Football's greatest - where does Lionel Messi rank?

[Taylor Swift]

It's hard to argue because the times have changed. A better way of thinking about it is in terms of generations. It's all great asking whether Messi could survive the defending back then, but could Maradona play 60+ games each year at the highest level like Messi does today? Would his body have broken down? The game is different today. Defenders aren't as tough in tackling but they're stronger, faster and fitter. Pele would have benefitted from the fitness techniques used today, but there are diminishing returns to this. A guy running a 15 minute mile could drop it down to 11 if he trained better and ate better. But a guy doing it in 11 minutes naturally wouldn't be able to do it in 7 if he trained better and ate better.

 

What I'm saying is the physical differences in players today is much, much smaller than before. Defenders are faster and fitter because it pays well to be a defender now. You have guys like Marcelo, Alves and Ramos who could outrun half the premiership playing in defense because the game has changed, it has become more physical.

 

This is not to denigrate Maradona and Pele. Like I said, it's better to view it in eras. Messi is by far the best in this Era. Maradona and Pele were in theirs. Was Cruyff in his? Was he as better relative to other players as the other three are to their peers? I don't know. But I think it's a better way of viewing it, rather than pitting the players against each other. The more dominant a player is, the more he is compared favourably to players from the past.

[Incognito]

Pele was a more complete player than Messi is. As Tooj said,  two footed and power  to add to the artistry.

[Incognito]

Cruyff was the most dominant of his time definitely,  though his time was shorter due to disputes with the Dutch FA.Had he played in 78 , Holland would almost certainly have won it .

[Guest firetotheworks]

It works both ways, opponents might not be tougher, or the game might not be as tough but they're fitter and the game is faster imo. It's also worth pointing out that Messi  does regularly get kicked all over as well and has done from the start.

 

Messi is dominant in an era where fitness, tactics, sports science, stats, match and player reviewing is at a much higher and refined level. Where there are people specifically employed to compile stats on individual players. I'm speculating of course, it just seems to me that if you can dominate in an era where teams can be a lot cleverer and use more tools to be cleverer then there's something seriously special going on.

 

Even going as near back as the '90s the game was nothing like it is now and the quality and fitness compared to now was pretty bad. That's not to say that it was less entertaining though.

 

[Guest firetotheworks]

When were you both born btw?

[Taylor Swift]

I'm with you KI. You don't see this level of dominance from players often in other sports. There's Trout in baseball and LeBron in basketball but LeBron was 10 years removed from MJ. These guys don't come around too often. I don't think there's any point in making a direct comparison because the circumstances are so different. Could Pele have won in Europe where the football was different? It's the same criticism that Messi got for having not scored against English teams. Obviously it's a ridiculous criticism but people did say it.

 

There are generational talents that don't come around too often, players like Pele, Maradona and Messi. They're in the top tier. The best ever? I don't think it's possible to say so without involving many of your own biases.

[Ketsbaia]

Messi's already there, in my opinion. I'm too young to remember Pele and Maradona, of course, but Messi isn't even human. Not only is he amazing but he's consistent at it, as his stats show. He's been at the top for a while.

[George Bailey]

Cruyff was the most dominant of his time definitely,  though his time was shorter due to disputes with the Dutch FA.Had he played in 78 , Holland would almost certainly have won it .

 

Would agree from a certain perspective, though what always peevs me re this debate is how defensive players, or less 'creative' players are always left out or at best an after thought.

For me the greatest footballer of all time is Beckenbaeur. The manner of his play, his leadership, what he gave to his sides marks him above (just) the others.

 

Breitner, Lahm, Moore, Baresi, Maldini, Cannavarro

All true greats but rarely get a mention as individuals.

 

Pele, Cruyff, Messi,Platini,Di Stefano, Best, Ronaldo all magnificent creative and exciting players, and to some degree imo the debate is a fatuous one.

Creativity and forward play v defensive play, which is just as vital to a team.

I adored the 82 side of Brazil, Zico et al where stunning, but they won nowt. France of the 80s with Tigana, Giressse etc played a great brand and simply entertained as well. The Dutch side of 88 won and played a great brand. Do you have to be one of the forwards to be in the top ten?

 

Also to be a great, or considered one of the best do you have to have played at the highest level internationally? if so bye bye Best, Di Stefano. Probably I would say, to have tested yourself at the highest level.

 

As for Maradona, well its churlish to question his inclusion on footballing grounds...or is it?

Whatwever discretions he had, drug abuse, and who's to say that wasn't prior to 94? On the field he produced magic, but on the field he also deliberatley cheated and lied about cheating.

 

To be a great it's about the full package for me.

Being true and honest to the sport you represent. You may have the talent you may have the titles or accolades but if they are tainted by cheating (Armstrong etc), or sullied by on field and off field actions then a question mark hangs over you imo.

 

Maradona should not have been on the field to score that wonder goal. One of the best individual goals I have ever seen, but he should have been sent off for deliberate cheating before it ever happened.

Thats why for me he is poison and despite his 'great' play his reputation is blackened. Just as Henry's is, he knew, he lied and he cheated.

They both cheated the sport they professionally represented.

That discounts them as being considered the greatest ever imo.

 

Messi is alraedy up there amongst the Ronaldo's, Cruyff's and Pele's for me and if he wins it with a fairly average side then his status will surely be confirmed.

 

[Tooj]

Cruyff was the most dominant of his time definitely,  though his time was shorter due to disputes with the Dutch FA.Had he played in 78 , Holland would almost certainly have won it .

 

Would agree from a certain perspective, though what always peevs me re this debate is how defensive players, or less 'creative' players are always left out or at best an after thought.

For me the greatest footballer of all time is Beckenbaeur. The manner of his play, his leadership, what he gave to his sides marks him above (just) the others.

 

Breitner, Lahm, Moore, Baresi, Maldini, Cannavarro

All true greats but rarely get a mention as individuals.

 

Pele, Cruyff, Messi,Platini,Di Stefano, Best, Ronaldo all magnificent creative and exciting players, and to some degree imo the debate is a fatuous one.

Creativity and forward play v defensive play, which is just as vital to a team.

I adored the 82 side of Brazil, Zico et al where stunning, but they won nowt. France of the 80s with Tigana, Giressse etc played a great brand and simply entertained as well. The Dutch side of 88 won and played a great brand. Do you have to be one of the forwards to be in the top ten?

 

Also to be a great, or considered one of the best do you have to have played at the highest level internationally? if so bye bye Best, Di Stefano. Probably I would say, to have tested yourself at the highest level.

 

As for Maradona, well its churlish to question his inclusion on footballing grounds...or is it?

Whatwever discretions he had, drug abuse, and who's to say that wasn't prior to 94? On the field he produced magic, but on the field he also deliberatley cheated and lied about cheating.

 

To be a great it's about the full package for me.

Being true and honest to the sport you represent. You may have the talent you may have the titles or accolades but if they are tainted by cheating (Armstrong etc), or sullied by on field and off field actions then a question mark hangs over you imo.

 

Maradona should not have been on the field to score that wonder goal. One of the best individual goals I have ever seen, but he should have been sent off for deliberate cheating before it ever happened.

Thats why for me he is poison and despite his 'great' play his reputation is blackened. Just as Henry's is, he knew, he lied and he cheated.

They both cheated the sport they professionally represented.

That discounts them as being considered the greatest ever imo.

 

Messi is alraedy up there amongst the Ronaldo's, Cruyff's and Pele's for me and if he wins it with a fairly average side then his status will surely be confirmed.

 

 

[Unbelievable]

What about David Luiz?

 

 

Too mistake prone to be considered one of the absolute best, on his day he is possibly better than Thiago Silva (who is the only central defender on the shortlist).

 

I see Luiz as a brilliant footballer, but he's way too mental to ever be a top, top defender.

 

I hope for the sake of the national team that he doesn't have one of those days in the World Cup. I do think he plays better for Brazil than Chelsea though, TSilva is such a calming influence.

 

IMO Luiz is a big game player.

 

There's a lot of truth in what you say, I think he might play well against better teams when he knows he can't drop his focus, against worse teams he'll switch off when there's not much happening.

 

Germany mustn't have been good enough for him to not drop his focus. Maybe there wasn't enough happening for him?

[Incognito]

Cruyff was the most dominant of his time definitely,  though his time was shorter due to disputes with the Dutch FA.Had he played in 78 , Holland would almost certainly have won it .

 

Would agree from a certain perspective, though what always peevs me re this debate is how defensive players, or less 'creative' players are always left out or at best an after thought.

For me the greatest footballer of all time is Beckenbaeur. The manner of his play, his leadership, what he gave to his sides marks him above (just) the others.

 

Breitner, Lahm, Moore, Baresi, Maldini, Cannavarro

All true greats but rarely get a mention as individuals.

 

Pele, Cruyff, Messi,Platini,Di Stefano, Best, Ronaldo all magnificent creative and exciting players, and to some degree imo the debate is a fatuous one.

Creativity and forward play v defensive play, which is just as vital to a team.

I adored the 82 side of Brazil, Zico et al where stunning, but they won nowt. France of the 80s with Tigana, Giressse etc played a great brand and simply entertained as well. The Dutch side of 88 won and played a great brand. Do you have to be one of the forwards to be in the top ten?

 

Also to be a great, or considered one of the best do you have to have played at the highest level internationally? if so bye bye Best, Di Stefano. Probably I would say, to have tested yourself at the highest level.

 

As for Maradona, well its churlish to question his inclusion on footballing grounds...or is it?

Whatwever discretions he had, drug abuse, and who's to say that wasn't prior to 94? On the field he produced magic, but on the field he also deliberatley cheated and lied about cheating.

 

To be a great it's about the full package for me.

Being true and honest to the sport you represent. You may have the talent you may have the titles or accolades but if they are tainted by cheating (Armstrong etc), or sullied by on field and off field actions then a question mark hangs over you imo.

 

Maradona should not have been on the field to score that wonder goal. One of the best individual goals I have ever seen, but he should have been sent off for deliberate cheating before it ever happened.

Thats why for me he is poison and despite his 'great' play his reputation is blackened. Just as Henry's is, he knew, he lied and he cheated.

They both cheated the sport they professionally represented.

That discounts them as being considered the greatest ever imo.

 

Messi is alraedy up there amongst the Ronaldo's, Cruyff's and Pele's for me and if he wins it with a fairly average side then his status will surely be confirmed.

100% agree. Great post.

 

Edit: You can't mention the France team of the 80s and miss out Platini's name though.[emoji1]

[Guest firetotheworks]

Playing devil's advocate, by the same token would you say that Senna and Schumacher aren't the greatest because they cheated?

 

I agree about the whole defensive play, but I do feel like if you're going to be the greatest you need to exhibit more than being an incredible defender. Beckenbaur stands alone in that for me from what I've heard of him as a player and I couldn't ever say that Maldini - despite being undoubtedly the best defender I've seen in my lifetime - can be considered one of the very, very best players of all time, as in Pele, Maradona, Messi.

 

My argument is that attackers or midfielders rightly get more credence because their primary job is to play football, not stop football. That's not to say that it's any less important, it's just much easier to realise. I dunno, maybe I'm thinking on too shallow a level, but having a defender as one of the very best would immediately make me question (if they were that good with the ball at their feet) why they weren't played in midfield or up front, do you know what I mean?

[Incognito]

It works both ways, opponents might not be tougher, or the game might not be as tough but they're fitter and the game is faster imo. It's also worth pointing out that Messi  does regularly get kicked all over as well and has done from the start.

 

Messi is dominant in an era where fitness, tactics, sports science, stats, match and player reviewing is at a much higher and refined level. Where there are people specifically employed to compile stats on individual players. I'm speculating of course, it just seems to me that if you can dominate in an era where teams can be a lot cleverer and use more tools to be cleverer then there's something seriously special going on.

 

Even going as near back as the '90s the game was nothing like it is now and the quality and fitness compared to now was pretty bad. That's not to say that it was less entertaining though.

Stricter rules and referees have allowed Messi to be kicked an awful lot less than his predecessors. And that's a good thing.  We want to see the best players on the pitch .

 

Pele,  as the spiritual leader of the greatest team in history, and a career which lasted 4 World Cups,  2 of which he was continuously assaulted on the pitch to prevent him from playing,  is the greatest player of all time.

 

GB's point is a good one too. Everybody renembers the Rossis and Kempes' of the World,  few recall the Scireas and the Passarellas.

[Guest firetotheworks]

When were you born btw?

[Unbelievable]

When were you born btw?

 

Paedo alert

[Guest firetotheworks]

[Wullie]

And how many times have those saying Pele  seen him play outside World Cups?

[B-more Mag]

It always makes more sense to me to compare in tiers and categories rather than straight-up, head-to-head rankings, especially when it comes to intergenerational comparisons and players in different positions. For me, Messi's already just in that highest tier of attacking players and blowing it out on Sunday would just make it indisputable.

[triggs]

And how many times have those saying Pele  seen him play outside World Cups?

Its kind of the problem with these arguments. The most anybody can say is that a certain player is the best they've ever seen. Lionel Messi is the best player I've ever seen and that's not going to change whether he has a stinker Sunday or the game of his life

[Flip]

What about David Luiz?

 

 

Too mistake prone to be considered one of the absolute best, on his day he is possibly better than Thiago Silva (who is the only central defender on the shortlist).

 

I see Luiz as a brilliant footballer, but he's way too mental to ever be a top, top defender.

 

I hope for the sake of the national team that he doesn't have one of those days in the World Cup. I do think he plays better for Brazil than Chelsea though, TSilva is such a calming influence.

 

IMO Luiz is a big game player.

 

There's a lot of truth in what you say, I think he might play well against better teams when he knows he can't drop his focus, against worse teams he'll switch off when there's not much happening.

 

Germany mustn't have been good enough for him to not drop his focus. Maybe there wasn't enough happening for him?

 

Yet he was the only one that showed heart and hustle despite being down. He had a terrible game, but no one can put it on him. There were six minutes, and honestly, six minutes of football that won't ever happen again.

 

As for this discussion. Messi will be up there with the likes of Maradona, Garrincha etc. Pele will always be the king

[George Bailey]

Absolutley agree KI.

Playing the game to creat, excite, the' positives' will always be seen as the most important aspects. I doubt many would pay to go and see Redondo (wonderful player imo), or Stielke but they will queue to see Messi, Platini (assumed it didn't need said Incognito LOL), Ronaldo etc, and rightly so.

 

The modern game, with back pass rule, less 'tackling' has to be taken into context as well, agree 100%. the fact that these players shone when being kicked lumps out of is testament to how good they truly where.

 

As for the Senna/Scumacher thing then imo yes.

Just my principles and standpoint, don't expect to be in the majority, but conduct and how you approach the game/sport is massive for me.

i think you should respect the sport, play the game to the full limits of the rules and also the spirit of the rules.

 

Bradman, Gavaskar, Laver, Nicklaus, greats of their sport. May have played hard, may have been ruthless, but all within the spirit of the game.

 

it's like the Suarez thing for me. a very, very gifted and talented footballer, in the top 10 of the worlds strikers at the moment, but.................

biting someone. Really! 3 times!.

Then the fact he and his captain etc didn't get it. "these things happen on the pitch" attitude....no they don't.

Mis timed tackles yes, part and parcel of the sport. Heat of the moment poor decisions, okay to an extent.

Deliberate acts of violence or cheating? give me a break.

 

Hence Suarez will be rememberd by me as a reprehensible, vile cheat. Just as the fat, hand balling, drug addled cheat will, sadly cos he was a wonderful footballer.

 

[Guest firetotheworks]

Absolutley agree KI.

Playing the game to creat, excite, the' positives' will always be seen as the most important aspects. I doubt many would pay to go and see Redondo (wonderful player imo), or Stielke but they will queue to see Messi, Platini (assumed it didn't need said Incognito LOL), Ronaldo etc, and rightly so.

 

The modern game, with back pass rule, less 'tackling' has to be taken into context as well, agree 100%. the fact that these players shone when being kicked lumps out of is testament to how good they truly where.

 

As for the Senna/Scumacher thing then imo yes.

Just my principles and standpoint, don't expect to be in the majority, but conduct and how you approach the game/sport is massive for me.

i think you should respect the sport, play the game to the full limits of the rules and also the spirit of the rules.

 

Bradman, Gavaskar, Laver, Nicklaus, greats of their sport. May have played hard, may have been ruthless, but all within the spirit of the game.

 

it's like the Suarez thing for me. a very, very gifted and talented footballer, in the top 10 of the worlds strikers at the moment, but.................

biting someone. Really! 3 times!.

Then the fact he and his captain etc didn't get it. "these things happen on the pitch" attitude....no they don't.

Mis timed tackles yes, part and parcel of the sport. Heat of the moment poor decisions, okay to an extent.

Deliberate acts of violence or cheating? give me a break.

 

Hence Suarez will be rememberd by me as a reprehensible, vile cheat. Just as the fat, hand balling, drug addled cheat will, sadly cos he was a wonderful footballer.

 

 

 

Can't agree on the Maradona bit mind.

[Incognito]

And how many times have those saying Pele  seen him play outside World Cups?

 

Remember watching him on World of Sport a few times playing for New York Cosmos alongside Beckenbauer, Chinaglia and  Steve Hunt.

[Incognito]

Absolutley agree KI.

Playing the game to creat, excite, the' positives' will always be seen as the most important aspects. I doubt many would pay to go and see Redondo (wonderful player imo), or Stielke but they will queue to see Messi, Platini (assumed it didn't need said Incognito LOL), Ronaldo etc, and rightly so.

 

The modern game, with back pass rule, less 'tackling' has to be taken into context as well, agree 100%. the fact that these players shone when being kicked lumps out of is testament to how good they truly where.

 

As for the Senna/Scumacher thing then imo yes.

Just my principles and standpoint, don't expect to be in the majority, but conduct and how you approach the game/sport is massive for me.

i think you should respect the sport, play the game to the full limits of the rules and also the spirit of the rules.

 

Bradman, Gavaskar, Laver, Nicklaus, greats of their sport. May have played hard, may have been ruthless, but all within the spirit of the game.

 

it's like the Suarez thing for me. a very, very gifted and talented footballer, in the top 10 of the worlds strikers at the moment, but.................

biting someone. Really! 3 times!.

Then the fact he and his captain etc didn't get it. "these things happen on the pitch" attitude....no they don't.

Mis timed tackles yes, part and parcel of the sport. Heat of the moment poor decisions, okay to an extent.

Deliberate acts of violence or cheating? give me a break.

 

Hence Suarez will be rememberd by me as a reprehensible, vile cheat. Just as the fat, hand balling, drug addled cheat will, sadly cos he was a wonderful footballer.

 

 

That French side, just to prove your point had two fantastic centre halves in Bossis and Tresor too.

[tmonkey]

Not sure I've posted this before, but about a decade ago I used to work with a guy in his late 70's who in the 50's/60's/70's pretty much used to live for football and had seen most of the greats in that era live in the flesh. Always rated his opinion on football matters as even in old age he seemed pretty sound with his opinion on the current generation of footballers.

 

Anyway, he pointed something out that I think is worth considering in these types of discussions - a point that I've rarely seen mentioned anywhere else - which was that to his eye the biggest change in the sport by far isn't to do with vastly increased fitness levels, ball technology, or tactics (which to him were irrelevant since the likes of Pele et al would be able to adjust or benefit themselves), but rather the biggest change is with goalkeepers. His view was that keepers in the modern game have improved to such an extent that keepers today are completely unrecognizable to the keepers you had during bygone era's. Today's keepers are taken for granted, but on a whole they're significantly better shot stoppers, far better distributors, they're alot more rounded and excel at other aspects of goalkeeping (coming off the line quickly, making themselves big, punching, catching, long throws, etc), and in many cases they'are alot bigger physically (man mountains vs normal sized guys) and better coached (a byproduct of the continuous learning from keepers who've added or popularized a new technique, e.g. Schmeical and his instant counter-attacking overarm long-throw) than keepers half a century ago.

 

On top of this, the depth of quality goalkeeping is infinitely better than what it was - he said Banks was a good keeper but beyond a couple of other good keepers in that era the rest were amateur standard in today's game. Keepers like Buffon, Schmeichel, Khan, that level of goalkeeping simply didn't exist at that time, and nowadays even mediocre or piss poor nations have decent keepers who are light years ahead of what equivalent teams in the 50's - 80's had.

 

It's an interesting point to consider imo. Maybe the lighter balls we have today would counter to this to a degree, but you still have to wonder how many of Pele's less famous goals would have been tipped round the post today. When looking at the low quality videos of matches in the Pele era, aside from fitness, the one player who does tend to stick out like a sore thumb is usually the keeper, and not just because of the weird "kit" (often gloveless?) they used to have. They just look odd positionally, the way they dive, the way the kick the ball, even their height (they do seem quite small).

 

I guess the point here would be that this should count massively in Messi's favor in the Messi vs Pele debates. I have no idea how good Gordon Banks was, but based on what I've been told (admittedly by one person, albeit someone who's opinion I value), I would bet Pele never had to face a keeper of Manuel Neuer's pedigree, let alone an entire competition full of keepers close to that standard.