I think you misunderstood my post. I have seen the films that many have seen from previous World Cups, documentaries, etc. Also, I say him play in person several times with the New York Cosmos (including a NASL Championship game against the Tampa Bay Rowdies). In my opinion, he was the best that has played the game for many of the reasons you and others have stated in this thread. As I stated before, his impact on the sport has been far greater than any player that has played to this moment or probably in the future.
Ok, since you guys seems not to like how Gregoriak has put his side of the debate over - I'll step up. I am saying he is over hyped. Everything that is being listed - his goals, the number of them, the teams they were for, the number games etc etc. - all fact, undeniable. I am not saying he wasn't the greatest (just to repeat myself), because he was. He did all that you guys list, and yes he made some great games, and yes, and yes, and yes... What I am simply (and it is simple) saying, is that the sheer Godlike status he's achieved, is rather unwarranted. I too feel like I'm being ignored on this subject, but that was always to be expected. My basis, is not from 'watching a handful of clips' or from 'one tournament'. This could go round and round endlessly. But at the end of the day, both sides are essentially arguing the same point. That Pele was the best - it's merely the issue of Pele the 'deity' that differs. He was an incredibly good footballer. Better than anyone else - there's no reason to pour the syrup over him.
Appreciate the fair points and an actual argument based on logic - that's all we were asking for and never got from Gregoriak.
Pelé is so complete and multi-faceted that he's also a successful businessmen and a good movie actor! I saw one of the brazilian movies he's done with a famous group of local comedians of the 80s, and he was not bad at all! (Os Trapalhões e o Rei do Futebol)
Pele is officially credited with 77 goals in 91 internationals. This includes international frendlies which are classed as first class games. The other goals came in representative fixtures against non-international teams.
Now you've gone too far!!! Well, I think most people here have seen him in Victory, even I didn't see any of his Trapalhões movies. In fact, I'm proud to say I've only seen one or two Trapalhões movies. Well... that's sad enough already.
No Maczebus, I was not ignoring you, but what can I say about what you feel? The thread, as pointed by other contributors, lists actual accomplishments, eye witness accounts, and celebrates the magic he brought to the game. The initial question was why is he heralded? If all this sounds too good to be true to you, so be it. But, a similar thread on Maradona’s life, or any other great, would sound as ‘syrupy’ to those who are avowed non-fans. Personally, I like the thread because it highlights things that people tend to forget. It can be a great reference tool to send people with whom I talk football.
Gregoriak and Skip, this topic has come up before. Here's an some additional context: Maradona’s career games (based on comme's link) – 829 games Beckenbauer - 659 (based on http://www.soccer-europe.com/Profiles/Beckenbauer.html + http://www.sover.net/~spectrum/nasl/naslstar3.html ) - its probably understated by 100 games (appreciate any more definitive answer) Now, would anyone argue that either one of those players was in their prime on their last game? Was Diego the best Diego on game 824? Was Beckenbauer on game 645, or so, making history at Hamburg? Pele played a total of 105 games after retiring from Brasilian football (http://www.sover.net/~spectrum/nasl/naslstar3.html ). Thus 1219 games pre-Cosmos, from Sept 7, 1956 to until October 2, 1974 ( http://www.lbm.com.br/user/r-alvinegra/pele.html ) That is an average of 68 games per year! When you add that to the fact that substitutions of any kind were not allowed until 1965 or so, and only allowed in WC in 1970, he played 10 years of full 90s. The fact that Santos played international tournaments - such as Tournoi de Paris, Gialloroso, Valencia, Tereza Herrera and such, to fill coffers in part to pay him and keep him from demanding to leave - against such substandard teams as Benfica, Inter Milan, et al. , in the midst of the Brasilian league, is also noteworthy. International flights at a time when air travel was not as smooth as today. Even travel within Brasil was not what it is today. O Rei had played somewhere in the neighbourhood of 900 games by WC 1970! Its easy to compute in Excel, just put in the dates and following formula to get elapsed months =(YEAR(A1)-YEAR(A2))*12+MONTH(A1)-MONTH(A2) Simple division and multiplication gets you to: 926 games by 6/3/70, Brasil's first game of WC’70! [For the cynics, go ahead and discount this number by 20% and you still get 741 games]. Perspective. By 1970 he had played roughly Maradona, and Beck’s entire careers. Why is it hard to understand the argument that he was not in his prime physically at 29? The mileage on his body from the sequence of games, compounded with the travel, marking and fouls suffered, lack of substitutions for half of his career, and less sophisticated nutritional and physical therapy all had to have impact. Focusing on date of birth is erroneous. The fact that he had such an outstanding WC’70 – you’ll never hear me call it disappointing – but on the other side of his prime is another indication of the man’s greatness (football intelligence wise he probably was at his peak). The fact that he won SA football player of the year in ’73 is further testament to how high he reached at his apex.
lol the response to this one should be interesting... It's either gonna be: A) ignored for the most part B) Argued against with nonsensical logic Or.. C) turn into the best debate this board has ever seen *returns to the shadows awaiting the outcome*
PRECISELY! That's exactly the reason why this debate could go on and on. Both sides have seen what he's done, both sides have all his many statistics to hand - the differing point is the only subjective one. I feel he doesn't deserve the Everest size crown he's meant to wear as King of all footballers, and no-one even comes close etc etc. You (and others) do. I think we've reached an impasse. And for the LAST time. I am NOT an unbeliever!! Is this not getting through to some? Yes all the facts and figure are there - I can't and don't argue with them. He was truly great - but as great as his almost Godlike aura would suggest? IMO no. I'm asking for people to put the brakes on a little. He's human, he was a human footballer - when people concentrate on his numerous positive points for years on end, it's only natural that people almost believe that he only had wonderful games and the bad parts get forgotten. Like I said, I've seen games where he really did fail to shine - I've seen him shoot and and miss so badly that it either went for a throw in, or burnt up on re-entry. I think it's wise to put a little perspective on proceedings. I've said my all on this topic, at least twice now, so I'm finished.
I think its the fact that you aren't an unbeliever that frustrates people. People want to convert a "heathen" and prove to them that Pele was the greatest. People want someone to say "well Maradona was better" so they can show how he wasn't.
At this point we are probably talking past each other. None of my posts have claimed superiority over any other player. You've internalized the praise on the thread in a manner that makes you uncomfortable. That's what I mean about "what can I say about what you feel?". I hear you Mac, but what can I do about you feeling uncomfortable with the facts I presented? Never claimed him to be god-like, nor have I tried to convert anyone (as comme alludes). That's pointless, especially around here. So there's no frustration at all around people's feelings and choices; but definite issues with bending and ignorance of facts, and unsupported assertions about a well documented career. Yes, he's human. We agree on this. Cheers.
Yes we are talking past each other. It seems. Are you doing this to me on purpose? 1)I'm not talking specifically about his thread. I am in my 3rd decade on this planet, and during the course of those years, I have seen him play (not live), I have games on tape, I have read magazine articles after magazine articles - and LASTLY (due to being most recently) there are the thoughts on this thread. SO, given that, I am NOT "internalising" anything from this thread. I have an eclectic knowledge which means I get information from further afield than here. 2) WHERE oh WHERE can you point out to me that I said or even insinuated that I was uncomfortable. I'll help you out - NEVER! In fact I have been saying AD INFINITUM that the facts given by everyone (yes including you) are UNDENIABLE - that's why I am not denying them. They are fact, I know most of them anyway - those that are new to me just illustrates mine and others opinions further. That he was wonderful. Once again - I have nothing wrong with your damn facts. All that you are doing and have been doing from the start of this, is posting FACTS and FIGURES. You say they make him worthy of his lofty position - I say they make him worthy of a less lofty position. You only agree with me on the fact that he's human? So you don't agree that he's had more than his fair share of naff games? Or anything else I posted? If that's the case then that's my point. Perspective people. And now I can see why RichardL doesn't see eye to eye with you on occasion. This time I mean it, last post on the subject. Unless faced with total and utter mis-reading or mis-interpretation of something I took the time and effort to keep on a simple level.
Isn't agreeing with you on his humaness also agreeing on the fact that he made mistakes? I'm surprised that a post that was meant to be conciliatory has you so inflamed. You must have read some sarcasm in my post that wasn't intended. As for disagreeing with The L, what does it have to do with this? Is Richard the benchmark on these boards? Yes, we frequently disagree, but engaging Richard is refreshing because it NEVER becomes personal (in fact our last encounter got me to call up the English PFA and I'll be sharing some interesting stats they provided me). Unfortunately it seems to have become personal here.
Sorry if people don't interpret it like this. It was not directed at tpmazembe, simple a reflection of some parts of the thread. At some point once stats have ben exchanged, it comes to the point of "I disagree with your opinion", nothing more is left to be said.
I did - and that comes from being British. I've met this problem a few times on these boards - I really should have the sarcasm chip removed before turning on the PC. It's more harm than good round here. No, but by and large we are on the same wave-length. Like I said, I can understand his postioning vis a vis, you. As for getting personal - no it's not, I can get worse, you just have to be Turkish and I just have to be drunk. Besides, I'm not going to get all personal over a player I don't rate all that highly
I was fortunate enough to see Pele play in person, and while I won't get into the Maradona/Pele debate, I think that comparing Ronaldo to the great one doesn't stand the laugh test. Pele was a playmaker, a scorer, a leader, and had alot of class. I love to watch Renaldo, but he looks like a cardboard cutout next to Pele in action.
No you didn't. 1975 NASL Final--Tampa Bay v. Portland 1976 Final--Toronto v. Minnesota 1977 Final--Cosmos v. Seattle You are probably remembering an early-round playoff game in 1976 between the two, usually referred to as the de facto title match. (Incredibly poor scheduling had the best two teams in the league meet in the first round of the playoffs). Pele was the greatest. Just like Gretzky was the greatest. I saw a lot of Gretzky games where he did nothing but hover at the blue line, and contributing nothing. But he was still the greatest. The fact that Pele had flat matches, or may have scored many of his 1000 goals in exhibitions does not detract from his greatness. He had the je ne sais quoi that identifies the truly great.
Your correct. Actually, it was probably just a regular season match(s) with the Quakes vs Cosmos. I was thinking of was the final in 1975 in San Jose, CA with Tampa Bay Rowdies and Portland Timbers. Ok, so my memory is a little shot after 28 years and watching a ton of games...
Simply, the greatest! One of the things that made Pele so loved and respected was that he has a VERY likable personality. He seemed unflappable, even when faced with scandalous situations. When he was at the 1994 World Cup qualifying draw in 1991, he was onstage with Abedi Pele from Ghana and told the official who was onstage with them "I want to tell you that he is not my son". This was when he was at the center of a paternity scandal which alleged him to be the father of a then 27-year old woman in Brazil. Indeed, his appeal was one that transcended sport. Exceptional athletes are generally known by non-sports fans and fans outside of their sphere of influence (e.g. Michael Jordan is known outside the U.S., even though some countries might not be basketball-crazy). But Pele, like Muhammad Ali, is special wen it comes to such high-quality athletes. Ali had principles and stuck by them. And of course, the world couldn't help but to notice all of his clowning around, brashness, and braggadocio. So he was more than an exceptional athlete. Pele wasn't as political, philosophical, or the activist that Ali was. And he was more humble. Still, his effect on mankind was more than worthwhile. He did stop a war in Biafra. The two men seemed to have different purposes in life, but I won't expound on that here. There are those who compare, as I am sure you know, Maradona with Pele; not just as soccer players, but as human beings. Maradona's actions and words, unlike Pele's, have not endeared him to the public. But Kasey Keller once hung out with Maradona during the 1995 Copa America and was quoted in a British soccer magazine (I think it was "Four-Four-Two") as saying that Maradona was a nice guy and would do anything for you, but he could not handle the fame that came with being an exceptional soccer player. As far as the soccer playing abilities, Giorgio Chinaglia said in an interview he gave to a paper I write for that Pele was a more complete player than Maradona. I had many sporting heroes growing up. My favorites from amongst all of them were Tom Seaver and Pele. Of course, I admired both for being great athletes. But I was a Seaver fan because he was clean cut and a good role model for kids my age (I was in elementary school when he was doing his first tour of duty with the Mets). The fact that he played for the Mets also helped since I am a life-long New Yorker! As for Pele, it ran even deeper because my mother is from Brazil and I have family there. Just for the record, my dad came from Greece and I was born and raised here in the U.S.A. Pele has exceptional human qualities. I did see him play in person many times for the Cosmos. In fact, I was in Brazil when he played his last game for the Brazilian national team in 1971. A friend of my family's had tickets to that game (vs. the former Yugoslavia) and wanted to take me and my brother to the Maracana Stadium to see it. My mother, however, vetoed the idea because she was afraid emotions would run high and that we would get hurt (I was only 8 at the time and my brother 11). 'Twas a shame we did not bear witness to true sporting history as he ran around the field at halftime after playing the first 45 minutes and then being given a crown and scepter while the fans all yelled "FICA! FICA!" ("STAY! STAY!"). All over Rio de Janeiro, there were car window stickers and a song which proclaimed "Obrigado Pele!". And it is to Mr. Edson Arantes do Nascimento that I echo these sentiments for doing his part in making me a big soccer fan, for entertaining the world with his great soccer-playing ability, and for being a good human being. OBRIGADO PELE!!!
Pele vs. Maradona Many people (mostly outside of Argentina!) say that Pele was the greatest ever and Maradona was number 2. I myself don't dispute that Pele was indeed the best ever. And yes, I admit to being biased because I am half-Brazilian! . But would anyone necessarily put Maradona in the #2 "Best Ever" spot? I don't doubt that Maradona was exceptional and was clearly the force behind the success of the teams he was on. But does anyone think that perhaps Cryuff or Eusebio was #2 ahead of Maradona? If so, why? Let me hear from ya! Write away!
Re: Pele vs. Maradona If Zico had won an World Cup (which could have happened in 82) he would definately be considered the #2 in the world. Zico scored even greater goals than the one Maradona scored against England, i.e. in a frendly against Yugoslavia in 87.
Re: Pele vs. Maradona Top 3 - Maradona, Pele, Puskas Next tier - Beckenbauer, Best, Bozsik, Cruyff, Di Stefano, Garrincha.
QUOTE]Originally posted by Gregoriak I have never seen a better player than Maradona at his peak in 1986. And I`m not an Argie. [/QUOTE] This thread was never meant to be a comparison forum - becos it generates arguments like the above - which wouldn't stand up in court.
One interesting note is that the FMF is very careful and tries to avoid as much as possible for the Mexican team to play against Brazil in Guadalajara because the fans may turn against their own team and root for Brazil. As many of you know, Guadalajara is where Pele and his team played the first round of elimination in 70. When Brazil comes to town they would rather have them play in Mexico city or anywhere else but Guadalajara. After world cup 70 Guadalajara became the home away from home for the Brazilian team in Mexico.