For a brief time he was perceived to be 'better' or at least performing at a higher level then franz beckenbaur and johan Cruyff https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Ballon_d'Or
He is definitely underrated given his ability. He was one of the greatest dribblers ever as the compilation above showcases. He was a great finisher and incredibly fast also. There is not much footage of him or many articles about him.
I'm always a bit uncomfortable with the idea that just because someone won a Ballon d'Or it meant that they were seen as "better." I suspect much of the voting is "narrative" based, similar to the MVP awards in the US, for example.
The critics often said that the Warsaw Pact "fixed" the 1975 Ballon d'Or. At least, that was how I often heard. In actuality, there were 26 voters, from Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, East Germany, England, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Ireland, Romania, Soviet Union, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, West Germany and Yugoslavia. Only eight voters came from there, According to rsssf, Blokhin received 20 first place votes and 5 second place. The last remaining voter put him as 4th. http://www.rsssf.com/miscellaneous/europa-poy75.html
Yeah, perhaps. I wouldn't know honestly I do suspect it is sometimes treated as "life time" award though, like when Stanley Matthews won it.
I never got the feeling of all time legendary dribbler from that barbosa football comp Extremely skilled yes especially on the run This comp made my YouTuber Harms (who I also think is a contributor over on the redcafe forum) sealed it for me. From both a stationary position and on the run blokhin was a completely devasting dribbler I'd say without getting too ahead of myself one of the top 10 or 15 most technically gifted European players of all time
Certainly impressive, but I'm not sure what in there made him look like a top 10-15 most technical gifted player, at least as far as dribbling is concerned. I certainly think he was very good and when combined with his athleticism he was, as you rightly used the term, devastating, but I don't think his technical foundation was top 10-15 impressive. As for other skills, I'm always wary because obviously highlights only show the good parts, but what usually separates the best from the rest is not the highlight reels, but their level of consistency. Like, not all of Bergkamp's passes were world-class (although he of course had his fair share) but he was able to execute the good to very good passes at a very consistent level as well, which don't show up in highlights generally, but it produced winning football.
He was a weird player in terms of his dribbling — capable of producing sublime pieces of skill (like his run for the disallowed goal against England or that mind-blowing dribble where he seems to somehow phase through 3 or 4 French players that have surrounded him from all sides), but he wasn't always consistent enough to be considered an equal to those smooth natural dribblers like Best, Cruyff or Figo. But the combination of outstanding (even if not otherworldly) dribbling with his ridiculous pace made him impossible to defend against when he was at his best. I've included a lot of different pieces from different games against Vogts, for example, who is rightfully considered to be one of the toughest man-markers of all-time and he had absolutely wiped the floor with him time and again. So top-10 is probably stretching it a bit, maybe top-20/25? It's obviously hard to assess different players with different skillsets under the same label of technique — like Blokhin was a better dribbler than Bergkamp, for example, but the latter was certainly more technically gifted in my eyes. Same goes for Best, Cruyff, Zidane, M. Laudrup, Figo, Savicevic, Iniesta, Netzer, van Basten, Cristiano at his early peak and a bunch of other very different footballers. When you add up his pace and the ability to control the ball at those speeds, he's virtually unmatched — he doesn't have many competitors aside from maybe Giggs or Gento.
Haven't read your post before replying to carlito myself but I found it funny that we've both used Bergkamp as an example even though we were illustrating slightly different points.
Blokhin was still a very good and useful player with less speed, as shown in 1985-86 (cwc winner) and also 1986-87 (2nd in the EC topscorers list). There are some less convincing years in between though. But that is not the version people remember. Conversely, people tend to remember this version of Bergkamp (he was then behind Lampard and Henry the most productive player of the league per EPL/Opta website, joint 3rd with Hasselbaink) not when he was faster.
Honestly, even I don't remember the Ballon d'Or placing years of Bergkamp as I didn't follow Dutch football at all. The best version of Bergkamp that I witnessed was his late 90s version, where he wasn't slow, but not particularly fast either. I don't know if he already had all the genius he had in him by 92 and 93, but I highly doubt it. Most players develop it later in their career, when they've lost a bit of athleticism. So without having seen his early 90s days, I would expect him to be at his best in the late 90s. He would still have most of his athleticism, but also developed other aspects of his game to a much higher level.
Yeah, I broadly agree: for example what Brad Friedel says and describes here. That is a sort of mental process mediated by experience. "Happy is the land that has no need of heroes." I just noticed above how some versions of players get remembered while for others it is different. Potentially the Indian Summer of Blokhin is underappreciated (his numbers indicate a certain longevity). I am inclined to say Shevchenko his best five years was better, but in longevity it is arguably not (I thought and still think in chronological order Shevchenko was the best European center forward since MvB).
I'd say that: Blokhin's best season (74/75) was probably a bit better than Sheva's best season (98/99 or 03/04, I'm not sure) Shevchenko's peak seasons were better than Blokhin's — even with 2 underwhelming seasons (01/02 & 02/03) stuck in between them, Sheva's peak from 97/98 to 05/06 is better than any similar set of seasons by Blokhin Blokhin's overall longevity is, though, probably more impressive — and he had been able to adapt to the loss of his athletic qualities much better, transforming into a less selfish playmaking version of himself Funnily enough their overall numbers are almost identical International: Blokhin 112 games, 42 goals / Sheva 111 games, 44 goals Club: Blokhin 655 games, 297 goals / Sheva 648 games, 321 goals
Yeah, I am personally not sure about this and, also, not sure whether Blokhin in 1974-75 is (individually) really so much better as some other seasons with high numbers. Is it really the single best or say one of his two/three/four best?
He was very good for the entire second half of the 70’s and early 80’s, but in 74/75 he was simply a level above. It seemed like in every important game he would come up with a piece of individual brilliance to win it. It’s not a coincidence that he had won Ballon d’Or, with Cruyff & Beckenbauer both at their physical peak, by a record margin (at the time). Blokhin — 122 points Beckenbauer — 42 points Cruyff — 27 points Obviously his demolition of the all-conquering Bayern Munich in European Supercup stands out — Dynamo had won 3:0 on aggregate (0:1 in Munich & 2:0 in Kiyv), all three goals were scored by Blokhin. Including one of the greatest individual goals in history of European competitions. He was also crucial in Dynamo's Cup Winner's Cup campaign: 2 winning goals in their first round fixtures against CSKA Sofia (1:0 & 0:1) Goal against Eintracht in the second round (with him being arguably the best Dynamo's player in both fixtures) Assist against Bursaspor in the quarter-finals Goal against PSV in the semi-final Goal & assist in the final against Ferencvárosi in the final And it's not like he was simply a poacher — he would beat people for fun, often dribbling past multiple opponents, he would run for the entirety of the game, making decoy runs, pressing the opponent etc. And that's with most teams putting at least one dedicated man-marker on him. It was also his goalscoring peak around that time (23 goals in 1973, 28 goals in 1974, 23 goals in 1975) but even though he would almost replicate those numbers in the 80's (22 goals in 1980, 23 goals in 1981), he would never quite replicate that level of tenacity, athleticism, drive, dribbling & goalscoring that he had reached around that point. In a few years he'll begin to play in a more reserved way, saving himself for those incisive forward runs and not participating in pressing/defensive part of the game as intensely, but in 1974/75 he was like a Duracell bunny.
This might look as contrarian but I think neither Beckenbauer and Cruijff were at their individual best, and also not as good as one or two years later. For example look at 2:20 + 3:35 here, here, or here (there is more). The domestic team results is a reflection of this and rebounded the next two years. This is what sometimes happened in a post-WC year. I think voices about Cruijff being the best player in the world (for example Placar in 1976) were louder and more convinced the next couple years, until 1978 (and rightly so). I mean it as a compliment and positive thing. Players with a career profile like him, with that durability, professionalism and longevity at a high (club) level have - as a rule of thumb - often a few years of a similar level. Might be three, might be six, might be ten. Not one. A few years of a similar general influence. Some goals at the right moment and right time are of course not irrelevant for the applause you get (it is not that he has no big goals in any other year), but often this ignores that your own personal contribution to the team you are a part of is similar in other years. This is different for, say, Roberto Baggio with multiple physical and psychological issues and therefore didn't last all that long at top level environments (club and country). He has eighteen months at his absolute zenith. Blokhin has not that arc. Maybe in other high scoring years or when he was producing against Brazil he was less athletic, I think I can see that, but it is hard to measure (on the eye, some high level games of 1977 show no difference to me). It can be, and was in my observation, compensated by measuring yourself better, as experience slowly kicks in, and your general game improves. There have been several great athletes in football who only (sporadically) use their athleticism when they need to, and only then go to the highest gear. In a different way and route you indicate yourself he has more than one year (namely 1973, 1974 and 1975). That is not too different from what I am getting at. There is not really a single best year, from an individual perspective and personal input (other than some 'half-random' goals at different times). Team-mates and other factors change all the time (maybe less so if you can buy a Neymar each year, or so). Also consider how the athleticism of football itself was continuously moving upward, certainly in those years. Maybe there was relative 'decline' against his peers rather than absolute decline. The narrative about a 'short peak' becomes false, is compensated by other developments (you can be as influential in a different role - I think he was) and does not do justice to your contribution as an old player (of course, you'll need luck for this, too). I think with some certainty that if you put an algorithm on him, it will not show just one season or year as his best and personal best contribution.
There are comments by himself of this nature in a series called "the international book of football". His examples and youth idols, as a youngster, were Dzajic and Cruijff (in that order). "Asked about his style of play he confessed he has been bullied by his Soviet coaches and manager to be less of an individual and had consciously tried to adapt his game, to use his skills for the benefit of the team. [...] 'Then' he said 'it suddenly clicked in my mind, seeing it done, and I am sure I learned a lot about aspects of the game that were new to me.' 'Cruyff' he went on 'is a great individual but plays his cards within the team framework rather than on his own. I realise now that even the greatest player is useless without the help of his colleagues.' [...] He is trying to balance his game between scoring goals and creating chances for others." (Also some other comments about tweaking his defensive efforts etc.) But again: the more you know, the less you know....