Best player of all time

BMxJoga wrote: Inter under Mourinho says otherwise.

Heck, Liverpool under Rafa says otherwise.

City have a better defense than Utd I would say. Real Madrid aswell.

You place too much emphasis on international football George.

1 question:

Is Messi better than Maradona? Messi is better, come back and argue otherwise when Maradona wins a Champions League.

Ferdinand and Vidic are two of the best centre backs in the world and Evra is consistently recognised as the best left back in the Premier League above the likes of Cole. Right back leaves a bit to be desired, but the strength in 3 of those back 4 is exceptional.

Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Fine Shagger wrote:You place too much emphasis on international football George.

1 question:

Is Messi better than Maradona? Messi is better, come back and argue otherwise when Maradona wins a Champions League.

WC is the biggest competition in football, any player would want to win WC than CL. CL is forgotten after 2-3 years.

Messi needs to win the most prestigious trophy..simples!

Fine Shagger wrote:Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Ferdinand and Vidic are two of the best centre backs in the world and Evra is consistently recognised as the best left back in the Premier League above the likes of Cole. Right back leaves a bit to be desired, but the strength in 3 of those back 4 is exceptional.

Evra was fairly poor last season. very poor to be "best left back in the premier league" As a whole defensive unit I would say City Barca Madrid and Milan are currently better.

The world cup is the most prestigious but the standard of football is better in the Champions League.

If Messi was Albanian, would he be unable to ever reach the best player status because he'd never won a world cup? Such a ridiculous argument.

Pele.

Defense is more than the back 4. It is about the system in place, and even with personnel Inter's defense over shadows that of United's IMO. Lucio, Maicon, Ranocchia, and Zanetti are rock solid. Cambiasso and Motta even add further protection in the middle.

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

It's actually a very valid way of mocking your argument.

You think a player who has been brilliant for 60+ games a season for a number of years can't be the best because he doesn't perform in about 7 cup games?

Fine Shagger wrote:The world cup is the most prestigious but the standard of football is better in the Champions League.

If Messi was Albanian, would he be unable to ever reach the best player status because he'd never won a world cup? Such a ridiculous argument.

But Messi is not, your arguement is invalid.

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:The world cup is the most prestigious but the standard of football is better in the Champions League.

If Messi was Albanian, would he be unable to ever reach the best player status because he'd never won a world cup? Such a ridiculous argument.

But Messi is not, your arguement is invalid.

Answer the question.

How in fuck's name is Torres better than Crujiff?

Roloman4 wrote:How in fuck's name is Torres better than Crujiff?

Quite simple Rolo. Torres has won a world cup while Cruyff hasn't. I am simply applying George's logic.

How can anyone seriously vote Messi the best player of all time? He hasn't even completed his career yet.

Fine Shagger wrote:

Roloman4 wrote:How in fuck's name is Torres better than Crujiff?

Quite simple Rolo. Torres has won a world cup while Cruyff hasn't. I am simply applying George's logic.

Oh, I am glad you were trying to turn it around on him, sorry, for a second I thought you were being serious.

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

It's actually a very valid way of mocking your argument.

You think a player who has been brilliant for 60+ games a season for a number of years can't be the best because he doesn't perform in about 7 cup games?

Compared to other greats, they've done it on both levels to be considered kings of football. Messi is a beast but to take crown of best player ever he need to step it on the international level.

Compare Messi to Zizou, both World Class Players with amazing ability, amazing club players but Messi hasn't done what Zidane has in the greatest stage of football. I'd pick Zidane to me.

Torres on other hand is no where near cryuff, no skills like cryuff, not a great club player like cryuff, didn't do anything in WC like Cryuff..simple.

Zidane won a World Cup, Champions League, La Liga, Serie A and Euro. Messi has a ways to go.

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:The world cup is the most prestigious but the standard of football is better in the Champions League.

If Messi was Albanian, would he be unable to ever reach the best player status because he'd never won a world cup? Such a ridiculous argument.

But Messi is not, your arguement is invalid.

Answer the question.

I don't know...how do we know Messi would even develop as great if he was Albanian...you never know...what can happen.

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

It's actually a very valid way of mocking your argument.

You think a player who has been brilliant for 60+ games a season for a number of years can't be the best because he doesn't perform in about 7 cup games?

Compared to other greats, they've done it on both levels to be considered kings of football. Messi is a beast but to take crown of best player ever he need to step it on the international level.

Compare Messi to Zizou, both World Class Players with amazing ability, amazing club players but Messi hasn't done what Zidane has in the greatest stage of football. I'd pick Zidane to me.

Torres on other hand is no where near cryuff, no skills like cryuff, not a great club player like cryuff, didn't do anything in WC like Cryuff..simple.

I think Messi could still be considered the best ever even if he doesn't win the WC, to be fair, he has an incompetent team, and he's done everything else.

To me best player is classified as who played the best, not who won the most.

To me Spencer is one of the greatest if not the greatest South American strikers in history, yet he never even played in the World Cup.

BMxJoga wrote:Zidane won a World Cup, Champions League, La Liga, Serie A and Euro. Messi has a ways to go.

As I said, he has an incompetent national team to deal with.

France 98-00 was un-fucking-stoppable.

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

It's actually a very valid way of mocking your argument.

You think a player who has been brilliant for 60+ games a season for a number of years can't be the best because he doesn't perform in about 7 cup games?

Compared to other greats, they've done it on both levels to be considered kings of football. Messi is a beast but to take crown of best player ever he need to step it on the international level.

Compare Messi to Zizou, both World Class Players with amazing ability, amazing club players but Messi hasn't done what Zidane has in the greatest stage of football. I'd pick Zidane to me.

Torres on other hand is no where near cryuff, no skills like cryuff, not a great club player like cryuff, didn't do anything in WC like Cryuff..simple.

Like I said, you say Messi needs to step it up on International level when a players career is heavily weighted in terms of games towards club football where Zidane doesn't come close to Messi.

Why is international trophies the most important? Messi already has 3 champions leagues, Zidane has 1, Maradona has 0. How is valid to say that Messi needs to win a world cup but it's not valid to say Maradona needed to win a Champions League?


Note: I'm not saying they can't be the best because of their Champions League record, I'm saying that needing to win a trophy to be considered the best is bullshit.

Roloman4 wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

It's actually a very valid way of mocking your argument.

You think a player who has been brilliant for 60+ games a season for a number of years can't be the best because he doesn't perform in about 7 cup games?

Compared to other greats, they've done it on both levels to be considered kings of football. Messi is a beast but to take crown of best player ever he need to step it on the international level.

Compare Messi to Zizou, both World Class Players with amazing ability, amazing club players but Messi hasn't done what Zidane has in the greatest stage of football. I'd pick Zidane to me.

Torres on other hand is no where near cryuff, no skills like cryuff, not a great club player like cryuff, didn't do anything in WC like Cryuff..simple.

I think Messi could still be considered the best ever even if he doesn't win the WC, to be fair, he has an incompetent team, and he's done everything else.

To me best player is classified as who played the best, not who won the most.

To me Spencer is one of the greatest if not the greatest South American strikers in history, yet he never even played in the World Cup.

Spencer is best in South America because of what he done in South America.

I will play the role of deluded dane

Michael Laudrup !

BMxJoga wrote:Zidane won a World Cup, Champions League, La Liga, Serie A and Euro. Messi has a ways to go.

Messi has won 5 League campaigns to Zidane's 3. He's won 3 Champions Leagues to Zidane's 1.

Step it up Zinedine.

Roloman4 wrote:

BMxJoga wrote:Zidane won a World Cup, Champions League, La Liga, Serie A and Euro. Messi has a ways to go.

As I said, he has an incompetent national team to deal with.

France 98-00 was un-fucking-stoppable.

What about France 06?

no France was underachieving before Zidane hit top form, it's not a coicendence.

France - before <96 underachievers
France - Zidane hit form +97 - world beaters
France - Zidane retire >06 - back to shit

chiboygeorge wrote:

Roloman4 wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:
Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

It's actually a very valid way of mocking your argument.

You think a player who has been brilliant for 60+ games a season for a number of years can't be the best because he doesn't perform in about 7 cup games?

Compared to other greats, they've done it on both levels to be considered kings of football. Messi is a beast but to take crown of best player ever he need to step it on the international level.

Compare Messi to Zizou, both World Class Players with amazing ability, amazing club players but Messi hasn't done what Zidane has in the greatest stage of football. I'd pick Zidane to me.

Torres on other hand is no where near cryuff, no skills like cryuff, not a great club player like cryuff, didn't do anything in WC like Cryuff..simple.

I think Messi could still be considered the best ever even if he doesn't win the WC, to be fair, he has an incompetent team, and he's done everything else.

To me best player is classified as who played the best, not who won the most.

To me Spencer is one of the greatest if not the greatest South American strikers in history, yet he never even played in the World Cup.

Spencer is best in South America because of what he done in South America.

Besides that, let me ask you, considering he was an even match for Pelé in his time, what other striker in the world could you compare to him?

chiboygeorge wrote:

Roloman4 wrote:

BMxJoga wrote:Zidane won a World Cup, Champions League, La Liga, Serie A and Euro. Messi has a ways to go.

As I said, he has an incompetent national team to deal with.

France 98-00 was un-fucking-stoppable.

What about France 06?

no France was underachieving before Zidane hit top form, it's not a coicendence.

France - before <96 underachievers
France - Zidane hit form +97 - world beaters
France - Zidane retire >06 - back to shit

To be fair they were shit from 2000 up until the beginning of the World Cup.

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:

chiboygeorge wrote:

Fine Shagger wrote:Also, Fernando Torres > Cruyff.

Come back when Cruyff wins a world cup, then you can tell me he's better.

Now that's an idiotic statement and stupid analogy. But Cryuff can actually take his team to the final...Messi?

It's actually a very valid way of mocking your argument.

You think a player who has been brilliant for 60+ games a season for a number of years can't be the best because he doesn't perform in about 7 cup games?

Compared to other greats, they've done it on both levels to be considered kings of football. Messi is a beast but to take crown of best player ever he need to step it on the international level.

Compare Messi to Zizou, both World Class Players with amazing ability, amazing club players but Messi hasn't done what Zidane has in the greatest stage of football. I'd pick Zidane to me.

Torres on other hand is no where near cryuff, no skills like cryuff, not a great club player like cryuff, didn't do anything in WC like Cryuff..simple.

Like I said, you say Messi needs to step it up on International level when a players career is heavily weighted in terms of games towards club football where Zidane doesn't come close to Messi.

Why is international trophies the most important? Messi already has 3 champions leagues, Zidane has 1, Maradona has 0. How is valid to say that Messi needs to win a world cup but it's not valid to say Maradona needed to win a Champions League?


Note: I'm not saying they can't be the best because of their Champions League record, I'm saying that needing to win a trophy to be considered the best is bullshit.

How long did Diego play in Europe? if he played in Europe most of his life he'd definetly won many CL. Even in Napoli he won Uefa Cup.

If you think what I'm saying...I'm not directly saying you need to win WC to be best but it's a huge decider. Messi and Zidane are there and there to me but since Zizou has been amazing internationally as well I will pick him over Messi any day. Zidane could have had more CL but compare his team to Messi. lol.