Argentina's 86 team wasn't exactly composed of players plucked from Switzerland's second division. And surely Barcelona's early 80s teams, on which Maradona failed to impress himself, were pretty good?
Maradona hands down. He could carry a team on his back especially at the international level. The World Cup is the top achievement in futbol not European Championships or league titles. World Cups make legends and Diego is that. DiStefano was great but came up a bit short on the big stage. IMHO anyhow.
So he's marked down because he never got the chance to play in the World Cup? Or to look at it another way, Maradona didn't have the same impact on five successive European Cup Finals as Di Stefano.
They essentially missed out by failing to get a result in Scotland - now when you consider that from 1954 to 1958 the only visiting teams to beat Scotland in Scotland were England and Hungary you can appreciate that the Scots were not an easy touch. Also take into consideration that they beat West Germany in Stuttgart in 1957 and between beating Spain in Scotland and losing the return match permanantly lost the services of their captain George Young (one of the worlds finest centre-halves, even at 35).
Ah, the old gang has reunited for some worthwhile discussion. The concept of offensive midfielder versus striker has always been an interesting topic. A striker’s primary purpose is to score goals. Players who exist to create scoring opportunities are often called “creatives”, but not all can be lumped together either. Some can finish as well as strikers, some create from deeper in the midfield, some serve more as link-up men, etc….. Tostao – of WC 1970 fame – wrote an article discussing the different types of “creative” midfielders. I saved it for a rainy day, so here goes…. Before getting into the article, let’s begin by introducing some Brasilian Portuguese football terms. The translations are not literal, but more in line with their colloquial meaning in a footballing sense: Armador – arm “er”…as in the one who provides the ammunition Atacante – forward, attacker Ligacao – connection, link Ofensivo – offensive Ponta – fulcrum…as in one that supplies capability for action Lance – a play, or movement Meia – midfielder Now provided is my translation of a portion of Tostao’s article dated 4/16/2005. Please read it for yourself, you might catch a nuance I missed. http://jbonline.terra.com.br/jb/papel/colunas/tostao/2005/04/16/jorcoltos20050416001.html Understand that he writes this for a Brasilian audience so all his examples are Brasilian players. Anything in [brackets] is my own editorial. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tostao This week a young football fan told me that he didn’t understand the difference between a meia-armador [arming-midfielder], a meia-atacante [attacking-midfielder], a meia-ofensivo [offensive-midfielder], a meia-de-ligacao [linking-midfielder], and a ponta-de-lance [fulcrum-of-play], given that journalists routinely mix these terms. Another reader who saw me [Tostao] play, did not understand when I wrote that I played a position similar to Roger’s [Corinthians, ex-Benfica, ex-Fluminense]. For him I was a ponta-de-lance, and not an armador. In the past, a ponta-de-lance was a forward that withdrew [into the midfield] to receive the ball, in order to arm the offensive plays; he would approximate himself to the center-forward in order for them to effectuate give-and-go’s, or to set the center-forward up with a pass; in addition, he [ponta-de-lance] also scored goals. Pele, Zico and other supercraques played in this manner. A ponta-de-lance didn’t always wear the number 10. For Cruzeiro, I played in that position and wore the number 8. The craque Dirceu Lopes [yes, he was] was the meia-armador and played with the 10. He wore that number well. The modern attacking-midfielder or linking-midfielder or offensive-midfielder [here Tostao suggests that these are all the same] - such as Kaka, Alex, Roger - play in a position that resembles the ponta-de-lance, but with differences. The attacking-midfielder is more a midfielder, who arms the offensive plays, rather than a forward. Generally he scores infrequently. The ponta-de-lance was more forward than midfielder and was accustomed to even leading the team in scoring. The arming-midfielder of today and of the past - like Ricardinho, Gerson, Rivellino, Ademir da Guia, and Dirceu Lopes - would provide [defensive] marking and organize the play in the midfield, as well as contribute with goals. They played from one intermediary to the other. Offensive-midfielders of today, and the past, primarily attack and participate little in marking. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Confused?
I gather from Tostao that he sees a spectrum to these midfielders with offensive range. The further to the left the more traditional the midfielder: Meia-armador--------Meia-Atacante/Meia-de-ligacao/Meia-ofensivo-----Ponta-de-lance I agree that different midfielders with offensive duties fall along such a spectrum; with the more versatile players - such as Pele, Maradona, Distefano, Cryuff, Platini, etc. - playing at different points along the specturm at different times….depending on the composition and needs of the particular team, or even for a particular game or tournament, or as their careers progressed. That said, for the majority of their careers they were placed in the area of their greatest strength (otherwise their talent was not maximized). Thus utilizing Tostao’s spectrum, I’d say, using some past and present players: Meia-armador/ Arming-Mid: Gerson, Netzer, Ballack Meia-Atacante/Attacking Mid: Zidane, Rivellino, Riquelme, Kaka Ponta-de-Lance: Cryuff, Maradona, Pele, Platini, Ronaldinho Gaucho (at Barca) I’m glad to have added to your confusion.
i'm bloody confused. arming mid/attacking mid are exactly the same, provide opportunities and contribute in goals, no?
players all have different technical abilities, so if ballack could dribble would he be considered an attacking mid?
Let me try it another way. Using Tostao's words, removing names, and re-arranging to join his thoughts: Arming-Midfielder: The arming-midfielder of today and of the past would provide [defensive] marking and organize the play in the midfield, as well as contribute with goals. They played from one intermediary to the other. Ponta-de-lance: In the past a forward that withdrew [into the midfield] to receive the ball, in order to arm the offensive plays; he would approximate himself to the center-forward in order for them to effectuate give-and-go’s, or to set the center-forward up with a pass; in addition, he [ponta-de-lance] also scored goals. The ponta-de-lance was more forward than midfielder and was accustomed to even leading the team in scoring. Attacking-midfielder: Plays in a position that resembles the ponta-de-lance, but is more a midfielder, who arms the offensive plays, rather than a forward. Generally he scores infrequently. Primarily attack and participate little in marking.
Ballack fits the description of Arming-Mid to a tee. Arming-Midfielder: The arming-midfielder of today and of the past would provide [defensive] marking and organize the play in the midfield, as well as contribute with goals. They played from one intermediary to the other. Of course this is not an exact science. The spectrum analogy I think works.
So basicly the arming midfielder is a two-way midfielder who also scores goals. And the ponta-de-lance is a withdrawn striker, a "hole player". So Ballack an arming midfielder, Bergkamp a ponta-de-lance and Kaka an attacking midfielder. Am I right?
For me it essentially boils down to Maradona, Di Stefano and Platini. I went for Maradona but either of the other two would be supreme back-ups. To be honest the entire list is just class players. This is probably the most difficult position to judge.
Platini with only four votes???? whats going on, the man was sublime, scored nearly as many as a striker and could dictate a game like no other. Platini was the man!! And yes i voted for him on the other midfielder poll aswell, didn't see this poll till to late!
As much as I love many of the players on this list, having been an attacking midfielder myself, players like Platini, Laudrup, Zidane, etc. were all great. However, there can only be one winner here....... Maradona. As much as I respect the other guys, Maradona is the one guy who could take a fairly average team and make them into world, seria A, or UEFA cup champions, simply by picking up the ball and weaving his way around the defense. I know he may not be the greatest ambassador ever to the game however Maradona in his heyday was considered the most feared player ever and absolutely unstoppable.
Spain's defeat in Scotland wouldn't have had a negative effect if Spain had managed to beat Switzerland at home, but they drew 2-2 in Madrid. That was the only point the Swiss collected in that group, they lost all other games. Had the Spanish won that game against the Swiss at home, they would have topped the group ahead of Scotland, due to the better goal differential.