some say wins the BallonDor award again . what an achievement
Messi Has won The Ballondor For the 8th Time
— VINEETH𓃵🦖 (@sololoveee) October 31, 2023
🐐Goat Messi 🔥#BallonDorpic.twitter.com/8EWWvWoArF
+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
some say wins the BallonDor award again . what an achievement
Messi Has won The Ballondor For the 8th Time
— VINEETH𓃵🦖 (@sololoveee) October 31, 2023
🐐Goat Messi 🔥#BallonDorpic.twitter.com/8EWWvWoArF
Was always a Maradona fan and I used to say Messi could not be the best ever while he didn't have a World Cup winner's medal, I'm not going to think up another reason now not to rate him as the best. I'm just old enough to have seen Pele at his best, but, even so, that still leaves not far short of a centuries worth of best players in the world I've never seen play. That's what makes best ever judgments virtually impossible, there are so many greats that we don't even have video of, but Messi is the best I've seen as I almost reach my three score years and ten.
I always thought that winning/not winning the world cup was not the right reason to judge a player.
Had burrachaga missed in 1986 and higuain scored in 2014, those world cup trophies would be the other way round. How can Messi and Maradona be separated on that basis?
Haaland must be wondering what he's got to do to win it.
If the way to win the thing is to win the world cup then I doubt he will no matter what he does.
Few doubt how good Messi is but did he really have a better season than EH?
They have made it all about Messi and Ronaldo lately and the tag GOAT.
To be honest, I agree with Lardy. Some people, including Bobby Robson and Jimmy Greaves, rated John Charles as the greatest they had ever seen, and he never won a World Cup. If the criteria is that to be the best player in the world you have to have won the World Cup, that would restrict it top players from around 8 countries only
And only certain generations of those countries.
Maradonas performance in 1986 undoubtedly puts him right at the very best who have ever played, no doubt there. It's entirely justified. But if Argentina had lost the final, Maradona would still be exactly as good a player.
The thread is titled best player of all time though and, until last year, that was Maradona for me,so, we’re talking about two players from the same country. Therefore, I thought the fact that one of them won a World Cup (no side that wins a World Cup can be called a one man team, but Argentina 1986 was the closest I’ve seen to one).That used to put Maradona over Messi for me, but I’ve changed my mind now because of Messi’s better club career.
Going off on a tangent, I get equally perplexed by man of the match awards. Think it was the end of the Kilmarnock game on Sky, and the analysts gave the award to one of the goalscorers. When awarding it he said that he wasn't the best player on the pitch, but had the most decisive intervention.
Messi is clear in my opinion. Pele second.
I don't think Messi should have had the Ballon d'Or this year though, Haaland or Mbappe have a much better shout in my opinion.
Should be best player of ‘my lifetime’ not all time.So many great players from every era, players that, because of lack of footage, have no way of their case being put forward. This messageboard is a ‘best player of the last 50 years or so’ situation.
The World Cup thing is nonsense. George Best was close to being one of the best players in the world in his heyday. Even if he was head and shoulders above everyone else there was no way he was ever winning a World Cup.
I really wish I hadn’t said anything. Are we arguing then that if you are comparing two players from the same country which has won the World Cup twice, the fact that one of them had a winner’s medal which Argentina wouldn’t have won without him and the other had been a member of arguably better squads that had all failed in the competition should not be a factor when making a comparison between them?
It can be a factor, but I don't think it should be the deciding factor between the two, which is what I often see (or saw, anyway).
If Messi had never gone beyond the quarters then perhaps, but that's not the case. The difference boiled down to Burrachaga scoring and Higuain missing.
I think that Bob has a shout concerning Messi and Maradona because there are so many similarities involved, even down to their size and the way they played the game. To use a boxing analogy, the world winning thing could be demed the 12th round, between two brilliant performers who were, are head and shoulders above the rest. It all rests on the final round on who is deemed the best. Still not conclusive and only opinion, but perfectly reasonable when comparing maradona and messi (in my opinion)
I think it was just used as an easy and convenient way to split the difference. NYC rightly points out that it's never used with Cruyff. I haven't seen it argued that Zidane is the best European player over Cruyff because he won a world cup (and a euros too).
I'm repeating myself, but Maradona relied on his three team mates to score the goals, something they didn't do in 1990. If you're comparing players as individuals, things that their team mates do shouldn't matter to the point where that is the sole factor, as there's more than enough that Messi and Maradona have done individually to discuss.
John Charles
We all know it’s all about opinions. In my humble opinion, it’s not even close between LM & DM.
I think Maradona is by far the best player I’ve seen so far.