Movies are dramatized reality. Forrest Gump movie is not a sci-fi. The point is very simple. Forrest Gump was a military success, amongst other things, because he had never questioned anything, he would simply do what he was told to do. The idea that being a great footballer somehow gives the player more authority in choosing between two players is silly. If one wants to give unsolicited authority for such questions, football managers would be much better choice because their actual job is team selection. To be a great footballer, it is enough to have physical predispositions and simply do what you are told to do, like Forrest Gump. There is a loose connection between great players and great managers (or great pundits even). Examples of both are very rare. That tells you enough about a correlation between the two. It is like asking an f1 driver to design you a f1 car. They are in the same sport but their expertise are a very narrow set of skills and knowledge and practise. It is like listening to a famous producent, who makes science movies, on theories in science. .. What we see here are the founding fathers of hate towards Messi on this forum who take every smallest opportunity to belittle Messi, saying there is no even comparison between Messi and Figo. Nobody else has voiced any agreement with Roberto Carlos either. So you tell me what do we make of Roberto Carlos' words in the video? I am deliberately saying this in a provocative manner because Carlito regularly appeals to (false) authority to argue some point. I say everybody has the right to have an opinion and each opinion is evaluated on merit and based on logic of what is being said, not on their life achievements that loosely connect with the topic at hand. A successful person can say the stupidest thing, and an unsuccessful can say the wisest thing ever. You say my comments are almost as bad as racism? It is quite the opposite. I dont judge people's words based on who they are in society and what they achieved, but I listen to what they are actually saying. Saying that Roberto Carlos' words stand above others based on percieved authority because he is "Roberto Carlos" is an actual discrimination and closer to racism than anything I have said. THAT is reducing people to their achievements and societal impressions. Any questions?
Ok I concede you I read too much between the lines of your message. But 1)Being a professional, top category player for many years makes you well aware of relative difficulties of different achievements, so the opinion of Roberto Carlos is 100% more relevant than that of any armchair expert in the world and consequently 2)Roberto Carlos here is like a formula 1 driver judging other drivers, not car designers, nor he is to akin a science fiction author making bold claims in a science field 3)Maintaing that a world-class player is someone who can get away by merely executing orders is quite a naive assumption to say the very least 4)only a few great players became great managers later on? Highly debatable. Also, great players very often ended up accumulating great bank accounts, so no need to start a new career after retirement 5)nobody here is saying Roberto Carlos words are a final sentence, the case is closed and nothing else can be replied to; he may well be wrong (and I think he is, regarding Messi), yet surely it is not the opinion of a random passer by, and it is worth taking into account to better put things in perspective (e.g.: Messi is still our best player in the world, but maybe boundary conditions played in his favor and margin to some other players is thinner than we may think).
I’m trying my best to ignore you but you are mentioning me by name Your entire post is a joke “Carlito regularly appeals to authority” when carlito is the one who says that footballers should be judged purely on merit and absolutely nothing else Roberto Carlos is entitled to an opinion on this specific subject That is what I said Why? Because he played with/against all of the aforementioned players Does it make what he said right? Not necessarily and just as players abilities and achievements should be judged purely on merit so should their opinions Is Roberto Carlos more likely to talk sense about footballers he has direct experience in playing with/against then let’s say yourself? Of course he is All your history on this forum does not show you even have an inkling about 1990s players Let’s be real here This faux outrage of yours is because he put Figo ahead of Messi and this triggered you I clarified twice that I absolutely do not agree with that view Highlighting a players credentials is not a appeal to authority An appeal to authority is insisting a certain view is correct because the person who said it is somehow an expert on any given subject Can a student of the game with 0% experience playing professional football say something that makes more sense and is closer to the truth than what a football legend has said? Yes he can of course he can But you need to get it in your skull that Roberto Carlos is still entitled to having an opinion and voice on this subject. More so than many of the fans who voted on this thread for Neymar > Figo or Figo > Neymar Notice how I said many of the fans and not every single one of them
Claude Makelele says on interview : 1 . Diego ....Maradona 2. Pelé .....Edson Arantes 3. Zizou ...Zidane are or were better complete players than Ronaldinho Gaucho for sure ... Luka Modric..... Kevin De Bruyne ..... Rodri ....F. Valderde ....Samuel Eto'o ... Ronaldinho was better ...than ...Martin Ødegaard ... by Claude Makelele ... my spiritual brother . " !
Based on what exactly? If the opinion of great footballers is indeed more relevant than that of non-great footballers (read: everyone else), then it must logically follow that their opinions would converge toward certain truths. The reasoning here is that great footballers, by virtue of their experience and expertise, are supposedly more "enlightened" and can see things that others can’t, making their opinions closer to the truth. But if being a great footballer truly gives you access to insights that non-great footballers can’t see, then their opinions should align more closely with each other, forming a consensus around certain truths. Yet, in reality, what we anecdotally see is that the diversity of opinion among great footballers is substantial. There is no strong convergence of opinion that indicates they are collectively seeing some higher truth that others miss. If being a great footballer truly granted some deeper insight, we would expect more agreement among them and less diversity of opinion. Since this isn’t what we observe, the claim that being a great footballer inherently provides some superior insight into football is questionable and would need substantial evidence to support it. BUT LET’S ACCEPT THAT FOR A MOMENT. Let’s assume that it is proven that being a great footballer generally results in more accurate and therefore more relevant opinions. Even under that assumption, the fact that Roberto Carlos is a great footballer still doesn’t automatically make his opinion more relevant. If we accept the premise that great footballers, on average, have better opinions, then that actually works against Roberto Carlos’ case, not in favor of it. Why? Because his opinion deviates from the consensus among great footballers. So it’s not that Carlos’ opinion is more relevant because he is a great footballer. It’s actually the opposite: despite being a great footballer, his opinion is an outlier. He has a viewpoint that most other great footballers do not share. Invoking Carlos’ status as a great footballer to argue for the relevance of his opinion is not only a logical fallacy but actually undermines the premise itself. If we’re arguing that the opinions of great footballers are more relevant because they’re great footballers, then Carlos’ outlier stance actually serves as evidence against that very claim. TL/DR: It is a direct contradiction to argue that great footballers have better and more relevant opinions and that Roberto Carlos' opinion is more relevant because he is a great footballer. In reality, success, experience and expertise in a certain field, doesn't grant you superior judgement across the board in the field. There are many studies that show examples of less experienced doctors performing better than their older peers. The question is how is that possible? Have you heard of the phrase beginner's luck? Why does that phrase even exist? How can certain players experience their peaks before physical decline takes over? In theory, they should get better and better as they gain more and more experience without declining physically. There is much more nuance in this conversation beyond assuming experience and expertise gives you a bullet proof judgement...
Of course, everybody is entitled to their opinion. Not because they are X, Y or Z, but because they just are. I am not asking anyone to take my words as given. Rather than attacking my percieved knowledge on footballers from 90s, you can point anything I said that is wrong... if you dare, of course.
Famous Wrong Predictions by Highly Regarded Figures Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Ken Olsen, Founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977: "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." Bill Gates, Microsoft Co-founder, 1981: "640K ought to be enough for anybody." (Though Gates has denied saying this, it is widely attributed to him). Darryl F. Zanuck, Head of 20th Century Fox, 1946: "Television won't be able to hold on to any market it captures after the first six months. People will soon get tired of staring at a plywood box every night." Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1895: "Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible." Lee De Forest, American Inventor, 1926: "While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially it is an impossibility." Harry M. Warner, Warner Brothers, 1927: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics at Yale, 1929: "Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." (This was right before the stock market crash of 1929). Albert Einstein, 1932: "There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will." Charlie Chaplin, Actor, 1916: "The cinema is little more than a fad. It's canned drama. What audiences really want to see is flesh and blood on the stage." David Sarnoff Associates, 1920s (Regarding Radio): "The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?" Western Union Internal Memo, 1876: "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft, 2007: "There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." Robert Metcalfe, Inventor of Ethernet, 1995: "I predict the Internet will soon go spectacularly supernova and in 1996 catastrophically collapse." Decca Recording Company, rejecting the Beatles in 1962: "We don’t like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out."
I have no doubt that a former footballer knows a lot about the game and his opinion generally must be treated with great significance. But often formers players doesn't say what he really thinks in public statements and pulls the strings of his friends, teammates, players from the same country, etc. So not every statement should be taken for granted.
But that is more or less what I was myself maintaing. You have taken some of my claims too literally and ztretched too far. I said that RC's opinion is surely very relevant cause it comes from an insider who as such is well aware of the relative value and the intrinsic difficulty of certain achievements. But then I added that I consider his judgement Figo>Messi a blunder! I think his words can help see things in perspective: Messi is still our best player of the century, but probably he is not the extraterrestrial many swear he is. What Carlos said was perhaps influenced by him playing alongside of Figo for a long time, finding confortable with him as the target of his passes, liking Figo as a person other than a professional or whatever. But his words make me strongly suspect he really thinks the difference between the two in terms of technique and effectiveness, mutatis mutandis, is smaller than common knowledge has it. And if I were willing to open a can of worms -something that I am not- I would insinuate that Messi does not collect the unanimous, unconditional acclaim by the footballers he played against that some Greats of supposedly "inferior" past classic-football era would.
What seems to be getting lost in the discussion is Roberto Carlos saying Luis Figo was better than Neymar Jr and that is the main reason I posted that video on this thread So even if we all agree(I hope) that Figo>Messi is a huge “blunder” it still leaves Roberto Carlos placing Figo the Portuguese above his compatriot Neymar Now the question is Is that an equally huge blunder or is there some merit to this opinion of his? Does Neymar get to hide behind Messi again (albeit in a different way this time) The recent iffhs post that @Bin1250 uncovered that I’m not sure ‘sexybeast’ has seen places Lionel Messi in 1st place and it places Ronaldinho in 10th All time I’m one billion percent sure that @Sexy Beast agrees with the first place position and that he completely disagrees with the 10th place position Is the whole list trash because Ronaldinho is included or is Ronaldinhos inclusion just a trash pick If he can be nuanced with Ronaldinhos ranking then I don’t see why he couldn’t do the same with Roberto Carlos and his opinions
You will call me stupid, crazy, arrogant, ignorant,.. I completely disagree with the last part. It puts it in perspective even if it directly contradicts words of another great footballer, like let's say Johan Cruyff (you heard of him?): The late great Cruyff told Mundo Deportivo: “For the world of football, Messi is a treasure because he is a role model for children around the world… Messi will be the player to win the most Ballons d’Or in history. He will win five, six, seven. He is incomparable. He’s in a different league.” Why does Roberto Carlos' words put things in perspective and not Johan Cruyff's in this instance? Who decides which words of which great footballers are taken seriously and which are not? Who is more relevant when two great footballers completely contradict each other? How does taking seriously the words of great footballers who contradict each other make you any more informed on the subject? How is that simply not moving the goalpost indefinitely or a justification to cherry pick quotes that suits your preconcieved notion on the subject?
Lamine Yamal 17 years old >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>. much better than Ronaldinho Gaucho ... whole career ... and 2004-2006 ...at His Peak.... or Ronaldinho's Peak .... easily !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! to put ..Ronaldinho Gaucho ... ahead ... Of Ferenc Puskas ....Michel Platini ...........Ruud Gullit .........Marco van Basten............Gerd Muller ........ Lothar Matthaus ......Mané ..Garrincha ....Sir Bobby Charlton ... .... G . Meazza...Zico ....Rivellino ....Tostão ...Jairzinho ....Ademir de Menezes .... Zagallo ....Carlos Alberto Torres ... update very poorly done by IFFHS
I predicted this heart attack on the other thread No way In hell has Lamine Yamal overtaken Ronaldinho Gaucho all things considered let alone by that kind of margin but I wouldn’t have a problem if someone said Yamal 24/25 was a more effective player than Ronaldinho in 04/05 He is a level below Ronaldinho 05/06 and possibly 03/04 though What is clear is Ronaldinho at PSG and Milan was never as good as Yamal 24/25 and if he continues at this rate(even without improvement) I can see him overtaking Ronaldinhos Barcelona legacy by the time he is 21 years old
But ... you don't answered my question ..... it was online votes ??? like that election of Diego Maradona ...in 1999 ..by FIFA FIFA Player of the Century : internet vote mode The results of FIFA's internet Poll were as follows:[7] 27 players were voted. Rank Player Nationality Percentage 1 Diego Maradona Argentina 53.60% 2 Pelé Brazil 18.53% 3 Eusébio Portugal 6.21%
0.735 goals+assists per 90 Scored 5 penalties ————————————- 0.86 goals+assists per 90 Scored 0 penalties
Mental Attributes Tactical Attributes already are putting Lamine Yamal ahead Of Ronaldinho easily ... ! i saw the Ronaldinho's whole career ... all the matches ...in that age ... Lamine Yamal ..already is much better than Ronaldinho ... in composure decisions decision-making-Power Anticipation concentration Tackles Marking Bravery Off the ball leadership positioning Team Work Work Rate .. Ronaldinho ..was very very good in vision in creativity ..." flair " in dribbling repertoire in first touch skills in Ball Control Skills .. and juggling Ball ... in pure Talent but Lamine Yamal is amazing on this too ... Lamine Yamal ... shoots from distance ... place shots ...curl balls ... much better than Ronaldinho .... with 17's old only ..
You are just lazy Way more credible at least than the FIFA internet vote that was open just to fans And the other vote that was open just to experts The credibility of FIFA is non existent anyways that is clear with every passing day and most recently demonstrated by the bald headed malteser infantino on waiting duties for MBS and Donald Duck He is a whore to the highest bidder like his entire organisation
online votes .... 75 % so .. loses totally ...any . credibility The real reason why Ronaldinho appears in 10th place is explained. A bunch of alienated and mentally ill people on the Internet voted. They never watched football... Before 2004... No full match
Lamine Yamal easily much better than Ronaldinho...'s peak.... Ronaldinho was the major farsant of the whole Football History ... in decisive games ... He has lost ... of Adriano Gabiru 2006 .. of Malulu Raja Casa Blanca ..2013... i don't need to say anymore .. about this Farsant ...
to see only Highlights at You Tube ... another illusion and farce created ...nowadays ..... 2006 til today 2025 People nowadays ..see players completely distorted and out of context ..for that " to see only Highlights at You Tube ... another illusion and farce created ... " even Jay Jay Okocha ..turns God in this mode " Highlights only " but .... watching the whole matches ....not not not ..for sure gives to see the work " Off the Ball moment ".. Mental Attributes Tactical Attributes gives to see much better .. in whole or full match mode the whole job... and all the Attributes ... working or not working at all Into the whole Matches
Neymar's peak was much higher, and not particularly short. Whether or not their legacies reflect that basic fact is an argument I'm not nearly as invested in, but it probably bears mentioning that Figo was himself rarely the undisputed main man on his team during his prime. I think Neymar's generally remembered as a significantly greater talent. I'd argue that his club career was by no means worse, either.