista as the playmaker. Di Stefano was unique out of this shortlist of forwards in that his ability to control the entire game despite being such a lethal forward was unprecedented and has not been matched since... although Cruyff did come close in terms of his ability to stamp his authority on a game. Maradona was the master of controlling the final third, whereas Zico was not as adept as Diego or even Platini

    Whilst I wouldn't place Pele at the top of the list in this regard alongside the likes of Maradona/Di Stefano/Cruyff, he definitely had the ability to control a tempo of a game and was a ball-magnet. He had a playmakers mindset in the final third, in contrast to CR7, R9 and knew when to accelerate or slow a game down in the final third which kept opponents guessing as to when he'd go for the kill.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=70&v=jqjov55658o&feature=emb_title

    KILLER PASSES IN THE FINAL THIRD
    Eusebio, R9 and CR7 struggle in this regard and whilst Henry had a ridiculous amount of assists(still not as many assists as CR) he and Van Basten didn't quite possess the same level of prowess that you'd associate with the finest passers in the final third including Messi, Cruyff, Maradona and Zico. Di Stefano was also an incredible passer in the final third and was the creative force of that Madrid side of the 50's. Puskas was also a fine passer but in comparison to the aforementioned, his passing game was slightly more limited.

    Pele was an absolute master in this regard.. the assist for Jairzinho's goal against England in 1970 as well as the final pass for Carlos Alberto's goal in the final. Two iconic assists in the same tournament which have stood the test of time and they were just the tip of the iceberg. Whilst this is a highly contested category, for me Pele has the perfect blend of insane imagination, flair technique and efficiency of execution to reign supreme in this category
    https://www.pythagorasinboots.com/pele-most-complete-attacker-of-all-time/
     
    Gregoire1 and Tropeiro repped this.
  10. Tropeiro

    Tropeiro Member

    Jun 1, 2018
    Yes, all facts. Some Brazilian member here counted 30 assists for Pelé in the Brazilian NT, but he didn't counted all the matches, used only one source and left behind obvious assists like the ones vs URSS and vs Germany out.

    Btw, Pelé's goal contribution with the Brazilian NT was actually higher than his supposed goal contribution for Santos.
    For Maradona, it is the opposite, his goal contribution with the Argentina NT is far away as the ones of Argentinos Jrs and Boca Juniors.
    .... and Pelé's Santos was actually playing for one of the best teams in his period and btw a high scoring team, with a lot of talented players to score goals (and not only Pelé)... that's a fact, so Pelé's G+A contribution happened in the top teams for his time (Santos probably TOP3, Brazil probably TOP1) and playing in the Paulista, Brazilian, Rio-São Paulo leagues with players who managed to be three time World Champions, while Argentina in 1978 wasn't that clear (in terms of football quality and political issues) and the main argentinian stars like Kempes from that time already was playing abroad when Maradona made his name in the Argentinian league.

    So, it wasn't the same (Altafini and Evaristo de Macedo, for example) Brazilians tend even now with a known worse generation, and with much more players playing abroad (like 1500+), have much better performance than the Argentines (less players) playing in other leagues and there is already a considerable difference (#329), imagine in a better time.
     
    Gregoire1 repped this.
  11. Tropeiro

    Tropeiro Member

    Jun 1, 2018
    Unpopular opinion: Cruyff was also better/more impactful than Messi and/or Maradona and has a better claim for the GOAT position than both argentinians. For now, he ranks second in my list.
     
    Gregoire1 repped this.
  12. sohel_bashar

    sohel_bashar Member

    Real Madrid
    Jun 5, 2020
    Forget the trophies, stats, impact and achievements. Based on what they were capable of doing on the pitch individual level, how will you compare them? Based on things like finishing, dribbling(close control,agility etc) , athleticism,physicality,crossing,passing etc playmaking resources,shooting, defensive contribution etc attributes . I am interested to see if you don't mind.
     
  13. Tropeiro

    Tropeiro Member

    Jun 1, 2018
    #38 Tropeiro, Jan 10, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2021
    You can't forget these things while judging the players. It is just not possible. The skill and the talent have to be used for and reflected in their team results. If not, football becomes aesthetic masturbation and doesn't achieve objective results.

    You can make an effort but it doesn't work like that, people are thinking to much in the on-ball contributions, but actually the way they execute defensive duties, the way they think the game, the leadership and influence on and outside of the pitch and the off-the-ball movement is really equally or even (maybe probably?) more important than the time the player stay (or actions) with the ball.
    ....and even being "more complete" doesn't mean being better, this is another misconception, sometimes a player with few strengths and/or few weaknesses, gets a much better result/impact than a more complete player, so to speak.

    Anyway,
    I rate Cruyff as a elite playmaker/ball progressor, he could impact the game on all sides of the pitch without the slightest problem and is very mobile to receive the ball in all these sides, great vision, could play the through ball, could make the perfect cross, long ball, chip passes, final pass, could distribute and orchestrate the team play, could think like a midfielder, could play in different positions.
    Could use his otherworldly acceleration, speed and stamina to progress the ball via carries and dribbles (more so than only passes). Good to great ball control, great first touch, good to great technique, two-footed, great imagination while playing and dribbling and an element of reference on the pitch for his teams, always very communicative and aware.
    He also scored around 400 goals in his carrer, though only few with his head.

    I can see Cruyff being a better, more effective ball progressor and playmaker in the full sense of the word than both argentinians, probably a superior player in the middle third of the pitch and the most impactful one all things considered, also a more trustable leader.
     
    Gregoire1 repped this.
  14. Tropeiro

    Tropeiro Member

    Jun 1, 2018
    I want to see your opinion now for why Messi and Maradona should be considered higher/better than Cruyff.
     
    Gregoire1 repped this.
  15. Gregoire1

    Gregoire1 Member

    Dec 4, 2020
    I saw two sources for Pele for assists in NT (92 games).
    In one they give him 47 assists https://www.goal.com/br/notícias/to...ter.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=brfb
    In other (spain wiki) - 60 assists.
    Its obvious that club assists is only estimated for him (lack of footage), but its fair to assume IMO that in Santos he has better or same ratio of assists like in NT (level of competition in NT is higher).
    One other note in favor of Pele: its easier to contribute if there are less goal by team, so its not linear. In these aspect Pele have advantage over Messi and especially Maradona. So, for me average goal+ assist ratio per game is maybe more important than % of contribution.
    Not to mention than goal for me have more value than assist because there are unassisted goals, assists is more arbitrary to count and difficult to indicate especially in old games.
     
  16. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    You don't trust stats for Maradona because you don't like what you see, simple as that. I made a quick research and the person who made the edit in the wiki page of Maradona and Pele is the same, is a chilean guy who edit a lot of player pages principaly chilean players. He made those edits in 2018 and when someone asked him where he got this data from, he replied from newspapers, videos and documentaries. I do not know but at least we can say that he is not a Maradona fanatic person who wants to inflate his statistics
     
  17. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Basically there is unanimity that the five best players in history are, Maradona, Messi, Pelé, Cruyff, and Di Stéfano and of course you can add Cristiano Ronaldo.
    about who is better is almost an impossible answer but believe me the differences are minimal at least I'm sure of that
     
  18. Gregoire1

    Gregoire1 Member

    Dec 4, 2020
    it's exactly opposite. You trust them because you like it. and in table there are a lot of dishonest biased numbers. "Some chilean guy"? It's reliable source? Sorry., but for me not. " Somebody ask", "he said", " Newspapers"- it sounds more like not very reliable source tbh. And why he could not be Maradona fan like you? Because he is chilean? maybe later I will try to search and count unbiased numbers.
     
  19. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    If he had given Pele a little higher numbers, you would have no problem with the source, this person edited the assists of Maradona and Pelé, and many other players is not a fan of Maradona.
    When I showed you that Maradona has a higher goal+assists contribution than Pelé, Messi and Cruyff suddenly that doesn't matter and the goal+ assist ratio per game is more important? How can you be so impartial and dishonest with your opinion?
     
  20. Gregoire1

    Gregoire1 Member

    Dec 4, 2020
    #45 Gregoire1, Jan 12, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2021
    I have problem anyway and dont trust the numbers without the source (or not evident source) and moreso biased. Its not linked to Pele, Maradona or other players. Its not you can "give" Pele or other player stats. I need evidence.
    Even if we took G+A contribution (stat you like) in your calculation (biased) Maradona is lower then Messi and Pele for NT, Boca and European career, only Arg. Juniors stats (not evident, some chilean guy) propelled him higher (and its without checking you stats and calculation, which I dont trust anymore), so maybe you need invent some new stat or new source to propell your boy Maradona to be number 1. Maybe give 2 or 3 point for assist. I think Maradona himself wouldnt be glad for such dishonesty if he was alive.
    You didnt show me anything still. Only arbitrary and dishonest calculation to favor your boy Maradona. Goal+ assists is more important stat for me without link to pele, Maradona or other player. What I can see is your favoritism in stats calculation and sources. And I suppose this "chilean guy" (by your words only one more time) could favor some players more like you. I trust onlu to reliable sources or commutiny opinion, not "some person" like you and chilean guy.
     
  21. Gregoire1

    Gregoire1 Member

    Dec 4, 2020
    For now after some research and opinions on this forum I tend to rank their peak (1 year or 3 year):
    1. Pele (59-64)
    2. Messi (13-15)
    3. Maradona (85-87)/Cruyff (73-75)
    4. Ronaldo Fenomeno (96-98)
    5. Platini/Zico
    6. Ronaldinho (04-06)
    7. Cristiano (16-18)
    8. Zidane (00-02)
    9. Beckenbauer
    10. Garrincha (61-63)
     
  22. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Nobody ever have a problem with the wiki source until I showed that Maradona was the one with the best G+A contribution %, then you began to distrust the source. This person literally edit hundreds of wiki pages about football, it looks convincing to me.
    Also if you only care about the G+A ratio per game I tell you that there are dozens of players with more G+A per game than Pelé for example, but of course they played in a time where many more goals were scored per game.
     
  23. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    Also a curiosity, for the three years peak in club and NT, if we only count the goals, Maradona is the player with the most goal contribution percentage.

    Diego Maradona (78-79-80), played 11151 minutes, scored 105 goals (18 PK)
    125 games, GF: 221
    Non-PK Goal: 0.702 per 90m
    Non-PK G contribution 0.702/1.624= 43.24%

    Pelé (63-64-65), played 11435 minutes, scored 176 goals (34 PK)
    129 games, GF: 373
    Non-PK Goal: 1.118 per 90m
    Non-PK G contribution 1.118/2.628= 42.53%

    Lionel Messi (10/11 to 12/13), played 16599 minutes, scored 208 goals (29 PK)
    197 games, GF: 505
    Non-PK Goal: 0.971 per 90m
    Non-PK G contribution 0.971/2.416= 40.17%


    I think this time you will not have any problem with the numbers, since I am using only objective data.
     
  24. Trachta10

    Trachta10 Member

    Apr 25, 2016
    Club:
    CA Boca Juniors
    I think you should rate it very high, until 1980 the Copa Libertadores was won by 12 argentine clubs, 5 uruguayan and 3 brazilian. This is clear evidence that the Argentine league dominated the region at that time.

    Also Maradona played in a very even league system, the Metropilitano was one group of 21 teams in 1978, two groups of ten teams in 1979, the Nacional were four groups of seven teams, and in 1980 the league was one group of 19 teams.
    So basically Maradona faced the best 20 teams of the county each season.

    Compared to the Brazilian system, Pelé for example, scored 470 of his 643 goals for Santos in regional tournaments, most of the time against not even first division teams. So I honestly don't think that Pelé's rivals have had a very high level.
     
  25. Gregoire1

    Gregoire1 Member

    Dec 4, 2020
    #50 Gregoire1, Jan 14, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2021
    Nobody care about your calculations actually. Because nobody care it doesnt mean its trustful. Pele's assists actually were remover from wiki, its very telling. If one person edit a lot of pages I need evidence, official community oppinion at least. And even with first glance where are a lot of posters here who give doubts about your calculations (Tropeiro, sohel), so I think most people just let it go... Me too, I will calculate myself some stats if I will want too. Your table is obviously biased and inconsistent.
    Yea, I know some (not a lot) players had better ratio than Pele. Its your conclusions about era, goals scored, I dont think its because of it. So, some players had better ratio, but not your boy Maradona, not even close. you need to live with it.
     

Share This Page