Football's greatest - where does Lionel Messi rank?

[themanupstairs]

It's crazy how his legacy and who he'll be remembered as (at this stage) was dependent upon a chance you would have expected him to bury and Higuan and Polacio being s***. Yet that's exactly how it'll be and it's hard to argue with. He still has two World Cups left in him imo, but he'll be extremely lucky to get a better chance than that.

 

He's the best footballer that I've seen in my life and he always will be tbh, so it really is now just a case of him doing it at that very highest level of Pele and Maradona.

 

I'm not sure that I'm a fan of him being a bit of a lone wolf though, he just doesn't seem that arsed about football anymore.

 

This. He attempted a gorgeous through ball between two german defenders that was seeking out Higuain before Schweinsteiger managed to clear it. The Messi of old would have seen him coming and would have made sure the ball got through. That's what made him who he is. When that didn't come off, he didn't show any kind of trust towards his teammates from there on and tried to do things himself, or pass around harmlessly in midfield. Something's just not right with him, and I hate seeing it.

 

 

[Hughesy]

He should be, on pure achievements, Cruyff s***s all over Maradona's club career and was the best player in one of the most iconic teams in history.

 

But i'm not personally one to put a World Cup winners medal above club year in/year out domination. When i look at achievement i look at the full package.

 

I think its a bit unfair (not just Messi) that players are judged on a tournament which happens once every 4 years after a grueling club season.

 

Agree with this completely.  Far too much weight is placed on the World Cup, when so many other factors are relevant.

[Incognito]

He should be, on pure achievements, Cruyff s***s all over Maradona's club career and was the best player in one of the most iconic teams in history.

 

But i'm not personally one to put a World Cup winners medal above club year in/year out domination. When i look at achievement i look at the full package.

 

I think its a bit unfair (not just Messi) that players are judged on a tournament which happens once every 4 years after a grueling club season.

 

Agree with this completely.  Far too much weight is placed on the World Cup, when so many other factors are relevant.

Agree somewhat here too. George Best is clearly in the top 10 players of all time despite never appearing at a finals.

[Hughesy]

I think some folk are missing the point with this Messi "debate".

 

When he was at his best for Barca, there was (as an analogy) a group of people calling him the best player ever because of his ridiculous goalscoring records/consistency, and another (considerably smaller) group who questioned how he would fare if he wasn't in such a fantastic Barcelona side that was built around him, since when you not only compare him to, but declare him to be better than, someone like Maradona (who transformed nothing teams like Napoli and Argentina into winning Serie A and the World Cup respectively) there needs to be some sort of feat where Messi's heart/fighting spirit/leadership/ability to be the talisman/raise the level of a team/etc can be analysed and compared. Especially with Xavi and Iniesta controlling games and allowing Messi to add the finishing touches with his explosiveness - Spain comfortably winning Euro 2008, and to a lesser extent the 2010 World Cup, was clear evidence of just how good Xavi and Iniesta were at controlling games.

 

Since there was no chance of Messi moving to e.g. West Brom and single handedly transforming them into a Premiership winning side, the World Cup was meant to have been his chance to cement himself as the best player ever because of how average this Argentina side were meant to be and how the team was going to be built around him. I think some folk expected him to have to win it in order to prove himself as up there with (or on top of) the all time greats, but others (I'd lump myself in here) only expected him to shine and be the talisman player for his team, irrespective of whether that meant a World Cup win or not.

 

I think this is a perfectly reasonable line of thinking and therefore his performances in this and previous World Cups are definitely relevant to the overall perception of his "greatness".

 

What Maradona did at Napoli will never be matched.

 

Complete myth that Maradona carried Napoli, they had a great team.

 

Same with the Argentinean team - it was a good team when Maradona was playing.

[Incognito]

I think some folk are missing the point with this Messi "debate".

 

When he was at his best for Barca, there was (as an analogy) a group of people calling him the best player ever because of his ridiculous goalscoring records/consistency, and another (considerably smaller) group who questioned how he would fare if he wasn't in such a fantastic Barcelona side that was built around him, since when you not only compare him to, but declare him to be better than, someone like Maradona (who transformed nothing teams like Napoli and Argentina into winning Serie A and the World Cup respectively) there needs to be some sort of feat where Messi's heart/fighting spirit/leadership/ability to be the talisman/raise the level of a team/etc can be analysed and compared. Especially with Xavi and Iniesta controlling games and allowing Messi to add the finishing touches with his explosiveness - Spain comfortably winning Euro 2008, and to a lesser extent the 2010 World Cup, was clear evidence of just how good Xavi and Iniesta were at controlling games.

 

Since there was no chance of Messi moving to e.g. West Brom and single handedly transforming them into a Premiership winning side, the World Cup was meant to have been his chance to cement himself as the best player ever because of how average this Argentina side were meant to be and how the team was going to be built around him. I think some folk expected him to have to win it in order to prove himself as up there with (or on top of) the all time greats, but others (I'd lump myself in here) only expected him to shine and be the talisman player for his team, irrespective of whether that meant a World Cup win or not.

 

I think this is a perfectly reasonable line of thinking and therefore his performances in this and previous World Cups are definitely relevant to the overall perception of his "greatness".

 

What Maradona did at Napoli will never be matched.

 

Complete myth that Maradona carried Napoli, they had a great team.

 

Same with the Argentinean team - it was a good team when Maradona was playing.

He did carry them in 86 to be fair. Their 78 side was a better one than the 86 and 90.

[Hughesy]

I agree (and to clarify - this is from what I have read than what I saw), but it appears to have almost become one of those football myths that the Argentinian team of '86 and '90 was useless, when they really weren't.

[Tooj]

This for me ranks comfortably below Ronaldo '98 and Zidane '06.  Which is disappointing because he's a better player.

Zidane had that mint game against Brazil in 2006 but apart from that I don't think he was that good in that tournament.

[Tooj]

This for me ranks comfortably below Ronaldo '98 and Zidane '06.  Which is disappointing because he's a better player.

Zidane had that mint game against Brazil in 2006 but apart from that I don't think he was that good in that tournament.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Baggio in '94 remains the best tournament that I've seen from a player. I was only 10 like, but I remember just being totally flawed by him. Absolutely ridiculous that he missed that penalty in those circumstances.

[Tooj]

Zidane in Euro 2000 is one that immediately springs to mind for me.

[Incognito]

I agree (and to clarify - this is from what I have read than what I saw), but it appears to have almost become one of those football myths that the Argentinian team of '86 and '90 was useless, when they really weren't.

The 90 side wasn't good mate. They got to the final on the back of their reserve keeper Goicachea coming in after injury to the first choice, Pumpido if I recall, and him being a bit of a penalty saving specialist.

[The College Dropout]

 

This for me ranks comfortably below Ronaldo '98 and Zidane '06.  Which is disappointing because he's a better player.

Zidane had that mint game against Brazil in 2006 but apart from that I don't think he was that good in that tournament.

To me it felt like he was a real leader.  As if he really galvanised the squad despite the clown in charge. When you hear the French players talk of him, it's in terms of leadership and following him into battle rather than 'he's the best.'

 

I know Messi is a different character. More 'aloof', single minded.

 

From what I've read and heard.  Maradona was a true leader. He would be the one geeing up the players, delivering speeches etc. Literally leading the team to glory rather than just being the star man.  A real old school vocal captain. Once again, that's not in Messi's nature. But from what I've heard it's one of the reasons Argentinians don't have him on Maradona's level. Doesn't have that charismatic leadership and character. IMO that affects his team mates.

[The College Dropout]

Zidane vs Portugal in the semi's of Euro2000 is what you expect from the worlds best player. He was brilliant.

[Parky]

People questioning Maradona's credentials.

[Hughesy]

I agree (and to clarify - this is from what I have read than what I saw), but it appears to have almost become one of those football myths that the Argentinian team of '86 and '90 was useless, when they really weren't.

The 90 side wasn't good mate. They got to the final on the back of their reserve keeper Goicachea coming in after injury to the first choice, Pumpido if I recall, and him being a bit of a penalty saving specialist.

 

Fair enough - I was only seven at the time, so my footballing knowledge wasn't great.  This was more based on what I had read.

[Incognito]

I agree (and to clarify - this is from what I have read than what I saw), but it appears to have almost become one of those football myths that the Argentinian team of '86 and '90 was useless, when they really weren't.

The 90 side wasn't good mate. They got to the final on the back of their reserve keeper Goicachea coming in after injury to the first choice, Pumpido if I recall, and him being a bit of a penalty saving specialist.

 

Fair enough - I was only seven at the time, so my footballing knowledge wasn't great.  This was more based on what I had read.

We all knew that the winner of the West Germany vs England semi were massive favourites to win the lot. Might never be that close again. Incidentally Gascoigne in that 90 World Cup was as good as anyone I've seen in a World Cup, Maradona 86 aside.

[Parky]

I agree (and to clarify - this is from what I have read than what I saw), but it appears to have almost become one of those football myths that the Argentinian team of '86 and '90 was useless, when they really weren't.

The 90 side wasn't good mate. They got to the final on the back of their reserve keeper Goicachea coming in after injury to the first choice, Pumpido if I recall, and him being a bit of a penalty saving specialist.

 

Fair enough - I was only seven at the time, so my footballing knowledge wasn't great.  This was more based on what I had read.

 

Feel free to make sweeping comments on zero knowledge tho. Napoli did have 2/3 good players in the Maradona side but had never won the league and never have since. They were up against the powerhouses of Inter, Roma and AC Milan.

 

He lifted the whole city not just the club. They won the league twice while he was there. Messi will never be able to do that at a midtable Spanish or Italian club...Ever.

[Tooj]

Maradona wouldn't be able to in this era either.

[Parky]

Maradona wouldn't be able to in this era either.

 

Messi would be dead after one tackle from behind that was legal in them days.

[mrmojorisin75]

I think some folk are missing the point with this Messi "debate".

 

When he was at his best for Barca, there was (as an analogy) a group of people calling him the best player ever because of his ridiculous goalscoring records/consistency, and another (considerably smaller) group who questioned how he would fare if he wasn't in such a fantastic Barcelona side that was built around him, since when you not only compare him to, but declare him to be better than, someone like Maradona (who transformed nothing teams like Napoli and Argentina into winning Serie A and the World Cup respectively) there needs to be some sort of feat where Messi's heart/fighting spirit/leadership/ability to be the talisman/raise the level of a team/etc can be analysed and compared. Especially with Xavi and Iniesta controlling games and allowing Messi to add the finishing touches with his explosiveness - Spain comfortably winning Euro 2008, and to a lesser extent the 2010 World Cup, was clear evidence of just how good Xavi and Iniesta were at controlling games.

 

Since there was no chance of Messi moving to e.g. West Brom and single handedly transforming them into a Premiership winning side, the World Cup was meant to have been his chance to cement himself as the best player ever because of how average this Argentina side were meant to be and how the team was going to be built around him. I think some folk expected him to have to win it in order to prove himself as up there with (or on top of) the all time greats, but others (I'd lump myself in here) only expected him to shine and be the talisman player for his team, irrespective of whether that meant a World Cup win or not.

 

I think this is a perfectly reasonable line of thinking and therefore his performances in this and previous World Cups are definitely relevant to the overall perception of his "greatness".

 

 

while this is a fair point it should not be overlooked that it's starting to appear as if playing 60 games a season has caught up with messi at exactly the wrong time, the messi of that great barca team would have won argentina that game last night, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind

 

point being that luck plays a massive part in football as we know, messi got shafted by an idiotic maradona in 2010 when he was around his peak and has now played when clearly physically and perhaps mentally shot

 

end of the day he failed to do it when it counted, which is all that will be remembered

[Collage]

I agree (and to clarify - this is from what I have read than what I saw), but it appears to have almost become one of those football myths that the Argentinian team of '86 and '90 was useless, when they really weren't.

The 90 side wasn't good mate. They got to the final on the back of their reserve keeper Goicachea coming in after injury to the first choice, Pumpido if I recall, and him being a bit of a penalty saving specialist.

 

Goycochea 

And yes you're right, that wasn't a good team. Full of twats and cheats.

[The College Dropout]

If Luis Suarez can fire L'pool to the brink. Maradona could win it today.

[Collage]

Baggio in '94 remains the best tournament that I've seen from a player. I was only 10 like, but I remember just being totally flawed by him. Absolutely ridiculous that he missed that penalty in those circumstances.

 

He was shite in the group stage, great in the knockout stages, but as a whole you can't say it was the best tournament ever from a player.

[Hughesy]

I agree (and to clarify - this is from what I have read than what I saw), but it appears to have almost become one of those football myths that the Argentinian team of '86 and '90 was useless, when they really weren't.

The 90 side wasn't good mate. They got to the final on the back of their reserve keeper Goicachea coming in after injury to the first choice, Pumpido if I recall, and him being a bit of a penalty saving specialist.

 

Fair enough - I was only seven at the time, so my footballing knowledge wasn't great.  This was more based on what I had read.

 

Feel free to make sweeping comments on zero knowledge tho. Napoli did have 2/3 good players in the Maradona side but had never won the league and never have since. They were up against the powerhouses of Inter, Roma and AC Milan.

 

He lifted the whole city not just the club. They won the league twice while he was there. Messi will never be able to do that at a midtable Spanish or Italian club...Ever.

 

I never made a comment about the Napoli team that Maradona played for.  As pointed out, I am basing my discussion on what I have read about the '86 and '90 Argentinean teams that Maradona played for (I think that having looked again, what I actually read about the '86 team being pretty good rather than the '90 team - think the most recent interview was one done recently with Linekar).

 

I would, however, question exactly how much football the older posters on this forum actually saw many of these greats play.  Probably not even 2-3% of the amount of football that one can now see Messi, Ronaldo etc play?  I sometimes wonder if familiarity breeds contempt with today's stars and that there is an element of mysticism that stills surrounds the legends of the 60s, 70s and 80s.

[Collage]

Maradona was a far more inspirational player than Messi, hard to argue against that.