You keep digging yourself deeper and deeper. Van Basten was vital to Milan/Holland's success because he scored goals. Correct? But Muller is not vital to Bayern/W. Germany's succes because he only scored goals. Makes sense I know alot of people who consider Muller to be the greatest striker of all-time and most of them aren't German. Maybe in Holland they feel this way(I wouldn't expect anything less from the dutch) but your opinion of Muller is very uninformed. I suggest you do a little research before you jump in here and claim Muller is about as good as Alan Shearer. And you might as well know that Gerd Muller didn't play his entire career against German clubs. There was this thing called the European Cup and World Cup that he participated in. And guess what? He led both competitons in goals. So I'm pretty confident he would have done well wherever he played.
I'm hardly objective, you're right, but then again who is in football. That said I'm guessing I've seen about 20 times more football in my life than the average bigsoccer poster, so I'm more entitled to an opinion than most. Fact of the matter is that Müller is generally described as a highly effective yet old-fashioned forward, whereas Van Basten is generally described as one of the greatest forwards of all time. Fact also is that Van Basten won two world player of the year awards, Müller didn't win a single one. Again, don't take my word for it.
Everybody has their biases, me included. But there comes a time where you need to be a little objective if you want people to take you seriously. I've spent half this thread defending Van Basten not because he's one of my favorite players of all-time but because I think he was pretty damn good. Van Basten's accomplishments speak for themselves I don't need my blinders on to defend him. But when I compare him to Muller I can see through all my love for Van Basten that he simply wasn't up to Gerd's level. Because If I were to debate that Van Basten is better than Muller(and I'm pretty sure I could ) then I would be no better than ilovecolombia or any of the 'World Rivalry' trolls. I don't base my opinion on what people generally feel. Most Americans generally feel Saddam Hussain was behind the 9/11 attacks. But I can care less what they feel. The only opinion that matters to me is mine because you know what? I'm usually right P. S. There was no "World Player of the Year" award when Muller played. He did win the Balon d'Or in 1970 though. And you have to remember that Muller played during Beckenbauer's and Cruyff's era so they won most of the awards.
I simply don't understand this post. I'm not Muller's biggest fan, but how can you say he wasn't vital to Bayern or Germany's success? He was in all honesty just as important as Van Basten was to Milan. Once Van Basten finished in 1993 Milan reached the next two CL finals. Could Bayern have done so without Muller? Another side point: how has Owen been anything but excellent for Real?
You could make the argument that he was Real's best striker last year. If he had as many starts as Ronaldo he probably would have scored as many or more goals than him. And of course Raul was crap last year.
here are the player of the century rankings from the iffhs world/europe: world: puskas ranked 6 eusebio ranked 9 van basten ranked 12 müller ranked 13 europe: puskas ranked 4 eusebio ranked 6 müller ranked 9 van basten ranked 10
gerd müller has shared the years with players like eusebio,charlton,beckenbauer,best,cruiff, ...and all of this 5 players are ranked in the player of century rankings for europe in the top 11....so for müller it wasnt so easy than van basten to win more balon D.Or than he did ..... on the other hand he did win 1970 the award and was 1972 only thiny 2 votes behind beckenbauer second ranked...and he was ranked twice third ranked... 4 times in the top 3 in years filled with alltimers... for a centerstriker this is pretty good...
Who said anything about Van Basten being rubbish? It's just that there are people with better credentials (both quantitatively or qualitatively) on the list who deserve to be voted ahead of him. Only a biased person, or an ignorant one would vote for Van Basten.
Van Basten was voted world player of the year twice, European player of the year twice, won several champions leagues and golden balls, won a European championship for his country, was topscorer at the same European championship, scored what possibly is the best ever goal at any international tournament. How many strikers do you know with the same credentials then? Just wondering.
Well he's got a point of course, naming a player who's been voted world player of the year twice among the greatest strikers ever is pretty absurd. When the English for example say about a young Dutch striker 'he's the next Marco van Basten' what they really mean to say is that he's a slightly above average forward.
You seriously don't see anyone else on the list who has more of those achievements? If not then you are uninformed. Van Basten is certainly one of the best strikers but not nearly the greatest ever.
Answer the question will you. Apart from the strikers who have won world cups for their country, who do you know has better credentials than Van Basten?
gerd müller had some offers from other countrys, inclusive barcelona short before 1974, but his choice to play for bayern was right....iam not sure its true but i have read cruijjf was against that müller join barcelona too...another point is that netzer where has played in spain lost his form before worldcup 1974 and it was voigts where did say the slow games in spain was bad for netzer....in the semifinal for eurochampionscup 1976 real madrid with german players netzer and breitner was eliminated against bayern , bayern won at home 2:1 and müller has scored 2 goals..
This is really great stuff. First it's Ronaldo vs. van Basten, then it's Ronaldo vs. Müller and now it's Müller vs. van Basten. In the 1970s, the only European top league with many international stars was the Spanish league. The Italians had a ban on foreign players since 1966, and the English league was traditionally only open to British players, it was very rare for non-Brits to play there. Despite a lack of international stars, both the English and the German leagues were the strongest leagues in Europe during the 1970s, clearly ahead of Spain and Italy. One could argue that the Dutch and Belgian leagues were at times stronger than the two latin leagues. Just look at the respective UEFA-coefficients of the 1970s. It was already pointed out that Bundesliga players won six out of ten Golden Balls during the 1970s (Müller 1970, Beckenbauer 1972, 76, Simonsen 1977, Keegan 1978, 79). In fact Bundesliga players won SIX straight Golden Balls from 1976 to 1981 – no other league can boast such a feat. Your assumption of the Bundesliga being 5th-8th in the 70s “minus all the great internationals” (what a weird idea, btw) is very far-fetched, to put it mildly.
Sigh! Tell me, apart from your personal bias, what other factors led you to vote for a player with zero goals at the World Cup and only five in competitive matches at the highest level, when there are players with more than five times as many goals? Especially when one of those players has (not a complete list): Two World Cups Two Copa Americas One Confed Cup, Le Tournoi each Three FIFA World Player of the Year titles Two European Player of the Year titles Golden Boot and Golden Ball at the World Cup Several top player titles in Brazil, Italy, Spain, Intercontinental Cup, Libertadores Supercup, Sportsman of the Year titles (BBC, Reuters, Laureus Sports Awards etc.), Onze d'Or etc. In addition: A bunch of league and cup titles in Brazil, Holland and Spain UEFA Cup and European Cup Winners Cup Highest scorer status at two Copa Americas, Copa Libertadores, in Brazil, Holland and Spain Also, when his only failure at an international tournament was a runners-up place at the World Cup (yet, he was the best player of the tournament). Can you objectively dismiss Ronaldo's candidacy in favor of Van Basten? I didn't even need to enter into qualitative analysis to prove his superiority.
I never knew Van Basten only scored five goals in the champions league. I saw both Van Basten and Ronaldo play several games in the Dutch league, by the way (I got my first season ticket when I was nine) and my assessment is that Van Basten was the better player. I'm guessing that you've never seen either of the two play in the flesh. Plus Ronaldo today is a fat barsteward these days, in short, hardly consistent throughout his career. And his choice of terrible haircuts is second only to Rudi Völler.
Unlike you, I don't see Cryuff anywhere on the poll. This is not a personal favorite issue. It is supposed to be an objective assessment of the greatest striker ever. My personal favorite player of all time is Romario. So would I vote for him? On seeing so many votes for Van Basten, I sure could. But I didn't vote for him as I would not be able to make a case for him being the greatest striker ever as easily as I could for Ronaldo. Romario was unfortunate to be injured prior to WC 1990 and 1998. Otherwise, I am pretty sure he would be collecting top honors. Getting back to your question, can you disprove that Ronaldo at his peak played at a higher level than Cryuff and has had a far more successful career overall?
So, an 18 year old kid was not good enough for you? Hardly consistent???? Have you ever seen anyone more consistent? In the supposedly worst season of his life (2004-2005), he has scored 27 goals in all competitions (more if you add CL qualifiers and friendlies). If being fat is a deterrent, wouldn't you voice for Puskas' dismissal first? What does that have to do with the poll? Stop looking through the womanish eyes for a change.
here are some stats..... müller 365 leaque goals in 427 games (germany alone) (gpg 0.85) müller 66 eurocup goals in 74 games (pgp 0.89) müller 68 NT goals in 62 games (gpg 1.10) van basten 218 leaque goals in 280 games (gpg 0.78) van basten 29 eurocup goals in 43 games (gpg 0.67) van basten 24 NT goals in 58 games (gpg 0.42) ronaldo 205 leaque goals in 265 game (gpg 0.77) ronaldo 34 eurocup goals in 64 games (gpg 0.53) ronaldo 56 NT goals in 87 games (gpg 0.64) this confirm for me that gerd müller in international games was more successful to score goals than in the german leaque.. ronaldo and van basten was more successful in leaque games than in international games to score goals...... international games are generell more important ...... and in all 3 categorys, national and international müller was better than van basten and ronaldo..
Marco van Basten was most likely the most allround striker ever and did far more then score goals. Amazing how people can even think Ronaldo is or was a better player then van Basten. Most likely most people here haven't ever seen van Basten play to make such a statement.