115 replies to this topic

[John Defort]

Diego Armando Maradona says that Lionel Messi has done what he had done previously, that is to conquer European football.

The football legend was so pleased with the achievement Messi today. He also thinks he and the bomber was a source of pride Barcelona Argentina.

“The key is we both Argentina person who is able to conquer European football. I love Leo and every time I see him on the field, always interesting to watch,” said Maradona.

However, Maradona Messi reluctant to acknowledge that achievement has now exceeded its success in the past.

“Why Maradona or Messi? I and Messi are both dominating success in his career. Only at the end of history will see who is the best, Maradona or Messi,” he continued.

Source / Reference

[TinShedChap]

This is such a difficult question to answer. I'd have to go with Maradona at this moment in time though, as he obviously excelled over a longer period of time, whereas Messi is still only around halfway through his playing career.

Ask me again in ten years time and I might have a different answer.

[Radec]

I'm going to say in Europe at the moment I'll say Messi is better than Maradona and he still very young too... This is just in Europe tho...

He'll only surpass Maradona if he plays a major part for Argentina and possibly win the world cup...Carlos Tevez is a better player for Argentina than Messi is.. I could be very wrong tho

[Ebeneezer Goode]

It's hard to say as I've obviously seen much more of Messi than Maradona. I do believe I have seen them both at their best though, and for me Messi's best is better. I'd be very surprised if Messi didn't go down as the best player in history.

[Oli H.]

This should be split between club and country. If we're talking about UEFA competitions, Messi takes it hands down. If we talk about the World Cup, obviously Maradona takes it. Then again we can assume that Messi has so many world cups ahead of him, that this debate is far from decided.

[ZianfrancoGoal]

Messi is only a third or so through his professional career, and probably 4 or 5 years from his peak. You can't compare them yet.

[allouso]

I think that's his peak, but then again i say this every season

[Benito]

Maradona.

[ZianfrancoGoal]

Messi will be scoring 100 a season by 2015.

[FCP]

IMO Maradona is the greatest off all time, not only he carried Argentina to the world cup but also carried an average Napoles team to win the scudetto.

[JimJams]

Hard to say who is the better player, but I'd say that Maradona made the bigger difference to his teams. The Argentina teams that Messi plays in, are better than the ones Maradona did. And the Barca team Messi plays in is far superior to that of Napoli. Although in fairness Barca are pretty much winning everything they can. Simply put I think Maradona has made the teams he's played in overachieve. I'm not sure the same can be said of Messi. In terms of the international scene though, Maradona played in 2 world cups before they won anything. Messi has now featured in 2.

[allouso]

Did Maradonna play in 78?

Such a shame for Messi that this monkey was in charge in 2010, the Argies could've have gotten quite far under a decent manager.

[JimJams]

No, I've got that wrong. He played in 4, but I forgot he was in the '94 WC.

[leez]

messi .. watched them both . i like messi better

[mistermagic]

Neither. They both suck.

[Renegade]

On a purely technical level, Lionel Messi is the greatest player of all-time. If we take into account the evolution of the game (the game is more physical, it is played at a greater intensity, there is more science behind it, more money behind it, more pressure involved), then it is staggering how well well Messi has performed for the past four/five years. He has bettter close control than any player in the world, he's an incredibly intelligent footballer and he has the physical stature to remain dominant. Two Ballon d'Ors at the age of 23, soon to be three, I will be very surprised if Lionel Messi doesn't go down as the greatest player of all-time when he retires.

I don't believe that a player must win the World Cup to rival Maradona or Pele. Those were different eras of the game and as football continues to evolve, it becomes more competitive, the number of world class players rises, the physical level of the game isn't even comparable. Maradona was head and shoulders above the rest of the world, Messi is now. I find Messi's performance (and still only 23) more impressive, because the game is more competitive now and one player shouldn't be able to make such a difference with the training and science available to everyone. Maradona was a phenomenon and perhaps if he was of this generation and had the development that has been afforded to players like Messi, he would be as good, we will never know and never be able to truly compare them.

If Messi continues at this level for the next five years, where he will have been the best player in the world for almost an entire decade, he will deservedly go down as the best player of all time. It's not his fault he was so good, that he was snapped up by the best club side in world football and thus can't influence them as much as Maradona influenced Napoli. I think Messi will surpass Maradona because he is a consummate professional. He has more ability than anyone out there at the moment and he has the right attitude. He's at the best club in the world to fight for all major honours and has a realistic shot of winning the World Cup with an always strong Argentinian squad. Even if he doesn't, I don't think it should take away from his achievements.

If Messi was around in the 80s, who's to say he wouldn't have lead Argentina to World Cup victory? That argument is null and void in my view.

[Napolean]

You're the best poster on this forum by a country mile, Renegade.

[allouso]

Cracking post as ever, Gerard.

[Satch]

Ren: I don't know about Messi being the best technically, Maradona's all-round game is unmatched as his passing ability is often overlooked, similar to Ronaldinho. We'll probably further realise how good Messi is after he hangs up his boots but I'm still adamant that he's yet to surpass Maradona and even Ronaldo. Maybe I have an exaggerated view of Ronaldo's quality because his best years were during my youth and it's just the nostalgia making it seem that way, since I grew up watching and admiring him.

A charity friendly aside, I never got to see Diego live but after a period of watching countless Serie A classic matches on tape, it's difficult to deny that he's untouchable at the top. Milan-Napoli games stand out, it was the rivalry in the late-80s and he regularly took the piss out of what is often regarded as the greatest back four in the game, including Baresi. I'm not a fan of ranking players according to greatness in such a team-oriented sport; the "best" is very subjective and it would be increasingly difficult to make a conclusive decision when factoring in different eras of the game and the advancements in fitness and training technology, so it's always necessary to take into account the circumstances.

If we all agree that achievements on their own should never be a yardstick of a player's quality, what criteria do you use to measure who the greatest is, skill? In a sport with so many diverse positions, why aren't Beckenbauer, Baresi and Maldini mentioned with Maradona, Pelé et al? Were they not as influential to the success of their teams? The European Cup was restricted to league winners only in Maradona's time so how do you compare who's been more influential in Europe, then?

(predictable, shameless Serie A flattery ahead) I agree with Jimmers though, Maradona played in a much inferior team and carried (no overstatement) Napoli to two Scudetti and a UEFA Cup win, at a time when the competition was taken more seriously and Italian football was at a high, with some of the best and most cynical defenders around. Messi is a goalscorer, a forward whose primary goal is to score but Maradona was Napoli's leader, captain, midfielder and attacker - he did everything, and that's without mentioning that average Argentina side...

Even though it's for Barcelona, watching Messi is a delight and I'll be the first to hope that he continues for as long as possible, but I can never get my head around the "he hasn't reached his peak yet" argument. Players peak at different ages, the pace-merchants slow down earlier and I saw that first-hand with Kaká, who showed signs of decline after a few injuries at 27. Zidane is the best player I've seen in terms of consistency and he lasted that long because he never relied on pace that much; I don't know if Messi will keep playing at this level until 27, or at least in this position.

[Sidney]

IMO Maradona is the greatest off all time, not only he carried Argentina to the world cup but also carried an average Napoles team to win the scudetto.

Bang on, how many of the 86 wc team can you reel off the top of your head Maradonna, Valdano.................?

It's ridicuous comparing Messi to Maradonna yet.

[allouso]

Even though it's for Barcelona, watching Messi is a delight and I'll be the first to hope that he continues for as long as possible, but I can never get my head around the "he hasn't reached his peak yet" argument. Players peak at different ages, the pace-merchants slow down earlier and I saw that first-hand with Kaká, who showed signs of decline after a few injuries at 27. Zidane is the best player I've seen in terms of consistency and he lasted that long because he never relied on pace that much; I don't know if Messi will keep playing at this level until 27, or at least in this position.

Completely agreed.

Messi's primary strength is his ridiculous acceleration and the way he shifts from side to side so quickly, i just can't see how he can get any better at that. He's already starting to take over the creative role for his team, and can play anywhere along the front three or at the spearhead of midfield.

I don't think he'll better this season, it would defy logic in all honesty. I can't see him being any better than he is now in 2/3 years time.

[Renegade]

You're the best poster on this forum by a country mile, Renegade.

Aw shucks, always nice to be appreciated, but I'd give that accolade to this fella personally:

Ren: I don't know about Messi being the best technically, Maradona's all-round game is unmatched as his passing ability is often overlooked, similar to Ronaldinho. We'll probably further realise how good Messi is after he hangs up his boots but I'm still adamant that he's yet to surpass Maradona and even Ronaldo. Maybe I have an exaggerated view of Ronaldo's quality because his best years were during my youth and it's just the nostalgia making it seem that way, since I grew up watching and admiring him.

Messi may be the first player I've fully been able to appreciate from the start of his career. I'm 21 now and when Ronaldo was in his prime, I was only 8-10 years old. He was the best striker I have ever seen, but then again, I can never compare him to the likes of Pele, because I never got to watch him and I wasn't old enough to fully appreciate every aspect of Ronaldo's game. The same rings true for Diego Maradona. These arguments will always be tainted by our personal leanings, preferences and memories.

I started my argument with 'on a purely technical level', because the game has evolved. Just like any facet of evolution, football is the same. Players get better on average every year and generally, the best players in the world surpass the ones that preceded them in ability. Of course, you get the rare anomaly in Pele, Maradona and Messi, players that are so good that they will be compared to players fifty years down the line. That said, on a purely technical level, with 20 years of evolution between Maradona and Messi, the game being tougher, faster, more competitive, more professional, ever filling with more top-class players, I absolutely believe that he is technically the best we have seen so far.

Taking a completely abstract hypothesis -- if you took Diego Maradona at his peak and threw him in today's game, would he be as effective as Messi? Almost certainly not. Messi is better trained, faster, stronger and arguably matches Maradona in all ball skills. Take Messi and put him in the 1980s? He would rip the world apart, probably to even greater effect than he currently is. Of course, these are ridiculous scenarios that favour Messi, because of the time in which he lives, but the points are valid when speaking on a purely technical level. Messi is the peak of football so far, eventually he will be surpassed too, in technical terms.

Of course, that argument doesn't take into account environmental factors, which is why I was careful not to outright declare Messi as the greatest footballer of all-time. The players were faced with different challenges, they were given different training, they played in different countries with differing standards of leagues. I can only argue from a technical perspective, logically. In terms of influence, Maradona's is paralleled only by Cruyff in world football. Messi can't compete with players that have played their entire careers and shaped the game even afterwards, so many players trying to emulate these greats, including Messi.

The argument is ultimately futile, as Messi hasn't finished his career and people have different views on what makes a great player. Many people look to trophy cabinets, I don't. They are a flawed measure of a player. Thierry Henry or Ryan Giggs? The former won far less, but for me was the best player the Premier League has seen. Influence is also flawed, as environmental variables affect how much influence an individual can have on a side. Messi's influence is obvious, but surrounded by far greater talent and tougher competition, it's obviously not as evident as Maradona's. Does this make his input less valuable? I don't believe so. You can tear apart any argument, because there are innumerable factors in the equation.

I will judge them on performance throughout their careers, consistent world class performance. Being the best player in the world for a sustained period of time, no matter what the era. As I said, if Messi continues at this level for the next 5-10 years, I think he will go down as the greatest ever. Until that time, I can only argue that he is the best we have seen so far given the progress of the game. Does that make him the greatest ever? It depends on the individual's definition.

Patrice Evra is the greatest footballer of all-time anyway, these no marks are fighting for second position.

[Satch]

The way I see it, it's ultimately difficult to compare skill without taking into account the surrounding factors that influenced their game. Measuring who sits, and will continue to sit, at the top of the hill is almost impossible and it will become harder in ten, twenty, thirty years; is Messi, given today's game, better than Pelé was, considering the circumstances in the 1960s? See what I'm getting at?

I think the most reasonable way of judging is to establish which footballers were the best of their eras. Pelé and Maradona were untouchable in their time, Messi is untouchable in his. You had the likes of Di Stefano, Puskas, Cruyff, van Basten etc challenging the throne but by what distance were those two head and shoulders above the rest? If Messi continues at this rate for the next few years, it'd be ridiculous to suggest that anyone today could displace him as the best in the world, and on the basis of that, it's logical to claim that he's better than anyone in the game's history.

Anyway, Paolo Maldini is the greatest footballer of all-time.

[harry hotspur]

Messi may be the first player I've fully been able to appreciate from the start of his career. I'm 21 now and when Ronaldo was in his prime, I was only 8-10 years old. He was the best striker I have ever seen, but then again, I can never compare him to the likes of Pele, because I never got to watch him and I wasn't old enough to fully appreciate every aspect of Ronaldo's game. The same rings true for Diego Maradona. These arguments will always be tainted by our personal leanings, preferences and memories.

I started my argument with 'on a purely technical level', because the game has evolved. Just like any facet of evolution, football is the same. Players get better on average every year and generally, the best players in the world surpass the ones that preceded them in ability. Of course, you get the rare anomaly in Pele, Maradona and Messi, players that are so good that they will be compared to players fifty years down the line. That said, on a purely technical level, with 20 years of evolution between Maradona and Messi, the game being tougher, faster, more competitive, more professional, ever filling with more top-class players, I absolutely believe that he is technically the best we have seen so far.

Taking a completely abstract hypothesis -- if you took Diego Maradona at his peak and threw him in today's game, would he be as effective as Messi? Almost certainly not. Messi is better trained, faster, stronger and arguably matches Maradona in all ball skills. Take Messi and put him in the 1980s? He would rip the world apart, probably to even greater effect than he currently is. Of course, these are ridiculous scenarios that favour Messi, because of the time in which he lives, but the points are valid when speaking on a purely technical level. Messi is the peak of football so far, eventually he will be surpassed too, in technical terms.

Of course, that argument doesn't take into account environmental factors, which is why I was careful not to outright declare Messi as the greatest footballer of all-time. The players were faced with different challenges, they were given different training, they played in different countries with differing standards of leagues. I can only argue from a technical perspective, logically. In terms of influence, Maradona's is paralleled only by Cruyff in world football. Messi can't compete with players that have played their entire careers and shaped the game even afterwards, so many players trying to emulate these greats, including Messi.

The argument is ultimately futile, as Messi hasn't finished his career and people have different views on what makes a great player. Many people look to trophy cabinets, I don't. They are a flawed measure of a player. Thierry Henry or Ryan Giggs? The former won far less, but for me was the best player the Premier League has seen. Influence is also flawed, as environmental variables affect how much influence an individual can have on a side. Messi's influence is obvious, but surrounded by far greater talent and tougher competition, it's obviously not as evident as Maradona's. Does this make his input less valuable? I don't believe so. You can tear apart any argument, because there are innumerable factors in the equation.

I will judge them on performance throughout their careers, consistent world class performance. Being the best player in the world for a sustained period of time, no matter what the era. As I said, if Messi continues at this level for the next 5-10 years, I think he will go down as the greatest ever. Until that time, I can only argue that he is the best we have seen so far given the progress of the game. Does that make him the greatest ever? It depends on the individual's definition.

Patrice Evra is the greatest footballer of all-time anyway, these no marks are fighting for second position.

Maradona was far stronger physically than Messi. You also say the game is more physical nowadays. I disagree, the game, although more intense and tactical, is less physical now due to much stricter refereeing, which has helped players like Messi who might otherwise be knocked off the ball. It's also interesting to note that Messi has never scored a goal in England, which is the most physical league.

Also your argument about taking Messi back to the 80s. How would he fair in an average Napoli/Argentina team, in the era of the libero? Would he have to adapt his style? Could he lead Argentina to the world cup?

Messi is already a legend, but for the reasons stated above still has a lot to prove before he can even be considered the best/greatest ever.

[Renegade]

Maradona was far stronger physically than Messi. You also say the game is more physical nowadays. I disagree, the game, although more intense and tactical, is less physical now due to much stricter refereeing, which has helped players like Messi who might otherwise be knocked off the ball. It's also interesting to note that Messi has never scored a goal in England, which is the most physical league.

Also your argument about taking Messi back to the 80s. How would he fair in an average Napoli/Argentina team, in the era of the libero? Would he have to adapt his style? Could he lead Argentina to the world cup?

Messi is already a legend, but for the reasons stated above still has a lot to prove before he can even be considered the best/greatest ever.

Maradona was far stronger than Messi? Messi is a little tank. He is dealing with bigger,stronger, faster players than Maradona ever had to and he never gets pushed off the ball. I've seen him dominate people head and shoulders above him in the tackle. Maradona was not far stronger than Messi, not at all.

The game is far more physical than it was. Sure, refereeing is stricter so players don't get away with kicking eachother as much or roughing eachother up off-the-ball, but pretty much every other aspect of the game has evolved physically. Tackling isn't the only physical aspect of the game and even now players kick Messi to try and stop him. The game is played at greater pace, there is more emphasis on speed, fitness and strength in modern football. Players are bigger, stronger and fitter. In Maradona's era, his flair shone through especially, because the players he faced weren't drilled enough. They had no idea how to deal with his intelligence, his control, his pace, his fluidity. Now we have players like Michael Essien. Utter machines, developed to nullify such threats.

I already covered the 'could Messi do it in the 80's?' argument in my first post. That Messi statistic is complete irrelevant nonsense. He has never scored on English soil, because of how Barcelona play away from home. He has scored four goals against Arsenal in one leg and scored in the Champions League final against Manchester United's incredible defence in '09. And I agree with you, he needs to prove himself further to be considered the greatest ever, but from a purely technical point of view, I'd argue he already is.

[Satch]

Also your argument about taking Messi back to the 80s. How would he fair in an average Napoli/Argentina team, in the era of the libero? Would he have to adapt his style? Could he lead Argentina to the world cup?

Yeah, it's an illogical argument because what's to say that Messi is this good partly because of how the game has progressed? There's no genuine way of knowing, but we can conjure up theories that he would've found it more difficult because of the greater physicality (in terms of approach, rather than the players' body structure) and leniency of referees in previous decades.

Marco van Basten, for instance, played his last match at 28 because defenders would constantly kick the shit out of him; a player's career being brought to an end because of cynical, often unpunished, deliberate fouling is unimaginable in the modern game.

On the other hand, at a time where there was more emphasis on raw technique rather than athleticism, maybe a lot of defenders would've struggled with Messi's pace. But then again, to what extent do modern training methods and greater protection from referees allow players like Messi and Ronaldo to have pace as such an asset of their game? It's a never-ending debate.

[Son of Cod]

You're the best poster on this forum by a country mile, Renegade.

...and you're the best arselicker!

Good thread though, with some interesting points from all involved. One thing I would add that I don't think has been covered is that Maradonna had/has far more charisma on and off the pitch than Messi. That might not be a factor in deciding who is technically better, but it's a pretty huge one in deciding who people prefer.

Edited by Son of Cod, 04 May 2011 - 01:18 PM.
''

[CraigBFC]

IMO Maradona is the greatest off all time, not only he carried Argentina to the world cup but also carried an average Napoles team to win the scudetto.

A half truth really and an insult to some fantastic players. You disregard the likes of Ferrario, Bagni, Ferrara, Giordano, De Napoli, Carnevale and later Careca and Alemao. Would Napoli have won their Scudetto's without Maradona? no, would Maradona have won the Scudetto's without these players around him? also a no. Would you level the same insult at Messi's team-mates? Maradona may have been the talisman, but he was certainly not a one-man team.

I think Renegade answers best, two players from different eras of the game who came to prominence in different ways. Messi will rightly be regarded as the greatest player of all time when he hangs up his boots, but Maradona will be forever my favourite.

[Satch]

Maradona was far stronger than Messi? Messi is a little tank. He is dealing with bigger,stronger, faster players than Maradona ever had to and he never gets pushed off the ball. I've seen him dominate people head and shoulders above him in the tackle. Maradona was not far stronger than Messi, not at all.

Messi got pushed off the ball by Diarra a few times last night alone! But anyway, it's a pretty difficult comparison to make, Ren, strength isn't very easily measurable when you have two players with similar build. There's a difference in how they react to challenges as well: Messi often lures you into the tackle, nicks the ball at the last second and forces a foul, whereas Maradona generally preferred making a fool of the opponent by getting around him and dodging the tackle altogether.

As far as their playing styles go, to me they're actually very different and Messi is probably closer to Puskas, if anything. Aside from being Argies, left-footed, considered as the best of their eras, taken - albeit very different - drugs at some point and having scored with their hand, there aren't that many "on-the-ball" similarities. I see Maradona as a genius playmaker, excellent at set-pieces, a charismatic leader who was also capable of scoring; Messi is more of a superb forward with great passing ability.

[Satch]

A half truth really and an insult to some fantastic players. You disregard the likes of Ferrario, Bagni, Ferrara, Giordano, De Napoli, Carnevale and later Careca and Alemao. Would Napoli have won their Scudetto's without Maradona? no, would Maradona have won the Scudetto's without these players around him? also a no. Would you level the same insult at Messi's team-mates? Maradona may have been the talisman, but he was certainly not a one-man team.

Sure they might be insulted but Careca and Giordano aside, there were no exceptional players in that Napoli side and certainly, given the strength of the other Italian giants at the time (in particular Milan), they were quite ordinary in comparison. I suppose you could make a case for Ferrara, but he only really established himself as one of the best defenders in the league after the switch to Lippi's Juve. I don't think anyone will claim that he would've won all those titles on his own, but the team's dependence on Maradona greatly outweighed his dependence on them.

Part of the point is that Messi is surrounded by fantastic players - some of whom will establish themselves as one of the best in their positions when they hang up their boots (Xavi, Iniesta and perhaps Villa) - whereas Maradona was the star of that Napoli side, bar none.

[CraigBFC]

Sure they might be insulted but Careca and Giordano aside, there were no exceptional players in that Napoli side and certainly, given the strength of the other Italian giants at the time (in particular Milan), they were quite ordinary in comparison. I suppose you could make a case for Ferrara, but he only really established himself as one of the best defenders in the league after the switch to Lippi's Juve. I don't think anyone will claim that he would've won all those titles on his own, but the team's dependence on Maradona greatly outweighed his dependence on them.

Part of the point is that Messi is surrounded by fantastic players - some of whom will establish themselves as one of the best in their positions when they hang up their boots (Xavi, Iniesta and perhaps Villa) - whereas Maradona was the star of that Napoli side, bar none.

I will. He left a Napoli in decline for Juve in 1994 and in the preceding two seasons was largely overlooked by the Italy national team, not being helped by the likes of Baresi, Maldini and Costacurta being at more successful clubs. He was an ever present at the back in both Napoli's Scudetto seasons and turned out almost as many times in a Napoli shirt as he did in a Juve shirt and gained 25 of his 49 Italy caps while at the San Paolo. To say he only came to the fore after leaving Napoli is grossly unfair. Granted, he won a hell of a lot more silverware at Juve, yet I think none would have satisfied him more than his first Scudetto with his hometown club. It's also worth noting that only Juve (champs) conceded fewer goals than Napoli in the 1985-86 season and only Inter in the 86-87 season, only Milan (champs) and Inter in 87-88 and 88-89 (Inter champs) and in 89-90 only Milan and Sampdoria. Or shall we attribute the teams defensive prowess to the attacking players too?

Napoli circa 1984-1990 were not an ordinary/average team filled with ordinary/average players is my point and the common misconception that they were a team of average players propelled to greatness by one player, however unquestionably legendary that player was, very much annoys me. Although I may be a little biased on the subject. Napoli were one of the best 3-4 teams in arguably the best league in the world at that period in time, compounded by their UEFA cup victory back when it was a decent continental competition.

Edited by CraigBFC, 04 May 2011 - 03:05 PM.
''

[harry hotspur]

Maradona was far stronger than Messi? Messi is a little tank. He is dealing with bigger,stronger, faster players than Maradona ever had to and he never gets pushed off the ball. I've seen him dominate people head and shoulders above him in the tackle. Maradona was not far stronger than Messi, not at all.

The game is far more physical than it was. Sure, refereeing is stricter so players don't get away with kicking eachother as much or roughing eachother up off-the-ball, but pretty much every other aspect of the game has evolved physically. Tackling isn't the only physical aspect of the game and even now players kick Messi to try and stop him. The game is played at greater pace, there is more emphasis on speed, fitness and strength in modern football. Players are bigger, stronger and fitter. In Maradona's era, his flair shone through especially, because the players he faced weren't drilled enough. They had no idea how to deal with his intelligence, his control, his pace, his fluidity. Now we have players like Michael Essien. Utter machines, developed to nullify such threats.

I already covered the 'could Messi do it in the 80's?' argument in my first post. That Messi statistic is complete irrelevant nonsense. He has never scored on English soil, because of how Barcelona play away from home. He has scored four goals against Arsenal in one leg and scored in the Champions League final against Manchester United's incredible defence in '09. And I agree with you, he needs to prove himself further to be considered the greatest ever, but from a purely technical point of view, I'd argue he already is.

Football is close to becoming a non-contact sport. When that happens speed begins to dominate over strength. Players in the 80s regularly committed brutal tackles that put opponents in hospital and often curtailed careers (Maradona was a victim of one such challenge in Bilbao). Nowadays players are afraid to bring down an opposing attacker as it would bring a booking or red card. Messi can glide past players when they put their hands up in a "I didn't touch him" gesture to the ref.

Anyway this whole argument is dumb. If Maradona was playing now he would put more effort into physical training.

Technically, there are a whole host of players that are close to Messi. Ronaldinho, Hoddle, Bergkamp, Cruyff, Maradona, Zidane, Garrincha, and probably many more. To say he is technically the best is debatable to say the least. Is agility, speed, creativity, consistency part of technique? I don't think so.

Edited by harry hotspur, 27 October 2011 - 05:01 PM.
''

[CraigBFC]

If Maradona was playing now he would put more effort into physical training.

Yeah, because the man was well known for his commitment to that side of the game.

[Satch]

I will. He left a Napoli in decline for Juve in 1994 and in the preceding two seasons was largely overlooked by the Italy national team, not being helped by the likes of Baresi, Maldini and Costacurta being at more successful clubs. He was an ever present at the back in both Napoli's Scudetto seasons and turned out almost as many times in a Napoli shirt as he did in a Juve shirt and gained 25 of his 49 Italy caps while at the San Paolo. To say he only came to the fore after leaving Napoli is grossly unfair. Granted, he won a hell of a lot more silverware at Juve, yet I think none would have satisfied him more than his first Scudetto with his hometown club. It's also worth noting that only Juve (champs) conceded fewer goals than Napoli in the 1985-86 season and only Inter in the 86-87 season, only Milan (champs) and Inter in 87-88 and 88-89 (Inter champs) and in 89-90 only Milan and Sampdoria. Or shall we attribute the teams defensive prowess to the attacking players too?

Napoli circa 1984-1990 were not an ordinary/average team filled with ordinary/average players is my point and the common misconception that they were a team of average players propelled to greatness by one player, however unquestionably legendary that player was, very much annoys me. Although I may be a little biased on the subject. Napoli were one of the best 3-4 teams in arguably the best league in the world at that period in time, compounded by their UEFA cup victory back when it was a decent continental competition.

He wasn't overlooked in favour of Baresi, Billy, Bergomi, Vierchowod etc because they played for bigger clubs (Vierchowod played for Samp, but point stands) but rather, because they were much better defenders during that period. His transition into becoming one of the league's best centre-backs coincided with Baresi, Bergomi declining and nearing the end and the new crop of Nesta and Cannavaro coming through. I was careful not to imply that he only became a good defender at Juventus.

The likes of Renica and Corradini weren't excellent defenders individually though, it's similar to Barcelona today who don't have great defenders but still maintain a good "goals against" record. That Napoli side didn't play catenaccio football but having an efficiently organised defense will always be more effective than a disjointed one full of great individuals (à la Inter this season). Calling those players poor is a bit of a disservice, I agree, but "ordinary in comparison [to Gullit, Rijkaard, Baresi, Maldini, van Basten, Cabrini, Scirea, Laudrup, Platini, Bergomi, Zenga, Tardelli, Altobelli, Rummenigge etc etc]" is fair enough. Take one of them out and Inter, Juve or Milan wouldn't have been half the team, the same can't be said for Napoli and Maradona.

Anyway, harry hotspur makes a fair point which Baggio expounded upon today: "[on comparisons between him and Totti, or Diego Maradona and Leo Messi] We played in different eras. For Diego and for me there is the regret that we didn't play under the new rules, where tackles from behind are sanctioned. It would've been easier to play without that fear."

[CraigBFC]

Great post as always Satch, and naturally your knowledge of Serie A far outweighs my own. But you would join me in debunking the claims by previous posters that Maradona played in an average team and was the sole reason for Napoli's success in the 80's, as said posters have implied. Surely?

I think JimJams put it best by saying that teams Maradona played in maybe overachieved. However replace Maradona with another good player of the time and that Napoli team would still have consistenly performed in Serie A, top 4-5 team maybe. Far from average. Maybe the Scudetto would have eluded them, but they'd have been a competitive team none the less.

[Satch]

Great post as always Satch, and naturally your knowledge of Serie A far outweighs my own. But you would join me in debunking the claims by previous posters that Maradona played in an average team and was the sole reason for Napoli's success in the 80's, as said posters have implied. Surely?

I think JimJams put it best by saying that teams Maradona played in maybe overachieved. However replace Maradona with another good player of the time and that Napoli team would still have consistenly performed in Serie A, top 4-5 team maybe. Far from average. Maybe the Scudetto would have eluded them, but they'd have been a competitive team none the less.

Oh definitely, sometimes I get the feeling people are under the impression that it was the equivalent of taking 2010/11 Bari to the f**king Scudetto!

[JimJams]

Don't knock Bari.


Kellogg's in disguise!

[Satch]

Fans trying to get El Diego on 10 peso note



Argentina legend Diego Maradona incites a fanaticism in his followers that can best be described as unhealthy. The 1986 World Cup winner already has a religion - the Iglesia Maradoniana, or the Maradonian Church - devoted to him and now there is a campaign to get his face on the country's 10 peso note.

'Diego' has already entered Argentinian slang as another word for 10 pesos and more than 15,000 people have joined a Facebook group entitled 'let the Diego be Diego', which is campaigning for their idol to replace the face of Manuel Belgrano on the note.

While Belgrano may have lead Argentina's fight for independence and created the country's flag, he didn't humiliate the English with the "Hand of God" and then score one of the best goals in World Cup history en-route to almost single-handedly winning the tournament for a football-mad country.

El Diego's campaigners have even created a mock-up of what the 10 peso note would look like, with an iconic image from the 1986 World Cup triumph. Maradona has yet to comment on the situation but it could be a real boost in his efforts to pay off the massive Italian tax bill that hangs over him.

[CraigBFC]

Maradona >> Belgrano

[Immaculate_Gangsta]

IMO Maradona is the greatest off all time, not only he carried Argentina to the world cup but also carried an average Napoles team to win the scudetto.

See this is what annoys me, that Napoli time where nowhere near average its an complete myth had many quality players along with Maradona.

I advise anyone to go through thier team and come back and tell me they were still average, if you still think they were average then i dont know what to say.

Maradona is still better though.

Edited by Immaculate_Gangsta, 10 May 2011 - 05:42 PM.
''