The Greatest Ever Striker?

Anything else?

 

Just to be clear, this is a list of goals scored in (first) league play.

Not a list of goals scored in all competitions.

 

I didn't know that Roberto Dinamite scored that much. In regards to Lineker, you've made some very good points.

 

Yeah, but your list doesn't only exclude friendlies and army games but also domestic cup games, international club games and national team games.

Just as a note, not to say the list has no worth.

 

Given the sheer volume of great forwards that have graced the game, Bergkamp should not be anywhere close to a greatest top 15 poll for w/d or strikers.

As beautiful as some of his goals have been - and some have been delightful - many others did just as beautifully with far greater consistency and impact on league and tournament campaigns.

Berkamp is a player I respect and enjoy watching when he is "on", but IMO comme was wise in not presenting him as an option.

A great player for sure - deserving of your recognition - but not an all-timer.

 

I don't think I could make a winning case for him as the "greatest ever," but if was picking from comme's list and need one guy, for one match and I could get him at his A game...I would probably take Eusebio.

His pace, physical strength, his ability to shoot first time off his runs...you watch him in the 1966 World Cup, and he looks like a player who is ahead of his time-larger than life.

I like the early version of Ronaldo as well, but I'm having a hard time moving off Eusebio.

 

Greaves was one goal off this feat on two seperate occasions, and if you include his brief spell in Milan he had four straight seasons with 30+ goals.

1959 32
1960 29
1961 41
1962 30 (9 Milan 21 Spurs)
1963 37
1964 35
1965 29

As for Clough, I'm pretty sure the only season he played in the top flight was his first - yes he scored goals but not at the top level.

 

Pele's total for all competetive games was 758. Gregoriak compiled another list last year.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151221

 

Is that the same Scolari who played with 2 rotating 'hole' players and 3 swashbuckling centrebacks...judge a man by his actions not words. Ironic that people still refer to the the 82 team despite it not winning - that's the power and beauty of JB. - I'd sooner watch a polystyrene cup than a game devoid of creativity and played by numbers.

 

You offer some interesting interpretations.

IMO it's certainly no coincedence that Brazil had the best defensive record at WC 2002. Scolari played with two central midfielders who could and did actually defend and destroy to balance his more offensive players. IIRC it was also said that he actually _forbade_ some of his CBs to attack. One has just to look at Brazil's defensive performances against Germany and England to see that Scolari was primarily playing to get results and not to entertain. Scolari's Brazil was not playing in the spirit of JB -- not that you've explicitly claimed otherwise.

Anyway, I would also maintain that he has learned the lessons of Brazil's failures -- particularly '82 when Brazil probably had the talent but not the necessary mindset and balance. Yes, the Brazil of '82 is still remembered, but IMO at least as much for the failure of its branch of offensive football as for the play itself.

Besides, one can certainly be a fan of power and creativity without to think JB is really necessary --or advisable -- to achieve success. In fact, the JB of Brazil in '70 is long dead, anyway. Teams which manage to win tournaments nowadays are balanced teams which can attack but also defend and destroy. There are rare exceptions but as a rule it's true IMO.

 

As has been stated numerous times in the past this arguement is extremely flawed by the fact Muller and Van Basten had the privalege of both playing in at least one all-time team. Ronaldo never did. Ronaldo never played with all-timers of the level of a Beckenbauer, Netzer, Milan side in his pre-injury days.

You don't seem to want to ackonowledge that Van Basten was part of the best team that serie A has ever seen.. when privy to such a calibre of team-mate your life is made alot easier as a striker.

Name 5 utterly dominant strikers from that time period who were successful at both club and international level. Not to belittle Van Basten but your statement is extemely misleading - that time period was not a great one for all-time strikers.

Precisely, in your opinion. Stats don't clarify your point at all.

A different animal. Pretty sure he's moot for this poll.

 

By that logic we should discount what Ronaldo has done with Brazil since he has the privilege of playing with all-time greats. Stupid point. The reason Van Basten played with all those greats at Milan was because he himself was an all-time great. Are Alfredo Di Stefano's achievements any less remarkable since he was surrounded by superstars. And Van Basten wasn't playing with Milan his whole career. Check out his days at Ajax.

And you make it seem like Ronaldo was playing with a bunch of muppets at Barca, Inter, and Real(three of the biggest clubs in the world).

I think we've had this discussion before. I feel there is only one way of comparing players from different generations. And that is by comparing them to their own peers first. It's useless to try and guess how Van Basten would have played in the 60's or how Ronaldo would have played in the 80's. So you have to see how far ahead of their own peers each player was. And imo, Van Basten is vastly superior to anybody who played during his era. Ronaldo not so much.

I didn't say anything about stats.

 

Ronaldo has never played in any all-time tam He most likely never will. It doesn't lesson a player's status in the game but, when your team-mates are stellar, your defense is one of, if not the best ever, your midfield is practically faultless...it certainly makes the job of a striker easier...why then, when not sorrounded by his stellar team-mates (WC '90) did Van Basten not perform?

You were talking about V'B's achievements in serie A whilst omitting perhaps the most obvious element - his team(mates) . Ronaldo's feats in Holland were a 1:1, better than Van Basten's, but not really that comparble as V'B was there for a much longer time. 42in42 compared to 129in133. Similar.

'Biggest club' does not equate to all-time team.

Do you believe this? If so, it's a pointless discussion. Ronaldo was miles ahead of a superior set of striking peers at his peak. You say V.B was 'dominant' for a decade yet, he couldn't score in the WC where Lineker was a top scorer and showed up again 4yrs later...that doesn't suggest dominance to me.

Essentially you're suggest V.B> Ronaldo in serie A certainly not by performance, so you must be going down the stat road.

There is no disscrepency between pre and post injury Ronaldo to you?

 

If it's not Romario and Nordahl then it's Ronaldo and Van Basten.

 

I missed that lanman...tough day at work. Come again man!

EDIT. Never mind. A return to the Draft of Drafts. Good memory.

 

Shouldn't factors such as the skill of their competitors be taken into account?
I mean how many of you actually think defenders from 30 years ago are as good as they are now?

 

Any team that wins a WC will have a decent defence. The modern game demands defensive CM or better still CMs that can defend and attack. Infact Brazil really played 1 defensive CM,Silva, Kleberson and Juninho are attacking players. It appeared to me that Lucio, Roq and Edmilson had carte blanche to attack! Obviously in certain games caution was the by word. Scolari fooled every one into believing he'd crimp the ball but logic says that would be impossible with Rivaldo, Ronaldo and Gaucho in the team - you cannot just turn of jb it's in the blood.

When Scolari took charge Brazil had contested 2 WC finals he continued wot CAP and Zagallo had begun. It's only natural that the Brazillian game would evolve it's own brand of modern futebol cleary it couldn't be as fluid or open as the 70's or 82 ( 3-2 was the score not 1-0...out scored!) - football the world over has changed since those times it's not only Brazil that has had to adapt. I think to most neutrals whether the 82 team had won or not is moot...it doesn't detract from the fact that they played some bewitching futebol, this is will always be remembered first.

But the great teams do it with style.

 

This point is heard quite often.

The game is faster today but the football equipment has progressed as well. I think one can't really argue that players from 30 years ago were inferior to today's just because they played slower back then and tactics being less developed. It's all a matter of adaption.

I am sure if we'd have a time machine kidnapping a great defender from 30 years ago at birth and letting him grow up 30 years later to become a footballer, he would adapt to the modern game and still be a great defender today. Do the same with a great defender of today and he would have adapted to the slower, less "developed" football climate of the past.

That's why it is most important to look how players performed in their own time, how much they stood out from the rest. It's fascinating but ultimately useless to compare players from different eras as so much has changed.

 

I'll put it this way. Van Basten's Milan is comparable to Ronaldo's Inter when you compare their competition in Serie A. At the point Van Basten was playing for Milan Serie A was the best league in the world(and imo it is the best league ever from 1985-1995). Inter were strong with the Germans, Napoli was great with Maradona, Juve is Juve, and Samp was good as well. The fact that Milan dominated the way they did is a testament of how great Van Basten et. al. truly were. Compare that to Serie A when Ronaldo played: Milan were on a downward spiral, leaving good teams(Roma and Lazio), but not great, to take their place. The teams that Inter competed against from 1997-2002 were nothing compared to Van Basten's Serie A. Inter really should have won something. And Ronaldo I have to think should take some of the blame.

I think you also have to remember that when Van Basten played it was during the most defensive era in the history of football.

Great players can make a big club great. Before Van Basten came to Milan they were just recoving from relegation. Before Maradona came to Napoli they didn't win anything, before Di Stefano came to Real, etc. you get the point.

Van Basten played in 1 WC. If you want to judge him by one month of football it's your mistake. Why not judge him by Euro '88?

It is by performance. Name another striker during Van Basten's stint in Serie A who is as good as Marco? He was top scorer three times in Serie A, won 3 scudetti, and 2 European Cups. Ronaldo never was top scorer in Serie A and his only trophy is the meaningless UEFA Cup. And Sheva, Vieri, and Crespo were as good as Ronaldo when he was in Serie A.

True. But he is playing with all-time greats is he not?

 

Agreed.

Now go back an additional 10 years and imagine facing defenders who didn't need to worry about getting sanctioned with yellow or red cards. Depending on the opposition, could be a frightening proposition.

 

However, players could still be sent off pre-yellow cards. The invention of the yellow/red cards came into effect in response to the Ratin sending off in WC '66. It is more to do with eliminating confusion.

 

Spartak, I can buy most of your arguements except for this one.

The only reason Inter got close to the Scudetto was due to Ronaldo. A blown penalty call away in fact.

How on earth does he get any blame?

 

True.

But the practical application of send-offs was close to non-existent. Reading some of the literature of the Libs games alone, or viewing footage, rare is the game today that comes close to that level of physical intimidation.

The yellow and reds are much more of a deterrant than ever existed prior.