ClassRep001:
You can't even compare Buhari with a dead dog honestly.

That man is utterly useless

Wot has dis statement got to do wt d topic?

Oegbeyem1:


Give me a break abeg. Clip na clip, I don't need high definition or 1000 angles to see Maradona's skill and ball control. Watching those Pele's matches fit reduce person football I.Q. Maradona in one of his interviews yabbed Pele too. He said his mother told him that defenders were like sticks that didn't move during Pele's time.

You are entitled to your own opinion
It is not mathematics but entertainment.
You d not like it is fine but talk about reducing IQ is exaggerated, take it easy.
Other people see the same clips and form different opinions
Defenders at World cup were like sticks that is childish talk which shows your age

gurunlocker:


You know what's paining Pele? It's simply because Messi will soon break his record for goal for a single club very soon.

Messi also won something for Argentina (U World Cup and Olympic), if he has support from his mate and they don't leave him to do most work, he would have also won something with Argentina. You think it's a joke to Play in 4 finals? 3 consecutively?

Please don't mention Ronaldo, he didn't do shitt at Euro and remember they were even lucky to get there. Aside Euro, which other thing has he won with his country also?

Nobody is arguing that Pele didn't win 3 WC! But saying stuffs like this makes no sense.

Knee Down And Lemme Pray For You,you Need Hypo To Wash Your Brain, Every Fulfilled Players Brags About Winning World Cup And Receiving The Honor Of World Cup Highest Goal Scorer.Messi Doesn't Have A World Cup Record.Legends Are Not Argued,they Are Always Absolute

Watch Ferguson's comments on Messi


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk9YiIGs-wk

Obi1kenobi:


1) Fergie didn't say Pele is the greatest. He's said he can't separate Pele and Maradona but I know no quotes where he definitively said Pele is the greatest,

2) There weren't any more "greats" in Pele's era than there are now. It was just a more romanticized era where the game was becoming more professionalized and stars were becoming globally renowned and those pioneers of the era of global fame transcended the game somewhat. I wouldn't say there is anything that makes Jairzinho or Garincha greater players than a Ronaldinho or a Ronaldo (Brazil's Ronaldo) for example by any measure. Even Neymar alone would probably eclipse them. The funny thing about the modern game is that the media saturation and overexposure has taken a little romance out of the game, where you watch matches every other day, and every goal is hyper-analyzed with HD, slow-mo, multi-angle shots to show you every error made by a conceding team and tell you how crap players are.

3) Rules about the backpass or tackling or whatever didn't exactly hamper strikers and forwards of the 50's/60's. It was a higher scoring era of football where a team like Tottenham for example won the 60/61 League and Cup double in England while hammering teams 10-4 and 13-2. The game tactically evolved as the rules and conditions evolved. So it isn't any easier for Messi to score 50 goals now than it would have been in the 1960's. I'd argue the opposite. Any clips of that era reveals a fundamental lack of athleticism and lower intensity of play compared to the modern game. When Maradona coached Argentina to their World Cup disaster in 2010, he commented on how overwhelmed he was by the intensity and tactical demands of the modern game.

4) It's simplistic to measure players by the World Cup and claim it is the pinnacle of football. For one, Pele played for a Brazil side that would have been about the same as Messi playing for Spain between 2008 and now. And Spain were basically Barcelona without Messi. I can understand using the World Cup to compare Messi and Maradona, but not Messi and Pele. Secondly, its false that the World Cup is the pinnacle of football - at least in terms of the level of football on display. There was a time national teams were stronger than club sides. That's no more the case.

Simplicity is not a vice.There is plenty to be said for simplicity.
Pele won the World Cup 3 times. The only man in history to do so. He played for several Brazil sides over 12 years, not one side.

The stated objective of those rules by FIFA was to increase scoring. Maybe they don't know what they're talking about.
You just argue blindly.
The very first game when back pass rule was introduced was the game between Italy and the USA.
1992 go and look at it
It puts more pressure on goalkeepers if they cannot pick a back pass. We have seen indirect free kicks in the penalty box,red cards to keepers etc as a result so you must be living in a bubble. Lack of athleticism? What a bizarre joke. Messi more athletic?
A guy who cannot even head the ball? Go and look at Pele's headed goal against Italy.


How do we measure romanticism? Is football aeronautics or engineering. It comes down to people and their preferences . All those people you mentioned in the modern era are greats just like
Garincha Cruyff,Beckenbauer Best were greats of Pete's time. Where he stands out is he was acknowledged as the greatest of his time. No rival.

That you don't know a thing is neither here nor there.
What you know is negligible compared to what you don't. Fergie acknowledged Pele as the greatest

Funny how according to stats. Mbappe can be compared to Pele having broken certain records Pele set during his age...and yet we all know messi is still better than mbappe...

Oegbeyem1:
maradona single-handedly scored Argentinas three goals in the final of 1986 too abi. Yeye dey smell. These retards should know it takes a team to win a trophy. No matter how good you are, if you play with 10 teammates who act idiotic on the pitch, you won't reach anywhere. Higuain wey dem dash one on one three times wey play everything go throw-in nkor. Abegii, you dey talk like sey you nor dey watch ball. Whether na livescores you dey read

And Those Idiots Are Not Proffessionals,if Pele Could Single Handedly Win A World Cup Final With An Hattrick At 17years With Injury,messi Got No Excuse,don't Ever Say Rubbish Again,is That Clear

Foodforthought:

You can't compare Messi to Pele oga...look at it any how you want. Abeg dem no be mate....probably you've never watched Pele before. Forget all these Cr7 and Messi fanboys.... watch Puskas and eusebio...even George Best....Today's players dey learn. Messi is one of the greatest of all time no doubt but not on Pele's level abeg EOD

Point Of Correction,barcelona Greatest Of All Time, Messi Would Have Died With His Talent In 60's And 70's

Obi1kenobi:


How many of those strikers would you play in the same team? How many of them played against Nigeria? And Mascherano has been rubbish for years. Ronaldo didn't do anything spectacular at the Euros. Portugal were a solid, organized resilient team that won the same way Greece won in 2004. He missed most of the final and Portugal still beat France who were hosts, in form, and overwhelming favorites. I Argentina had half the luck Portugal had in that match, they would have won the World Cup in 2014?

If Messi Was A Legend As Claimed,he Would Save His Team And Not Giving Some Excuses,better Team Always Win.

Legends carry teams to undeserved heights.
Ask Roger Milla, ask Maradona

distinctguy:


Maradona was great, but drugs made him a cheat!

Although he was excellent in the world cup, He NEVER single handedly won the world cup, infact he couldn't do much in the final and another teammate scored the winning goal.

Even Pele, go check his records, he was only the best world cup competition player once. The other 2 times he won the world cup there are BETTER players in the Brazilian squad than Pele

Pele Scored 3 Goals In His First Final World Cup At Age 17, Messi Could Have Tried That Too,stop The Blaming On His Team mates,Call And Talk To Messi As His Advocate To Win World Cup Highest Goal Scorer To Prove All The Comparison Atleast That Will Convince Me

SkinnyNigga:
kids everywhere.... SMH!!

E pain am!

You are the kid! Go check stats!

Champions league should be renamed CR7 league.....Period!

0monnak0da:


Simplicity is not a vice.There is plenty to be said for simplicity.
Pele won the World Cup 3 times. The only man in history to do so. He played for several Brazil sides over 12 years, not one side.

The stated objective of those rules by FIFA was to increase scoring. Maybe they don't know what they're talking about.
You just argue blindly.
The very first game when back pass rule was introduced was the game between Italy and the USA.
1992 go and look at it
It puts more pressure on goalkeepers if they cannot pick a back pass. We have seen indirect free kicks in the penalty box,red cards to keepers etc as a result so you must be living in a bubble. Lack of athleticism? What a bizarre joke. Messi more athletic?
A guy who cannot even head the ball? Go and look at Pele's headed goal against Italy.


How do we measure romanticism? Is football aeronautics or engineering. It comes down to people and their preferences . All those people you mentioned in the modern era are greats just like
Garincha Cruyff,Beckenbauer Best were greats of Pete's time. Where he stands out is he was acknowledged as the greatest of his time. No rival.

I don't think you understood my point. If let's say the English First Division in 1961 recorded more goals per game than the English Premier League in 2018 (and statistically, the 50's and 60's were a very high scoring era in English, European, Brazilian football or wherever), then its rather pointless talking about evolutions in the game. If less flexible interpretations of the offside rule, greater tolerance for hard tackling, the backpass rule, less comfortable equipment and apparel etc made life uncomfortable for strikers in that era and they were STILL plundering more goals than teams of the modern era, then there would also have to be evolutions in the game limiting scoring in the modern game: like tactical improvements and greater preparation, better conditioning and fitness, greater financial incentives for a far bigger professional circuit making livings from football etc. Unless you somehow think football is the only sport in the world where its athletes are worse than they were half a century ago.

And yes, the rules brought in the 90's was to try to stimulate scoring because the game had evolved to be more defensive. This affected a player like Maradonna who played in the 80's, not Pele. This is why I can't compare Maradona and Messi's stats for example. Serie A football through the 80's and 90's was highly conservative and defensive and this seeped over into international football too.
I'm talking about the general athleticism of the average footballer in the 50's or 60's compared with the modern athletes. Who was specifying Messi? Watch some old videos of George Best waltzing past British semi-pros and it was embarrassing. Spaghetti-legged, pot-bellied, slow-as-Bleep, clumsy excuses for athletes who smoked and drank loads. It was clear their physical conditioning is nothing like what it is today.

Pele being widely acknowledged as the greatest of his time wouldn't be relevant in a comparison with Messi. Messi had Ronaldo as rival. Pele had no rival in Ronaldo's class that defined his era. He never even appeared on the same pitch with many greats of that era, nevermind competing with them in any meaningful way.

That you don't know a thing is neither here nor there.
What you know is negligible compared to what you don't. Fergie acknowledged Pele as the greatest

I Googled and didn't see where Fergie said that. Do you have any link to it?

0monnak0da:
Legends carry teams to undeserved heights.
Ask Roger Milla, ask Maradona

Why not name Pele? Because you know he didn't really carry the Brazilian team? Maradona's achievement was certainly unique, but Argentina had the best defense in '86 World Cup and his strike partner, Valdano, was a Real Madrid player. If you have a solid unit, the more creative talents can make the difference. I'd compare it to the Leicester team that won the league with a solid, resolute shape that allowed Mahrez and Vardy to make the difference upfront. Yet, you can't even call Mahrez or Vardy great players.
If the Danish team that won the Euros in '96 or the Greek team in 2004 had a player like Maradona or Messi, people would be claiming that standout player won it "single-handed". In reality, if your team has a glaring imbalance anywhere, no player can make a difference. Messi in my opinion has struggled for Argentina cause the team's management has been dysfunctional and in turmoil throughout his career and they never really became a team. This is a team that appointed Maradona as their coach in 2010. That's like England appointing Paul Gascoigne. You would note players like Aguero and Higuain have often been useless for Argentina too. Messi and Di Maria have been about the only 2 players who have done well for them over their careers.

Obi1kenobi:


How many of those strikers would you play in the same team? How many of them played against Nigeria? And Mascherano has been rubbish for years. Ronaldo didn't do anything spectacular at the Euros. Portugal were a solid, organized resilient team that won the same way Greece won in 2004. He missed most of the final and Portugal still beat France who were hosts, in form, and overwhelming favorites. I Argentina had half the luck Portugal had in that match, they would have won the World Cup in 2014?

Ronaldo scored 3 goals and had 3 assists at the Euros oga.....

Obi1kenobi:


Why not name Pele? Because you know he didn't really carry the Brazilian team? Maradona's achievement was certainly unique, but Argentina had the best defense in '86 World Cup and his strike partner, Valdano, was a Real Madrid player. If you have a solid unit, the more creative talents can make the difference. I'd compare it to the Leicester team that won the league with a solid, resolute shape that allowed Mahrez and Vardy to make the difference upfront. Yet, you can't even call Mahrez or Vardy great players.
If the Danish team that won the Euros in '96 or the Greek team in 2004 had a player like Maradona or Messi, people would be claiming that standout player won it "single-handed". In reality, if your team has a glaring imbalance anywhere, no player can make a difference. Messi in my opinion has struggled for Argentina cause the team's management has been dysfunctional and in turmoil throughout his career and they never really became a team. This is a team that appointed Maradona as their coach in 2010. That's like England appointing Paul Gascoigne. You would note players like Aguero and Higuain have often been useless for Argentina too. Messi and Di Maria have been about the only 2 players who have done well for them over their careers.

3 finals, and Messi couldn't win one... And you still have mouth to talk??

petux:
Pele on some cheap drugs.Messi left leg is better than you entire career..

this one na pure barca fan

tony5:
And Those Idiots Are Not Proffessionals,if Pele Could Single Handedly Win A World Cup Final With An Hattrick At 17years With Injury,messi Got No Excuse,don't Ever Say Rubbish Again,is That Clear

Pele single-handedly win the world cup. He scored 2 dumb goals in the final not three. You are saying rubbish my friend. Just like saying mbappe single-handedly win the world cup. I've seen all his clips, the guy was shut compared to today's players. At least Mabappe played in the 21st century and won the world cup as a 19-year old, still doesn't make him the best player around. One mumu old that played football 100 years ago is calling himself the greatest, Harry Kane sef beta pass am by far lool

0monnak0da:
You are entitled to your own opinion
It is not mathematics but entertainment.
You d not like it is fine but talk about reducing IQ is exaggerated, take it easy.
Other people see the same clips and form different opinions
Defenders at World cup were like sticks that is childish talk which shows your age

why are you calling me childish what is my own, Maradona was the one that said it not me. Lol. 1960s football, greatest of all time, indeed, Pele na clown.

STILESGANG:
Mayweather ke!. Who considers a him a great boxer. Rich? Yes. Great boxer?far from it

Mayweather is a reference. Hardly is there a discussion about boxing great without his name coming up. Tyson fury performance against Wilder had some pundits asking in he is the new Mayweather. Mayweather is the best of this generation.

KendrickAyomide:
Doctors Said Pele Has brain problems so i see why he is talking trash . this old fool scored 700 of his goals through friendlies and street competitions

hahaha, that's actually true, he never played in Europe, imagine Messi in Brazil league, he would definitely score a thousand goals

Oegbeyem1:
why are you calling me childish what is my own, Maradona was the one that said it not me. Lol. 1960s football, greatest of all time, indeed, Pele na clown.

Did I sell you childish?
Comprehension problems?

Obi1kenobi:


Why not name Pele? Because you know he didn't really carry the Brazilian team? Maradona's achievement was certainly unique, but Argentina had the best defense in '86 World Cup and his strike partner, Valdano, was a Real Madrid player. If you have a solid unit, the more creative talents can make the difference. I'd compare it to the Leicester team that won the league with a solid, resolute shape that allowed Mahrez and Vardy to make the difference upfront. Yet, you can't even call Mahrez or Vardy great players.
If the Danish team that won the Euros in '96 or the Greek team in 2004 had a player like Maradona or Messi, people would be claiming that standout player won it "single-handed". In reality, if your team has a glaring imbalance anywhere, no player can make a difference. Messi in my opinion has struggled for Argentina cause the team's management has been dysfunctional and in turmoil throughout his career and they never really became a team. This is a team that appointed Maradona as their coach in 2010. That's like England appointing Paul Gascoigne. You would note players like Aguero and Higuain have often been useless for Argentina too. Messi and Di Maria have been about the only 2 players who have done well for them over their careers.

It is only a weak team that needs " carrying " Brazil was a strong team full of greats and it was not one team but several teams over 12 years that won the World Cup 3 times and he wads part of them all.
Messi reached a World Cup final that is not dysfunctional management. He just did not have leadership to take the team over the final line.
He is a great player but Maradona is better

Obi1kenobi:


I don't think you understood my point. If let's say the English First Division in 1961 recorded more goals per game than the English Premier League in 2018 (and statistically, the 50's and 60's were a very high scoring era in English, European, Brazilian football or wherever), then its rather pointless talking about evolutions in the game. If less flexible interpretations of the offside rule, greater tolerance for hard tackling, the backpass rule, less comfortable equipment and apparel etc made life uncomfortable for strikers in that era and they were STILL plundering more goals than teams of the modern era, then there would also have to be evolutions in the game limiting scoring in the modern game: like tactical improvements and greater preparation, better conditioning and fitness, greater financial incentives for a far bigger professional circuit making livings from football etc. Unless you somehow think football is the only sport in the world where its athletes are worse than they were half a century ago.

And yes, the rules brought in the 90's was to try to stimulate scoring because the game had evolved to be more defensive. This affected a player like Maradonna who played in the 80's, not Pele. This is why I can't compare Maradona and Messi's stats for example. Serie A football through the 80's and 90's was highly conservative and defensive and this seeped over into international football too.
I'm talking about the general athleticism of the average footballer in the 50's or 60's compared with the modern athletes. Who was specifying Messi? Watch some old videos of George Best waltzing past British semi-pros and it was embarrassing. Spaghetti-legged, pot-bellied, slow-as-Bleep, clumsy excuses for athletes who smoked and drank loads. It was clear their physical conditioning is nothing like what it is today.

Pele being widely acknowledged as the greatest of his time wouldn't be relevant in a comparison with Messi. Messi had Ronaldo as rival. Pele had no rival in Ronaldo's class that defined his era. He never even appeared on the same pitch with many greats of that era, nevermind competing with them in any meaningful way.



I Googled and didn't see where Fergie said that. Do you have any link to it?

Maybe because you have no point.
What objective measure do you have of athleticism that is just beer parlour talk
How is Messi or Maradona Zidane or Romario more athletic than Pele and what evidence is there that greater athleticism is of any value
Black people are generally more athletic why are we not the best at football?
Messi cannot even head the ball and he is fine.
Is Messi more athletic than his peers today and how do we measure that? That is just an irrelevance
I do not know what you mean by rival

Clearly you do not know anything about football in the 60s and 70s.
There were several legends in the 60s
Eusebio
George Best
Beckenbauer
Cruyff
Garincha
And before his time another Argentine great perhaps even greater than Maradona
Did Stefano
Heavyweight boxing is another sport going downhill a good example is a 40 something year old Foreman coming from retirement to knockout an UNBEATEN MICHAEL MOORER
Fact is some people are special whichever era they live
In fact it is instructive that there is near unanimity that Pele was the greatest of his time by his peers many of whom are still alive.
Eusebio and Garincha as well as Jairzinho are glorious examples

osaslord500:




hahaha, that's actually true, he never played in Europe, imagine Messi in Brazil league, he would definitely score a thousand goals

He would not score a thousand goals in the Nigerian league
Messi is playing in an era when the tackle from behind is banned
Maradona played when it was routine.
That is why he can run through the field and no one touches him

Knowing that defenders will not touch you or are afraid to creates a very different mindset from knowing that when they hack you down you are lucky to get a foul.
It is a very different ball game

0monnak0da:

Maybe because you have no point.
What objective measure do you have of athleticism that is just beer parlour talk
How is Messi or Maradona Zidane or Romario more athletic than Pele and what evidence is there that greater athleticism is of any value
Black people are generally more athletic why are we not the best at football?
Messi cannot even head the ball and he is fine.
Is Messi more athletic than his peers today and how do we measure that? That is just an irrelevance
I do not know what you mean by rival

Clearly you do not know anything about football in the 60s and 70s.
There were several legends in the 60s
Eusebio
George Best
Beckenbauer
Cruyff
Garincha
And before his time another Argentine great perhaps even greater than Maradona
Did Stefano
Heavyweight boxing is another sport going downhill a good example is a 40 something year old Foreman coming from retirement to knockout an UNBEATEN MICHAEL MOORER
Fact is some people are special whichever era they live
In fact it is instructive that there is near unanimity that Pele was the greatest of his time by his peers many of whom are still alive.
Eusebio and Garincha as well as Jairzinho are glorious examples

1)By actually watching football of the era. I have watched every knockout stage match England played at the '66 World Cup for example and watched Brazil's 1970 World Cup games. The far slower, far less intense game is easily apparent.
2) By watching the evolution of athletes in just about every other sport. Football is not immune from such natural evolution.
3) By noting the incentives for the game to evolve - especially the professionalization of the game. Majority of first division players in England as of the 1960's and prior were semi-pros at best who often worked second jobs as dock workers/stevedores, factory workers, postmen, police men etc etc. Except you were a Jimmy Greaves or Bobby Charlton and other top internationals it was hard to make a living just from football. This had obvious implications in the commitment of players to the sport.
4) By noting the globalization of the game and greater access of the world to top professional football. This obviously means a wider pool of talent in the sport. In 2 friendly matches in 1959, and 1964, England beat the USA 8-1 and 10-0 and thrashed Mexico 8-0 inbetween (among several other thrashings of other teams often in double-figures), If you're not playing some tiny islands like Leichtenstein, Faroe Island, San Marino, Gibraltar etc, that will not happen in modern football because there is a wider pool of professional talent across the world who are competitive.

You're asking me what the value of athleticism is in football? Might as well ask me what the value of a calculator/calculating device is in accounting. That athleticism is integral to the game doesn't mean it is the only important quality in the game - you're just being willfully obtuse now. And I never stated that athleticism is the only thing that has evolved in the game. The average player today is more technically proficient, and the game has come a long way in tactics and strategy. Modern day high intensity, high pressing football with high defensive lines and positional fluidity between the lines is totally alien to 1950's and 60's football.

In fact it is instructive that there is near unanimity that Pele was the greatest of his time by his peers many of whom are still alive.
Eusebio and Garincha as well as Jairzinho are glorious examples

No such unanimity exists. You haven't even supported the claim that Fergie called him the greatest. There will be no unanimity about Messi in his time because Messi had a great enduring rival in Ronaldo who himself has staked a claim to belong in the "Greatest of All Time" debates. Pele had no such rival because none of such rivals existed or were good enough. People used to claim Eusebio was greater than Ronaldo when Ronaldo was in Man U. Now he's in a different class from Eusebio with what he has done in his career.

0monnak0da:

Maybe because you have no point.
What objective measure do you have of athleticism that is just beer parlour talk
How is Messi or Maradona Zidane or Romario more athletic than Pele and what evidence is there that greater athleticism is of any value
Black people are generally more athletic why are we not the best at football?
Messi cannot even head the ball and he is fine.
Is Messi more athletic than his peers today and how do we measure that? That is just an irrelevance
I do not know what you mean by rival

Clearly you do not know anything about football in the 60s and 70s.
There were several legends in the 60s
Eusebio
George Best
Beckenbauer
Cruyff
Garincha
And before his time another Argentine great perhaps even greater than Maradona
Did Stefano
Heavyweight boxing is another sport going downhill a good example is a 40 something year old Foreman coming from retirement to knockout an UNBEATEN MICHAEL MOORER
Fact is some people are special whichever era they live
In fact it is instructive that there is near unanimity that Pele was the greatest of his time by his peers many of whom are still alive.
Eusebio and Garincha as well as Jairzinho are glorious examples

Check out the records, Pele's teammates then we're all superb, especially in the 1970 world cup.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelé

These guys, especially the attacking five were top game winners, led by Pele. In fact, the squad was regarded as the best world cup team! And it was the ONLY OCCASION PELE WON THE BEST PLAYER OF THE COMPETITION!!!

0monnak0da:

It is only a weak team that needs " carrying " Brazil was a strong team full of greats and it was not one team but several teams over 12 years that won the World Cup 3 times and he wads part of them all.
Messi reached a World Cup final that is not dysfunctional management. He just did not have leadership to take the team over the final line.
He is a great player but Maradona is better

But like I said, if Messi was part of the Spanish team that won all those titles between 2008 and 2012, people would attribute his success to the talent he had around him, just as they have done his success at Barcelona. Yet, those arguments are never applied to Pele who played in Brazilians sides that could just as easily have won those titles without him.

2014 is about the only time Argentina got their acts together. And no surprises, that is when they reached the finals. They have been a shambles throughout the rest of Messi's career. They didn't win the World Cup, not because of Messi's leadership but because Germany were the best team in the world, pure and simple. Messi was pretty much the only player that started for Argentina in that final who could start for the German team.

Obi1kenobi:


But like I said, if Messi was part of the Spanish team that won all those titles between 2008 and 2012, people would attribute his success to the talent he had around him, just as they have done his success at Barcelona. Yet, those arguments are never applied to Pele who played in Brazilians sides that could just as easily have won those titles without him.

2014 is about the only time Argentina got their acts together. And no surprises, that is when they reached the finals. They have been a shambles throughout the rest of Messi's career. They didn't win the World Cup, not because of Messi's leadership but because Germany were the best team in the world, pure and simple. Messi was pretty much the only player that started for Argentina in that final who could start for the German team.

Messi's success which is great is attributed to him .It is only fair that he should accept his failure too.

He failed at the World Cup and that is very important. He is the captain of Argentina that is a fact.
The team that wins a tournament is the best team. If Messi had been greater than he is maybe his team would have been better just like Maradona in 1986 he got the job done by any means necessary that is the difference.
If the Germnan team were so obviously better than Germany why did they need extra time?
That Messi is the only player that could make it into the German Team is not only exaggeration it is foolish.
Winning is not about individuals but their blend . That is why Denmark won the European cup in 1992, Greece in 2004 and Porto the UEFA cup
Germany were not the best team because they had the best players that is absolute nonsense

Obi1kenobi:


But like I said, if Messi was part of the Spanish team that won all those titles between 2008 and 2012, people would attribute his success to the talent he had around him, just as they have done his success at Barcelona. Yet, those arguments are never applied to Pele who played in Brazilians sides that could just as easily have won those titles without him.

2014 is about the only time Argentina got their acts together. And no surprises, that is when they reached the finals. They have been a shambles throughout the rest of Messi's career. They didn't win the World Cup, not because of Messi's leadership but because Germany were the best team in the world, pure and simple. Messi was pretty much the only player that started for Argentina in that final who could start for the German team.

Messi's success which is great is attributed to him .It is only fair that he should accept his failure too.

He failed at the World Cup and that is very important. He is the captain of Argentina that is a fact.
The team that wins a tournament is the best team. If Messi had been greater than he is maybe his team would have been better just like Maradona in 1986 he got the job done by any means necessary that is the difference.
If the German team were so obviously better than Germany why did they need extra time? Why did they struggle against Algeria?

That Messi is the only player that could make it into the German Team is not only exaggeration it is foolish talk. Even Messi could not make it into that team. He is not German and theat German team would not accommodate his style of play if he were
Just like he probably would struggle in the Premiership or Bundesliga
Winning is not about individuals but their blend . That is why Denmark won the European cup in 1992, Greece in 2004 and Porto the UEFA cup
Germany were not the best team because they had the best players that is absolute nonsense

0monnak0da:

He would not score a thousand goals in the Nigerian league
Messi is playing in an era when the tackle from behind is banned
Maradona played when it was routine.
That is why he can run through the field and no one touches him

Knowing that defenders will not touch you or are afraid to creates a very different mindset from knowing that when they hack you down you are lucky to get a foul.
It is a very different ball game

So no red cards back then!!?? I agree with the point of the game been more physical then, but refs is active in judging back then too.

Again, many players back then do use enhancing drugs which were not yet identified back then.

So different eras will always have pros and cons.

Meanwhile, watch Eclasicos during Mou era at Madrid and see rough tackles and kickings on Messi.