I disagree. Playing my whole childhood and teens on uneven pitches, crazy conditions, different kind of balls and boots.. good dribblers will be good dribblers. It is still very obvious.
that is why exactly I think you dont understand my point. I was NOT putting down his world cup performance, I was simply using him as an example of a player of the past who is clearly silly in many domains compared to modern football, but that shouldnt be hold against him, because every player and their achievments should be looked through the context of their era and relative to their peers. And carlito brought up brilliant video of Sivori who for me clearly shows more talent in close dribbling (so it was possible not to be silly even then, although lacking Garrincha's pace) and puts this whole idea that Garrincha was some kind of unparraled dribbler for his time to question. Comparing Garrincha's performance against a great team of his era (Spain) to performances of any player against great teams in WC today is disingenuous because in the past, seemingly every world cup some player would pull such feat, but when was the last time some player has put on a masterclass against top tier nation (that actually was great in that tournament) on the world cup stage? What you are suggesting is that Garrincha's performance vs Spain in 62 would be eqvivalent of Messi doing the same against France and I disagree with that. Messi doing the same against France would be much more impressive than Garrincha doing it to Spain in 62 because Messi's performance would be an absolute outlier in recent world cups, unlike Garrincha's performance. Fundamentally, It is about how much players stood out from the rest of the competition of their time rather than how they compare in terms of stats or performances. The ones who stood out the most in their respective era are the players who performed the best throughout the history. And performances from the players from the past have to be calibrated a bit because it is impossible that there was so many better performers back then than right now.
For me the comparison is merciless in favor of Maradona. The World Cup played in Qatar seemed to me to be enough to ensure that Messi won this World Cup and even the performances are not comparable in the slightest. The best performances at the World Championships, individually for me are: Cruyff 1974/ Diego 1986, there would be a debate about which of the two played a better World Cup. With a small gap I would put Garrincha 1958 and 1962 below.
Don't forget Pelé 1970. The all-time leader in assists in an edition (6) and he scored in the final, unlike Cruyff and Maradona.
I think Kopa might be the all-time leader in assists in one edition (at least 7 - I keep forgetting without double checking but less than the 9 sometimes quoted), though double-checking how Fritz Walter's assists were split between 1954 and 1958 (and the overall tally) could be worthwhile Most G+A in World Cup history | BigSoccer Forum I know you're probably thinking in terms of the OPTA/Sofascore data though, since 1966. That's pretty much what I'm thinking too, with possibly Pele 1958 in the mix (but Kopa from that year likewise a possible option indeed, along with Fontaine and Didi too...I'm probably inclined towards those more than Garrincha for that year, although France Football's ratings were interesting in rating Garrincha higher on average in 1958 than in 1962).
Cruyff and Maradona are the two most dominant players ever seen in a World Cup. I think Johan, from the debut game against Uruguay to the one against Argentina, are the most dominant performances I've ever seen. Against East Germany, Brazil (despite goals and assists) and West Germany he had a decline. As we well know on El Grafico he has an average rating of 9 in the first 4 matches, I believe that no other player equals him, Maradona recovers with the matches of England, Belgium and Germany (personally I am not convinced that Diego played a better finish than Johan). For me Pelé played a great World Cup in 1970 but we have seen better, for many it was 'He's not even better' of his national team and this says a lot.
In fact, according to French and Spanish press, Pelé was only the third best player of his team: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2023/03/brazil-ratings-in-1970-world-cup.html
The main thing you can say is Maradona his best performances in 1986 came against midfields missing their best players. He had also crucial calls going for him against England and also Belgium (some very, very wrong offside decisions). It is nothing like the sustained penalty gifts of Argentina in 2022 though, that had every game big gifts (and imho in general on the first 'possibility'). Yesterday, Van Gaal repeated his words (and added that if that brings him into trouble, so be it). 🗣️ - Van Gaal: "We were robbed by the referee vs Argentina. The facts are there. I can show you the video's. You think it's normal a player of Argentina can hit the ball against our bench without getting a red? And then there was the penalty we conceded." [rtl4] pic.twitter.com/O8cMdLlJJ3— 𝐀𝐅𝐂 𝐀𝐉𝐀𝐗 💎 (@TheEuropeanLad) August 2, 2024 "I still think we were fooled by the referee," Van Gaal reflects on the semi-final of the 2022 World Cup. "The facts are there. I can show more than twenty scenes, and everyone will say: that's a red card. It can't be that an Argentinian kicks the ball forcefully into the dugout?", he wonders out loud, referring to an action by Leandro Paredes. "That can't be, can it? Where is the VAR?" "And I haven't even mentioned the penalty that was awarded. And I could go on like this for a while," Van Gaal continues, before taking one more swipe at referee Mateu Lahoz. "If we had played with eleven against nine men, we would have won, I think." Van Gaal is also asked about the comparisons between his time as national coach and that of Koeman. "In the end I can only refer to the dry facts," says Van Gaal, who elaborates on those facts. "We together as a group have not lost a match." He also nodded that reaching the semi-finals at a World Cup is often more highly regarded than reaching the last four at a European Championship. --------------- "We didn't lose a match, but we did on penalties. I had scientific research done on how we could best manage penalties. We trained on that a lot. I didn't do that before the 2014 World Cup (when the Netherlands lost to Argentina on penalties in the semi-finals, ed.). Many of the takers didn't hear the whistle. So when you evaluate, you've actually done everything you can, but it didn't work as you expect" Van Gaal laments. ----------------- As in aside, Van Gaal already said in 2012 to Hard Gras (in some length) that when it comes to players he has seen in his life, and when he had reached the "years of distinction", that Messi is absolutely better than Maradona and the comparison should be with Pelé and Cruijff. Van Gaal was no friend of Cruijff, as most will know.
Messi's World Cup, as I have said in the past, is phenomenal when you consider his age. At 34, few people can make a World Cup like that. At the moment I only remember Zidane 2006 which for me is superior to Messi 22, also considering the opponents the Frenchman had to face (Spain, Brazil, Portugal and Italy). But if we look at the overall picture, a player who walked around the pitch without the ball cannot absolutely be considered one of the best world cups in history. The equalizer in the final came from his mistake in midfield. If Kolo Muani had scored the winning goal, what would have been said about Messi? Probably the same things that were said after the 2014 World Cup.
Maradona Maradona in '86 was also clearly superior to Messi in '22 defensively. And Maradona didn't score from the penalty kicks, while Messi scored four (the most by any player in any single edition of the World Cup).
Perhaps the stick was too high for Pelé. Pelé was clearly the best in the team. Leader in G+A, leader in G+A in final, leader in key passes per game (and leader in the whole competition too), had fantasy with anthological plays (like the one against Mazurkiewicz) etc