Does Lionel Messi have too many failures to be considered the greatest footballer of all time?

Discussion in 'The Beautiful Game' started by darek27, Apr 23, 2021.

  1. Legolas10

    Legolas10 Member

    Real Madrid
    Jun 5, 2020
    Agree with most of these casual idiots these days just blinded by recency bias and blind fanboyism , fail to use proper reasoning to apply context of circumstances and conditions across different eras - either they are that stupid which is a common thing in this age of social media or lazy or maybe both.
    However irony is, when i see these double standards. Aren't you literally the same person who in past has put similiar remarks and agendas against Pele across this platform probably influenced by those kind of idiots and insecured fanboyism. Anyone who kept their eyes open knows what i am saying. These types of stuffs make me laugh
     
  2. golden_god

    golden_god Member

    Liverpool
    Brazil
    Jan 16, 2021
    out of topic
    the quality of Bigsoccer>redditsoccer in term of knowledge
    on facebook fans:It's up to person,I have seen a lot of smart person but I have seen some crazy dumbass and idiots too.
     
    Legolas10 repped this.
  3. Legolas10

    Legolas10 Member

    Real Madrid
    Jun 5, 2020
    All of these social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook etc are just full of idiots in 90% of the cases when it comes Football. Almost all of them have turned into some propaganda machines , some stupid fanboys run those big accounts which spreads half-sided information , without context and meaningless stats to hype up their favourite players , players playing for their clubs , bring down other players especially from older eras which has become a trend now due to recency bias. Its like you'd start losing braincells whenever you enter there . Literally ninety percent of them have no clue about football history , don't even have enough understanding of the nuances of the game , thats why stupid takes become popular there because others suck it up , judge players based on stats , team results basically etc.
     
    golden_god repped this.
  4. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC


    Well it easy to see that Platini isn't on his or Cruyff level

    When was Pele ever better than Platini was at Euro 1984?

    Not at World Cup 1958.

    Not at World Cup 1962.

    Not at World Cup 1966.

    Not at World Cup 1970.

    Pele also never played in the defensive Serie A of the 1980s.

    Platini and Maradona did actually played in the defensive Serie A of the 1980s.

    Garrincha 1962 was more decisive than Pele 1970.

    Jairzinho 1970 was literally as good as Pele 1970.

    I cannot say with exactitude just how great Pele really was, because we do not have the videos of Pele's long career with Santos; but Pele at the World Cup is a very overrated player, in my opinion. He literally gets outclassed by Garrincha in 1962; and then Jairzinho is easily at the same level in 1970.

    Agree to disagree.

    You have both Pele and Messi on a golden pedestal...

    How do you expect me to realistically argue against your decision to have religious devotion to players who were never as great as you claim they were?

    Unless you have 15 or more complete games of Pele at Santos; I have absolutely no reason to believe that Pele was better than Platini. Call me a hater all day, every day.



    You don't give any examples of Pele being dispossessed, Only talking it's easy to eee.

    Watch the videos below, you lazy person.



    LMAO.

    LMAO.

    LMAO.

    And this video doesn't even show the many times that Pele gets dispossessed in the available games with Santos FC.

    I have not watched the videos below, but I will make the educated assumption that the videos below will show the same tendency by Pele; gets dispossessed a lot; not the best at decision-making i.e. intelligence; but obviously is one of the all time top 5 players, a very inventive player i.e. creativity.

    But yes, the idea that Pele was a lot better than Platini is laughable at best; Platini was an infinitely better passer, more intelligent, and probably the better player, to be honest.







    Messi's 10/11 and 14/15 seasons are best club seasons ever by player. It's benchmark like WC 86 by Maradona. Platini and Maradona never came close, never.

    Platini and Maradona never played for teams that could well win without Platini and Maradona.

    Messi played for Barcelona teams that could win without Messi.

    Pele played for Brazil teams that could and literally did win without Pele; Garrincha 1962 got the job done without Pele; this literally actually happened; this isn't even a theory.

    Why is Messi not looking mighty and great at the Copa America?

    Why is Messi not looking mighty and great at the World Cup?

    Platini and Maradona (when not playing injured) always look like the same players, across all the formats, with teams that would not win without them...

    Deal with it. That is the truth.



    If Celito is Messi's fanboy, You are a hater.

    I have no problem with being perceived as a Messi hater; in fact, I fully expect to be viewed as a Messi hater, because Messi is too big to fail, and any criticism of him will be viewed as 'hating' inevitably; invariably; by definition; per design.

    Messi is the goat player of the league format, in my opinion; and as such, Messi obviously is more important than Iniesta ever was, in terms of La Liga results.

    Iniesta is, however, more important in the handful of La Liga games that prove to be difficult.

    Do you understand the argument now?

    Barcelona would not win as many games without Messi; Messi is the most important player, in terms of Barcelona's consistency in the vast majority of the games; that is, in terms of long term consistency, Messi is the most crucial at Barcelona.

    On the other hand, Iniesta is arguably more important than Messi, in the handful of low-scoring games that prove to be difficult in La Liga.

    Iniesta's importance becomes more relevant in uniquely competitive La Liga campaigns; La Liga 2011/12 was the greatest ever campaign by Real Madrid, and Barcelona's mediocre results in games without Iniesta proved to be very costly; all the while, La Liga 2013/14 was a three horse race, ergo, competitive as can be, and again Messi playing most of the season with injuries was very costly in the end, and again you can see that points are being lost when Iniesta does not play.

    Do you understand the argument now?

    Messi could probably rather easily be replaced with Zlatan Ibrahimovic; and yes, Barcelona would very very probably win more or less the same quantity of La Liga titles.

    Luis Suarez.

    Neymar.

    Zlatan Ibrahimovic (in his prime; not at 40 years of age).

    Yes, I do believe that Barcelona would still more or less dominate La Liga; and the little-known fact that Cristiano Ronaldo is more often than not detrimental to Real Madrid's chances to win La Liga, would further facilitate Barcelona's quest and dominance of La Liga.

    But Messi still should be viewed as the 'goat' of league players; because being perceived as 'goat' should not be exclusively defined by the quantity in terms of titles won, but rather by the actual contribution of Messi, regardless of titles won or lost.

    Messi arguably is the greatest of all time, in the league format.

    Messi is nothing special in cup formats; even when you ignore the results, Messi still lacks the actual form to be defined as a serious 'goat' candidate in terms of the cup format.
     
  5. darek27

    darek27 Member

    Aug 29, 2008

    I don't have any golden pedestal to be honest.
    If I had, this thread wouldn't exist.

    Pele's WC 58 isn't worse than Platini's Euro 84
    And Michel never ever were equal at WC to his Euro.
    Pele 58 - 63 was better than any Platini's version in term of pick or consistency.
    When Platini was equally great to Pele vs Benfica ?

    So to be a goat you have to play in Serie A in the 80 ?
    Platini's Juve was great team tbh.
    If Maradona and Platini played in bigger teams they would like to win more.
    If Pele and Messi played in weaker teams they would like to win less.
    But it's not their fault that were playing in big teams.
    Who knows maybe Platini in superstars team wouldn't be so great


    What if Platini played in Messi's Barca is equal to what if Messi played in Platini's France.
    How many times Platini played in so poor as a team tactics NT like Messi's Argentina.
    Leo should perform better regardless of IT but now You try to blame him more than his fanboys are praise him

    Maybe in passing Platini is better or more unpredictable but the rest offensive attributes goes to Messi.

    It's hard to belive that Messi is nothing special in UCL format. At WC I agree but at WC Platini isn't among very best
     
    Gregoire1 and Legolas10 repped this.
  6. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    #106 leadleader, May 2, 2021
    Last edited: May 2, 2021
    Brazil 1970 (Funny Video)



    LMAO.

    This video is pure gold.

    By the way: I am not a Pele hater, I just thinks it's hilarious that some fans seriously think that Pele was somehow a lot better than Platini... Just another reminder of the sheer power of propaganda. Pele is so much better than Platini. Everybody knows that.
     
  7. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC

    Yeah, and I think that if focused more and more on it; I bet I could fly like Superman one of these days.

    That is a lot of maybes my friend...

    Maybe Maradona would develop in terms of finding space; but this is a huge maybe; players do not develop goal scoring intelligence from one year to the next, as you probably know.

    Maradona is not easily better than Platini; just barely, and more than anything else because of his slalom dribbling ability. Without the slalom dribbling, Platini is clearly the better player; better defending; better midfield play; better inside of the box; a more intelligent player all-around, and I do not need to use maybes in order to see how great he actually was.
     
  8. Legolas10

    Legolas10 Member

    Real Madrid
    Jun 5, 2020

    @darek27
    Forget all those, this guy literally calls other to be a pretenious person , what is he on first place.
    He's the one here who seems like have no literal knowledge of Pele . He literally said Pele was just a mere scorer of goal. You can go to his profile and see that lol. Its like many of those casuals out there who have no idea of Pele's role and think he was some scorer , service reliant guy like CR7 or Muller.
    Anyone who has decent amount of idea about Pele , espeically on this platform which i expect them all to know (and mainly from where i actually started learning more about the players) that Pele was both the chief creator + scorer of his club side Santos. Its pretty common sense , Pepe, Coutinho -these guys were just scorer and not facilitator . So where did their source of creativity come from?
    Then he literally brought up one of the shittiest , bullshit video ever i saw on youtube which was created by some biased , jealous , retarded fanboy on youtube (some casual idiot messi fanboy called Raymar Football) and obviously the prime source of a lot of Pele slander . Some idiot who also said there wasn't an aspect of the game where Maradona was better than Messi LOL . Anyone with a good knowledge about Pele would've easily seen those stupid , half-sided and nonsensical stuffs put on that video .




    The video in the puts forward some ‘arguements’ arguing Pele is overrated:

    "17 years C.Ronaldo called Pele the greatest ever. Pele retired before CR, how could you call someone the greatest if you have not seen him play?"

    I mean seriously , so if ronaldo calls Pele best ever without seeing him , he becomes overrated? What kind of logic is that. So , if someone who was born within next few years and didn't see Messi actually play by time he grows up calls him best , Messi will become overrated?

    Pele didn’t officially score 1283 goals. Those goals include goals scored in friendlies and exhibitions against below average teams. It even includes gaols scored against Brazil national coast team

    This is one of the most common characteristic of Pele-haters. And i am pretty sure these stuffs were discussed on bigsoccer a lot of times. Those 1281 goals were never claimed to be scored in official tournaments, they were claimed to be scored in professional level. And weren't they recognized by Fifa and statisticians actually calculated those? So it seems its his fault that statisticians of that time and FIFA , Brazil FA all counts them at professional level (not Official matches ) .
    And those who knows Pele , unlike someone like leadleader, knows Pele was not just some kind of poacher , that his merit totally depends on those 1000+ goals. I've seen reports on this platform from Vegan or some user where Pele was already accepted as best player ever by lots of sources by mid 60s , way before he reached his 1000th goal mark.

    And then the guy goes on saying “Pele scored goals against teams whose names resemble giant clubs” as if Pele named those clubs." The speaker says Pele scored many goals against such minnow team. Can you tell me what kind of hypocritical stuffs is that? Look at career of any player who has over span of his career scored lots of goals - muller , messi, ronaldo, puskas , eusebio etc. You'll see major portion of their goals actually came up against minnows and inferior opponents

    So what does this idiot wants to embarge ? That only Pele is supposed to score all of his goals against comparable opponents ,if he scores in games against minnows its a crime, but if others score against some lower opponents its not a problem? And this becomes such a ridiculous statement when you analyze goalscoring stats of pele, messi, ronaldo etc across various competitions - world cup, Copa/euro, continental, cwcs , national teams etc.

    Football level at the time Pele was playing was not exceptional. The quality of football was not as good. Pele became legendary in that generation because of how he transformed the game.
    Again a double standard. again “Why only Pele?” I have never seen someone saying “Garrincha/Best/Cruyff/Di Stefano/Rivera is overrated because football level of the time was not exceptional.” When it comes to Di Stefano or Best or Cruyff, it is “he is legendary. He was superb.” NO mentioning of level of football, no considering him an overrated. But when it comes to Pele “oh, level of football back then was a sh.t Pele is overrated.

    The quality of football was not as good. Pele became legendary by transforming the game: On what basis do you meaasure football’s quality? Every era has its advantages and disadvanatages. Let us assume it was really bad, then Pele was training and being educated with bad quality opportunities. If he was training with “exceptional level training” he would have been far better. And hasn't the playing conditions , fields, equipments , balls , boots etc improved now allowing players to play the game at a faster pace in a more smooth way.

    “Everything improves by time. Defenders were bad back then, could Pele do the same to Sergio Ramos?” Again a double standard. First of all , players now are fitter and physically, athletically more improved over players back then because of change in nutrition, diet, medicine , training equipements etc.Pele grew up and trained with the opportunities of 1960s and played against players with similiar opportunities. If Pele was facing ramos today , will he be playing by growing up with faciltiies of 50 years ago? Or if we transported ramos to Pele's era , even a child could say he wouldn't be in similiar physical shape as he is now. I mean this is such idiotic and low iq , stupid statements which actually exposes the brain level of this idiot called Raymar and similiar other stupid people who uses arguments like that.

    "Pele does not have these world cup records"
    “Most people believe Pele holds record for the most goals scored [in the FIFA world cups.]”

    I have not seen anyone claiming it, let him give me a reference. This is just one more slander they have invented to degrade Pele.

    The ******** states some world cup records not held by Pele. Again, double standards. None of those records are held by Di Stefano or Johan Cruyff or Maradona or Messi but the he does not accuse any of them of being overrated, but when Pele does not own those records it is an evidence of his overratedness .I mean what sort of logic are those.You can argue any player is overrated by picking up any record not holded by him. No one holds all the records of the world

    It is well known Pele was injured in both WC during his peak . Had he been fit , he'd have hold a lot of these records very easily .
    He uses things like all star squad appearances, most appearances etc as arguments against Pele basically at the point which Pele was injured in two world cups and could play only two WCs till final.
    And Pele does have handful of WC records like - most assists in a single wc since 1966 (opta) , most goals contribution in WC final , most goals conribution in WCs (12 goals , 8 assists), youngest player to win the wc , youngest to score a Wc hattrick , in the final etc.
    But these don't fit the agenda.

    “Pele was outperformed in all of his World Cup runs. He was not top scorer of Brazil.
    Have you ever seen someone claiming “Maradona/Cruyff/ Messi/Rivera was outperformed in all of his world cup runs because he never was top scorer?
    According to his logic, Maradona was outperformed in 86 by Lineker , Cruyff in 1974 by Lato , Zidane in 2006 by Klose etc... What sort of idiot is that?

    The ridiculous part is, he says Didi was the best player of 1958 WC, but wait why does he not dismiss Didi’s golden ball for not becoming top scorer as he dismisses Pele’s Golden Ball 1970 for not becoming top scorer? Didi wins Golden Ball without being the top scorer of the tournament, no problem with that. Pele wins Golden Ball without being the top scorer, it demonstrates how overrated Pele is.

    Anyone keeping their eyes and mind open on this platform (bigsoccer) isn't required to be told these points explicity , but seems like @leadleader probably turns a blind eye to many things discussed here . Which is why he calls other pretenious and still links some low iq , half-sided videos created by some stupid fanboy , which can totally be debunked within 5 minutes with proper knowledge.

    .
     
    Lincon18762 repped this.
  9. Legolas10

    Legolas10 Member

    Real Madrid
    Jun 5, 2020
    #109 Legolas10, May 2, 2021
    Last edited: May 2, 2021
    So no player makes mistakes on field? You could literally create videos like that for any player. So they all become a worse player by that logic. Infact i can create a videos of Maradona 86 out of misplaced passes and lost of dispossesions and ball lost by him. Also wasn't he out of his prime by that point, slowed down after having played 1000 matches (official + those tour games)?And so it seems he only did mistakes in that tournament , no brilliant individual performances or moments ? Of course what to expect from someone who thinks Pele was just a mere scorer of goal lmao


    I meant its easy to say about not being a hater and then link without context videos .

    Also,

    Pele gets outclassed by Garrincha in 1962 by being not on the field. The game against Mexico is there available . Even with a peak Garrincha having tournament of his life, Pele was the best player on the field in that game very comfortably.
    Then,
    It is true Messi played for large portion of his career in a super team . But how does it becomes his fault. Then saying Messi isn't anything special for cup format and hence Platini is better , as if someone like Platini never had failures in cup formats.
    Also,one could easily cherrypick runs of matches including tightly contested matches where Barca had positive result without Iniesta . And wasn't Iniesta getting tossed in big CL games after 2015 . Also Barca has become more dependent on Messi after 2017 since Neymar left.
    Even few hours ago, didn't he ensure the win against Valencia
     
  10. celito

    celito Moderator
    Staff Member

    Palmeiras
    Brazil
    Feb 28, 2005
    USA
    Club:
    Palmeiras Sao Paulo
    Nat'l Team:
    Brazil
    Players taking charge on the field is a thing of the past. The top coaches control every bit of tactical movement from players on the field. Tell me, in the last 15-20 years, any player that makes tactical changes on the field. Guardiola once removed Henry at half time because he didn't stick to the left wing in the 1st half (because he was bored) even if he scored a goal doing so.

    As for Messi's tactical awareness, you show your ignorance once again. Just as an example, when Suarez signed up and Lucho put Messi as a false 9 and Suarez on the wing, it was Messi who came up with the change to go back to the wing and play Suarez centrally. It took 3 months or so, but it is an example of player going against a coaches decision.

    There are fair criticisms to give Messi, but yours are mostly plain stupid and superficial even if you literally write books worth about it every post.

    I never said Messi didn't have blame in some eliminations with poor performances. I clearly pointed out him choking away chances vs Chelsea in 2012. He was bad vs Roma. But, for example, you say he was ineffective vs Liverpool 2nd leg when he created plenty of scoring chances for his teammates and came close to scoring himself. You're the one who blames Messi for every Barca elimination in CL.


    Again, from what I remember, R10 performance wasn't spectacular. His goal was. He was a player who pulled out some magic tricks out of his repertoire like that goal. But for example, he was very underwhelming in the final vs Arsenal.

    That is actually a good point. And it's true for most players who play Messi's position in general. It's not good to rely too much on one creative player. It's why the classic 10 doesn't exist anymore.

    Ronaldo is a different type of player as he got older and you have to give him credit for how often he could get on the end of chances. Specially with his headers. It's when Madrid stopped depending on him to do so much that they won those CLs.

    Messi has often moved from wing to dropping back to the middle to find the ball. I don't see how that's not an adjustment even if it's planned. Games like the one vs Chelsea and Atletico are unique because the defended deep. Dafuq you want Messi to do when they gave up the midfield ???


    Barca had Xavi, Iniesta, Fabregas in midfield ... all creative midfielders. And your solution is Messi drop to the mid to create chances. You know how silly that sounds ?


    That's really besides the point isn't it ?


    Messi probably still burns Boateng in that situation injury or not. But I can't find any report that Boateng was battling injury. 1st goal had nothing to do with Boateng though.


    Don't take my word for it. At 2:04 Rio Ferdinand talking about it.






    BTW .. in those highlights you see him drop to midfield quite a bit.

    Watched all of those games live. I stand by my comments. I am not so sure you did.

     
  11. Legolas10

    Legolas10 Member

    Real Madrid
    Jun 5, 2020
    I will agree with him on the part about his final performance vs manchester united where i rewatched the game and i would say it would be an overstatement to say he ran Manchester United ragged and maybe its got to do with the hype as well. I would say his performance was a very good dribbling performance more of . And probably Ferdinand points to that perhaps.

    And also , i think Messi lacks the inventiveness in his gameplay to somewhat compared to some other players discussed in this thread.

    However i agree on some of the other parts, such as Messi making the tactical change on his own . And also as you said Barca literally had fabregas, xavi, iniesta in the midfield.
    And as far as Bayern are concerned and as far as i remember , it was alaba and badstuber who were out with injury and of course bayern had half fit players in attack as well. Don't remember much about Boateng carrying injuries to be particular, perhaps i might be wrong
     
  12. celito

    celito Moderator
    Staff Member

    Palmeiras
    Brazil
    Feb 28, 2005
    USA
    Club:
    Palmeiras Sao Paulo
    Nat'l Team:
    Brazil
    Sure I might have used the wrong word there, but he had a very good final and the highlights I posted show it. But I am not giving that to the poster because of some of the utter nonsense he posted. Obviously that Barca team was very strong and not all on Messi. Barca as a team ran them ragged and Messi had did his part.

    Yep, I've searched match previews and I don't see anything about Boateng coming back from injury. Bayern were obviously depleted. I can't deny that. Still a couple of great individual goals.
     
    Legolas10 repped this.
  13. celito

    celito Moderator
    Staff Member

    Palmeiras
    Brazil
    Feb 28, 2005
    USA
    Club:
    Palmeiras Sao Paulo
    Nat'l Team:
    Brazil
    As good as he is, he has his limitations. I don't know what to tell you. Show me a player that has never been fallible.


    Barca could have won without Messi in 2011 and 2015 ? Sure. But that's a useless hypothetical. If you think their chances would have been actually better without him, that's just plain stupid. You don't consider how much space Messi ends up opening for other players. I won't go as far as saying that he is always triple teamed, but it's obvious that teams have to pay a lot of attention to him on the field. As far as I am concerned, he is probably the best at exploiting the little space given to him. He is not so great at working hard to overpower players without the ball to create space.
     
  14. JoCryuff98

    JoCryuff98 Member+

    Barcelona
    Netherlands
    Jan 3, 2018
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    @leadleader Btw wasn’t Barcelona in for Platini prior Saint-Etienne signed him? He would’ve been the perfect successor to his idol, Cruijff who left the club during 1978.
     
  15. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC

    Platinis EC 1984 is even more of an outlier for him
    His 3× capocannoniere is a vastly overrated achievement considering all the strikers he was competing against ranged from barely above average to completely shit

    Pruzzo,altobelli,maurizio lorio,virdis etc

    Zico came to Italy past his prime most likely and put up better numbers(per 90) with better media ratings aswell in Serie A

    There were no Good/world class strikers in Italy until the arrival of guys like voller,van basten,careca and later on batistuta
    Aldo serena and signori peaked around the same era aswell

    Before Someone mentions Paulo rossi he had a short lived renaissance during few world cup games in 1982 but his league form was patchy to say the least

    When Rossi was a relatively good league performer(the late 70s) platini was still playing in France


    What does your argument even mean??

    I honestly don't get it... Are you saying that Fabio Quagliarella and Ciro Immobile are both better goal scorers versus Platini??

    I mean, what exactly is the conclusion that you've drawn??

    Serie A 2018/19

    26 goals / Fabio Quagliarella.

    23 goals / Duvan Zapata.

    22 goals / Krzysztof Piatek.

    21 goals / Cristiano Ronaldo.

    Are you telling me that Quagliarella, Zapata, and Piatek, are all better goal scorers than Platini?

    Are you telling me that Cristiano Ronaldo 2018/19, did more creative functions than Platini 1983/84?

    After all, Quagliarella, Zapata, and Piatek, are all competing directly against mighty and powerful Cristiano Ronaldo, Mr. Champions himself... and that is apparently evidence, according to you, that Quagliarella, Zapata, and Piatek, would easily dominate 1980s Serie A.

    At any rate, and with all due respect, your argument is ludicrous at best. Not only do you fail to realize that better strikers would make assists significantly easier for both Platini and Maradona, but then you also fail to adjust for relativity all-around.

    It is in your opinion, somehow more difficult to score goals in leagues that have better strikers?

    I mean, your entire premise makes no sense, because better strikers are an indication of higher scores, as a direct consequence of softer defensive tactics, which is not coincidentally why better strikers begin to emerge more and more as football becomes softer; this makes scoring goals actually easier to do, not harder to do.

    Was Pippo Inzaghi a better goal scorer than Platini??

    After all, Inzaghi was scoring tons of goals in the golden era of the Serie A; but as it is self-evidently obvious to see, Michel Platini is a superior goal scorer who can score goals from a much greater variety of situations, versus Inzaghi.

    Not only would Michel Platini have a field day in modern football but it would also be a lot easier for Platini to register tons of assists, as a result of Juventus having the best striker in the league, playing next to Platini; all of this makes it easier to score goals...

    I mean, this does not make scoring goals any more difficult than it was in the 1980s, which is literally why players score more goals in the 2020s, than in the 1980s; because it is easier to score goals in Cristiano Ronaldo's era, than it was in the 1980s.

    Your argument is frankly irrational and counter-intuitive; it spits in the face of obvious logic and reason.

    Serie A 2019/20

    36 goals / Ciro Immobile.

    31 goals / Cristiano Ronaldo.

    Is Ciro Immobile also a better goal scorer than Platini??

    La Liga 2016/17

    Cristiano Ronaldo was outclassed, in terms of goal conversion rate per minutes played, by Alvaro Morata... This literally happened.

    Does that mean that Alvaro Morata is a better goal scorer than Platini, given the fact that Alvaro Morata was competing directly against Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, and Luis Suarez??

    Again, your argument here is absolutely irrational.

    Michel Platini was the same player across all formats; when not seriously injured. Same player at Euro 1984. Same player at the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup 1983/84. Same player at the UEFA Champions League 1984/85.

    In Cristiano Ronaldo's very very long career; how many times did Ronaldo demonstrated the same level of form across all the formats?

    Cristiano Ronaldo literally disintegrated before our very eyes in the game vs. Uruguay 2018, because Uruguay 2018 (unlike Spain 2018) was actually tactically disciplined; could actually do a decent job on the defensive end, as Cristiano Ronaldo disappeared into thin air, after his good run of goals against second-rate national teams.

    The same story repeats itself many times over...

    2. Cristiano Ronaldo disappeared for 180 minutes vs. Bayern Munich in 2018; Semi Finals.

    3. Cristiano Ronaldo disappeared for 90 minutes vs. Liverpool in 2018; Final.

    4. Cristiano Ronaldo disappeared for 120 minutes vs. Atletico Madrid in 2016; Final.

    5. Cristiano Ronaldo did absolutely nothing vs. Manchester City in 2016; Semi Finals.

    6. Cristiano Ronaldo disappeared for 120 minutes vs. Atletico Madrid in 2014; Final.

    8. Cristiano Ronaldo was literally voted the worst player of Real Madrid; Real Madrid was eliminated from the Champions League vs. Borussia Dortmund in 2013; Semi Finals.

    10. Cristiano Ronaldo was a complete non-factor vs. Barcelona in 2011; Semi Finals.

    When have you ever seen a non-injured Michel Platini, or a non-injured Diego Maradona, fail so consistently against top tier opponents?

    Diego Maradona in Serie A 1987/88 and World Cup 1986 was virtually the same player; this is what Maradona looks like when he is sufficiently fit.

    Michel Platini is the same story, but with even greater consistency as he dominated all the prestigious tournaments of Europe, with the exception of the World Cup; injured in 1982, and too old in 1986.

    Why does Cristiano Ronaldo never looks like himself neither at the Euro nor at the World Cup?

    Portugal literally won the Euro Final in 2016 without Cristiano Ronaldo on the pitch; this literally happened...

    So again, what happens to Cristiano Ronaldo in the Euro and the World Cup, that he just repeatedly looks like a shadow of himself?
     
  16. golden_god

    golden_god Member

    Liverpool
    Brazil
    Jan 16, 2021
    If the ref wasn't too retarded,he must gave red card to the butcher Schumacher(whom for me he is the most craziest gk that I have ever seen in my life.) and France would won against the German and passed to Final1982. France vs Italy was more interesting than German vs Italy.It would be funnier and deserved game a lot too.If Cabrini shot the penalty into the net,Italy would even outclassed German more and more.
     
    leadleader repped this.
  17. golden_god

    golden_god Member

    Liverpool
    Brazil
    Jan 16, 2021
    It would be very interesting between Italy defense vs France elegant midfields and attacks.
     
  18. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    #118 leadleader, May 3, 2021
    Last edited: May 3, 2021


    And Michel never ever were equal at WC to his Euro.

    I will answer this, not with my own words, but with the words of a person who knows far more than me about Platini's career. I was educated and informed on this matter quite recently, in fact.

    Here is the story:



    Well the difference between Platini at World Cup 1982 versus Platini at Euro 1984, resides first in the fact that he played injured in '82 and that he was not injured in '84.

    Michel Platini always was diminished physically since day 1 of his career as he knew a first big injury prior to the start of his pro career; meniscus. As I already related it in another thread recently, he had to get surgery in 1976 but he was retarding it as he was breaking-through in D1 and with the National Team; he also played the Olympics in '76. So, the meniscus broke in his knee in August 1978 (post-World Cup), and he was out for more than 6 months.

    In addition to the above career-altering meniscus injury, or perhaps more exactly due to this main injury, he had a heel tendonitis which was more and more and more handicapping year after year; until the end in 1987 when he could not take it anymore.

    In terms of Euro 1984, saying that he was not injured is a formula, not correct, because Platini always was injured to some degree; but at Euro 1984, he was still rather young and infiltrations did well their effect; unlike at World Cup 1982.

    Well, when you're injured, you can't go to the contact of the defenders so you "hide" at midfield or on the wing (it was still possible back then, to do so on the wing): Platini at World Cup 1982. Platini was not dull but way under what he could have achieved; thus Giresse shining more.

    When you're not (injured) you can make the differences, you can play nearer from the goals, you can make the difference.

    That's why Platini stopped his career in 1987, as he was too diminished physically which prevented him to project himself forward; make the good runs, call for the ball, and things like that. He did not want to play the little ball at midfield. In his own words.

    Platini never wanted to favour one aspect over another, passing over goal scoring, but was forced to do it in some occasions. At World Cup 1982; injured, so simply unable to do more, not a deliberated choice; he's really not fantastic unfortunately. Even as a midfielder, he's quite average in my opinion. I think he's slightly overrated over this competition due to his status of star player when he's cited by some observers amongst the very good performers of this World Cup.

    Same at World Cup 1986; Platini is injured again, but this time his best moments were better than in '82. But he had no fuel anymore + always that more and more troublesome tendinitis when the semi-finals arrived... Others on the team were burnt also for the semi-finals; older Giresse, injured and unavailable Rocheteau... France already played 'two finals' before that and Germany were in full form so...

    At Euro 1984, he had no physical problems and he was able to hear Tigana-Giresse when they told him to play more upfront; his time in Italy and his habit to escape the direct contact with the defensive line and the need to prepare attacks from deep when here, with France, other players could make it instead of him while there was not really good finishers. That leads to the late goal against Denmark, the very first and very difficult match of their Euro, and all the rest.



    In summary: Platini was injured for World Cup 1982; and Platini was too old at World Cup 1986... But when he was sufficiently fit, he dominated the Euro, and the Champions League, and the Cup Winners' Cup, in the space of two years of staying injury-free; 1984 and 1985.

    Very similar story to Maradona, in fact.

    Maradona not injured; great at World Cup 1986.

    Maradona injured; never was at his best at the Copa America.

    Platini not injured; great at Euro 1984.

    Platini injured; never was at his best at the World Cup.

    The Copa America is not more difficult than the World Cup. And by the same principle, the World Cup is not more difficult than the Euro. It purely depends on the fitness level of the players; Platini, when he was fit, dominated all the formats in 1984 and 1985.

    Ergo, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the World Cup was too difficult for Platini, when Platini is literally dominating the Champions League, the Cup Winners' Cup, and the Euro, all in the space of only 2 or 3 years; 1983, and 1984, and 1985.

    Platini would have dominated the World Cup also; if he had ever been completely fit, or at least sufficiently fit, and in his prime. Please remind yourself, that the World Cup is one short tournament that is played only one time, every four years, which is why many players (not only Platini) have had the bad luck of never being completely fit and in prime for a World Cup tournament.

    Platini retired very early in his career, because he did not wanted to play "little ball in the midfield" in his own words. And that is something I can appreciate; when a player retires more or less at the top of his game, at the beginning of the end, as opposed to retiring at 37 years of age, all washed up and perhaps even crippled for life.

    At any rate, I think it is very convenient how you chose to ignore Platini's unlucky history at the World Cup.

    Why are you ok with being dishonest and lazy against Michel Platini?

    And why are you not ok with any well-constructed criticism aimed at Messi or Pele?

    Are you a South American person?

    Honestly, I find it suspicious... your demonstrable dishonesty and bias against Platini, and your double-standard in favor of South American players Messi and Pele.

    I must make the educated assumption that you are a South American person, who is apparently ok with dishonestly discrediting European players like Platini, since your agenda here appears to be to inflate your preferred South American players.

    Tell me this; how many European players do you have in your top 5??

    And keep in mind that Di Stefano does not count as a European in my book, by the way. So outside of perhaps Di Stefano, just how many European players do you have in your top 5??

    In fact, I might as well ask, how many European players do you have in your top 10??



    It's hard to belive that Messi is nothing special in UCL format. At WC I agree but at WC Platini isn't among very best.

    Outside of 2011 and 2015, with perfect Barcelona sides that could well win without Messi...

    What exactly has Messi done in the Champions League against teams that are not second-rate?



    I don't have any golden pedestal to be honest.
    If I had, this thread wouldn't exist.


    You do have a golden pedestal; and the creation of this thread is not evidence of anything at all; and honestly, you are a coward, you immediately back-tracked immediately after creating this thread...

    "I don't mean to discredit Messi... I just mean that Messi was probably not the goat..."

    Coward.

    You are discrediting Messi, you just don't have the honesty nor the conviction to be honest about the reason why this thread even exists.

    You cannot create this thread, and then immediately back-track, and say that your intention is not to discredit Messi, when you are literally discrediting Messi with the creation of this thread.

    Yes, you absolutely have both Messi and Pele on a golden pedestal.

    You asked me for my top 5 players of all time; I tell you that I think Platini is better than both Messi and Pele... You immediately tell me that both Pele and Messi are a lot better than Platini... Your opinion is perfectly, comprehensively, in line with the status quo; you have nothing insightful nor original to add to this discussion.

    I mean, why did you even asked me the question: who are your top 5 players of all time?

    Your opinion obviously is that Pele, Messi, Maradona, Di Stefano, and the obvious names are the top 5 players of all time... So again, why do you even create this dishonest question, when you already have a perfectly linear status quo answer yourself, and when you already have the same obvious names on the golden pedestal that you now deny that you have??

    You are so incredibly dishonest and passive-aggressive; cynical, to be perfectly honest with you. Very similar to Celito, I have to say.

    Are you from Brazil?

    Is cynicism, passive-aggressiveness, and dishonesty, a common characteristic among Brazil fans?

    I mean, I don't get it; you literally created this thread, and now you are siding with the Messi fanboys... This is incredibly bizarre, passive-aggressive, cynical, cowardly behavior. You created this start, only to immediately side with the Messi fanboys; very very honest of you.

    You offer no evidence, and no arguments whatsoever, about why you think that Pele is better than Platini. You are just repeating the status quo to me, as if that were an argument; and no Pele 1958 was an 18 year old kid, not even remotely as great as Platini 1984 - an actual adult - was in his prime.

    Religious hubris; to even begin to entertain the ludicrous idea that 18 year old Pele at World Cup 1958, was in the same league as Platini 1984, a player who dominated Europe in an era of advanced modern tactics.

    Laughable religious hubris...



    Leo should perform better regardless of IT but now You try to blame him more than his fanboys are praise him.

    With all due respect: I think you are dishonest, a fanboy, and a hypocrite.

    You create this thread about how Messi is not the goat, because he has too many failures.

    You are now criticizing me, because I happen to think that Messi is not the goat, precisely because he has too many failures.

    What exactly did I say that was controversial?

    Messi's failures in the Champions League are clear to see.

    Messi does not have any legitimate great performance against a great team, in the World Cup.

    Messi's Copa America form is hardly any better than his World Cup form; this is literally the case.

    Messi cannot be the goat; too many inconsistencies and failures.

    My opinion is not controversial.

    The only reason why you are criticizing me, is because you are a coward who doesn't understand criticism; your attachment to Messi, makes you lash out at any criticism you don't like, and you don't like my criticism because you don't like me as a person; you don't like how I construct my arguments in a know-it-all tone and rhetoric; you just do not like me, which I can understand, but it doesn't make your argument good to simply be dishonest and lazy; and a coward to add.

    At any rate, I completely and categorically disagree with you with regards to Pele, Messi, and Platini. You are out of your depth. You are lazy and can only quote status quo propaganda.
     
  19. JoCryuff98

    JoCryuff98 Member+

    Barcelona
    Netherlands
    Jan 3, 2018
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    France was better than Germany in the second half. I mean they would’ve won the game if it was a red card and if they got the penalty. Too bad Germany made a come back in the extra time, but I was definitely not impressed with their performance overall. That referee was a moron, no doubt. I think France would’ve given Italy a good fight.
     
    leadleader repped this.
  20. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC

    That is my general impression as well, but then again, I watched the game about 8 years ago; my memory is very very flawed, to be honest.
     
  21. Danko

    Danko Member+

    Barcelona
    Serbia
    Mar 15, 2018
    As if I ever denied there are tactical considerations. I just have a hard time believing that any offensive player on a team that got drubbed 2-8 should be help responsible for the loss.

    I can agree with most of your Maradona takes. Again, I can't bring myself to even compare Messi and Maradona. Their circumstances are so vastly different. It's just that there are a lot of factors potentially favoring Messi in this comparison not just Maradona. Anyways Maradona's prime wasn't 10-11 years. Before 1985 and after 1990 he was no longer near his best.

    Your post still didn't address how Messi is responsible for these losses by the way which was sort of the point of this thread.
     
  22. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC


    So no player makes mistakes on field? You could literally create videos like that for any player. So they all become a worse player by that logic.

    False.

    Watch Netherlands at World Cup 1974; you will see no such mistakes, at all. Cruyff hardly ever misplaced one single pass after I don't even know how many minutes? He played all the minutes of every game, if I'm not mistaken, I would be hard pressed to find one single bad pass by Cruyff.

    Brazil 1970 makes a lot of very sloppy and bizarre mistakes; maybe Mexico's altitude plays a factor here, who knows, but the mistakes are still bizarre and sloppy relative to the 1970s, as clearly demonstrated by the far more organized total football of Netherlands 1974.

    Pretentious argument by you, I must say.

    Very pretentious, in fact.

    Also; Pele 1970 was more sloppy than the other Brazil players; this is clear to see to any person not a Pele fanboy. Bad passes. Easily dispossessed at times, in many times as a matter of fact. Again: very similar to Messi, but in a different era.

    I showed a video full of sloppy dispossessions and mistakes by Pele 1970.

    Please show me Cruyff 1974 or Platini 1984 making even 20% of the stupid, stupid, oh so stupid, mistakes that Pele made all over the place at World Cup 1970.



    Pele gets outclassed by Garrincha in 1962 by being not on the field. The game against Mexico is there available . Even with a peak Garrincha having tournament of his life, Pele was the best player on the field in that game very comfortably.

    Pretentious argumentation by you, yet again.

    Pretentious is pretentious, I'm sorry to tell you.

    One good game by Pele, is not at all evidence that Pele is better than Garrincha, nor is it evidence that Pele would be better than Garrincha in a 7 game tournament like the World Cup. You are cherry-picking one great game by Pele, as you conveinetly extrapolate the one game into a 7 game tournament.

    The fact is, Garrincha 1962 was a better performance than Pele 1970, Pele 1966, Pele 1962, or Pele 1958. This always was my obvious point; Garrincha 1962 outclassed Pele.

    Pele never completed a full World Cup tournament that was as complete and as dominant as Garrincha 1962.

    And yes: Pele obviously is better than Garrincha, but that doesn't change the fact that Garrincha was better at the World Cup. This is a fact. I'm not sure why you are bitching and moaning about it.



    It is true Messi played for large portion of his career in a super team . But how does it becomes his fault. Then saying Messi isn't anything special for cup format and hence Platini is better , as if someone like Platini never had failures in cup formats.

    What are Platini's failures, according to you?

    Messi is nothing special at cup formats; his Copa America form is nothing special compared to Enzo Francescoli, Gabriel Batistuta, Carlos Valderrama, for example; and his World Cup form is nothing special compared to just about any other great player of any era; for example, Arjen Robben being one of the more obvious references in recent years.

    Honestly, you are a very pretentious and narcissistic person; you think that you are correct about literally everything, and you appear to get easily irritated when any person has the audacity to not agree with 100% everything that you think. Chill out, dude. It would be a boring world to live in, if all opinions were perfectly aligned with your own.
     
  23. Danko

    Danko Member+

    Barcelona
    Serbia
    Mar 15, 2018
    Right so Messi presents a tactical problem that hurts Barca in big games against the best opponents... ok let's assume you are correct for a second.

    The first assumption you are implicitly making is that the managers of Barca don't know this or they know this and would not do anything to address it.

    The second assumption is that Messi dramatically increases the number of times Barca as a team gets dispossessed. I would have to see some evidence to believe this. My gut tells me NO WAY. Messi typically posts passing rates of 80-90% despite making decisive final third passes often.

    The third assumption is that other forwards generally contribute a lot of defense and run a ton. I would like to see some evidence of this i.e. Messi ranking at or near the bottom in distance ran for forwards or something like that.

    The fourth assumption and maybe the most important is that the benefits of playing Messi don't outweigh the above risks (assuming you provide the evidence...).

    So far you and several others in this thread have made a lot of arguments without any evidence to back it up. Anecdotes if you wish...

    Your example of 2nd Leg vs. Liverpool... let's see. Messi in this match created 2 Big Chances which his teammates didn't score. Somehow this just flies past people's heads. 2 clear scoring chances is nothing to scoff at. 4 successful dribbles, 5 times dispossessed, and 85% passing rate (very impressive number for a player playing up top...). This is the actual data. It doesn't support Messi having a bad match.

    You are right that Alba had a horrible match against Liverpool.

    Liverpool was in no way shape or form inferior to Barca in 2019. Sure they didn't have Salah or Firmino in the 2nd leg but they were physically a far superior team. Apart from Vidal, Barca had no other player in the midfield or defense that could handle the sheer physicality of that Liverpool team. Heck the 1st leg result was a total mirage. We actually got badly dominated in the 1st leg as well if you look at the numbers. The difference in the 2nd leg is the law of big numbers finally swung its ugly head and Liverpool started converting their chances.
     
  24. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    #124 leadleader, May 3, 2021
    Last edited: May 3, 2021

    This is silly propaganda, to be honest.

    I honestly, do not understand the need for seemingly intelligent people, to use what is blatant propaganda, just out of what appears to be some tribal instinct to defend Messi, their idol from their preferred club.

    Myth:

    "Messi created 4 chances."

    Reality:

    "Arturo Vidal makes a great tackle wins the ball, gives the ball to Messi; Messi runs across empty space, does not dribble past one single defender, does not so much as challenges one single defender; Messi literally just runs across empty space, then serves up a simple and an easy half-chance for Coutinho; Coutinho then fails to convert said half-chance."

    Conclusion:

    Not only was this an obvious team sequence, but also, Messi arguably did the easiest thing in a 3 player team sequence; of course, Messi gets uniquely described as the 'creator' of what was, in fact, an obvious team sequence.

    Arturo Vidal was not the so-called 'creator' even when he literally initiated the dangerous counter-attack; and by doing the difficult thing, which is to slide tackle and steal the ball away; arguably more difficult than Messi simply carrying or 'progressing' the ball across yards of empty, vacant, press-free, space.

    Messi the creative genius creator.

    Arturo Vidal did nothing to even mention on paper.

    Cringe.

    Hard cringe.

    Messi will never in his career have bad or disappointing games, if these are the incredibly low standards that he is supposed to match.

    Ronaldinho's assist vs. AC Milan in 2006: this was an actual example of Ronaldinho 'creating' a chance, out of nothing, or at least out of what was a completely ordinary situation.

    Messi did not do that vs. Liverpool 2019; not in the second leg; not when Barcelona was humiliated for the entire world to see, yet again, for the second consecutive year after Roma's debacle.

    Greatest of all time my ass.
     
    SayWhatIWant repped this.
  25. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC

    I think intelligence could be divided into two branches?

    Perhaps, theoretical intelligence and intuitive intelligence.

    Real Madrid's Casemiro is a great example of a player who is highly gifted, in terms of theoretical intelligence; he watches a lot of videos, studies the game as much as he can when not on the pitch. Casemiro also perhaps is gifted in terms of intuitive intelligence.

    Maradona was never particularly gifted in terms of theoretical intelligence; this is my opinion, of course. However, Maradona was great in terms of intuition; he knew how to balance his creativity, he used the wings, he used the center of the pitch, he used crosses, he used long balls, he was balanced and unpredictable in terms of how he alternated between passing the ball and/or shooting the ball, etc. But I think Maradona reacted primarily through intuition, not necessarily because he had a great theoretical understanding of his surroundings.

    Ronaldinho I would say is very similar to Maradona, in that regard.

    Messi does not crosses the ball, and after 2008 was never again consistent at dribbling through the wings; you can tell, he gets dispossessed a lot of the time, when he tries and fail to dribble like a winger... Yes, it is obviously true that Messi is great at starting in the wing and then cutting inside; but Messi quickly and increasingly after 2008 was very very disappointing in terms of dribbling in the wings like a winger could, he just doesn't have the creativity required to do what Luis Figo was so great at, for example.

    Diego Maradona could more or less do what Luis Figo did on the wings; creative ball retention, and then serve up the perfect cross to assist the crucial goal; Messi cannot do that, not after 2008.

    And that makes Messi a very central and direct type of player; Messi cannot 'hide' himself from good defensive strategy, Messi is central and direct, and he gets lost to good defensive strategy; this happens all the time against the top tier clubs.

    In other words, even if Messi was, in theory, highly intelligent in terms of theoretical intelligence; the fact that Messi can only really operate as a direct and central player, this fact supersedes whatever theoretical intelligence Messi might have...

    Barcelona as a club is very very limited in terms of their tactical alternatives; because Messi is only ever truly creative as a central and direct player; Jordi Alba or Dani Alves (who was defensively solid, unlike Alba) will always need to be there, of course, because Messi can only play his signature kamikaze style of attacking football; always direct and always central; always running directly into the black hole of great defensive units.

    Unfortunately for FC Barcelona, Europe learned back in 2013 how to play against Messi's architecture of play, and ever since, Messi only ever managed to shine consistently in 2015, with a Barcelona team that could have well won without Messi.

    The league format is a completely different story, because it is a completely different format; as I've repeated so many times.

    At any rate, I think the greatest player of all time should be more varied and less predictable than Messi.
     
    KS10 repped this.

Share This Page