Lionel Messi..

[Ausage]

Messi did play well - or as well as he could really. His team was set up crappily by Maradona. It had only one real midfielder IIRC. People tend to underestimate how incredibly hard it is to single-handedly (however that may be defined) make a team win. Most of these great players played in great teams and won a lot of titles. Very very few of them played in much smaller, weaker, or unfavoured sides and won.

Maybe a little, but there is a good reason a players creativity in attack is rated so highly. Defending is easier. It's a simple point but the area you have to score in is tiny compared to the area you have to miss, and goals happen only a few times a game as a result. Not to mention defense has more to do with organization, strength and determination than it does individual skill. Those things are easier to come by, and much of it can even be trained so guys like Messi/Zidane really stand out and are frankly worth more pound for pound than their defensive counterparts.

Just on Gerrard you make him sound like he was dragging along a complete basket case single handedly in that Liverpool team. If he's that good why hasn't he done the same at international level?

 

[duffer]

I think when all is said and done Messi will have a bigger legacy than Zizou (**** I love Zizou) but KFC Ronaldo without the injuries would have eclipsed both of them.

 

[duffer]

The team that has Zidane generally runs the match from start to finish. It's that simple.

Man was an artiste when it came to controlling a match. Never seen a guy run the show like he could, got the right players involved at the right times, adjusted the tempo when necessary, unlimited range of passing, insane control, fantastic with the head. God I love Zizou.

 

[Nate]

Gerrard > warmth from the sun

 

[Ausage]

Yeah the sun's all offense tbh.

 

[vcs]

Yeah the sun's all offense tbh.

Messi has taken his productivity to an unbelievable level. I already thought he was head and shoulders above everyone else in 2008-09, when Eto'o was outscoring him (I think he still ended up with 35 goals or so that season, which was a fantastic tally). However, he's managed to retain the same impact in his general play, and take his goal-scoring to ludicrous levels. Never gets injured either. Yes, it helps that there are a relatively low number of teams in La Liga (by low, I mean zero) that can challenge Barcelona, but I'm not sure a human being can play any better than this.

 

[Furball]

My head hurts enough this morning without reading the drivel in this thread.

 

[GIMH]

Not really. The article could have been attributed to Tim Lovejoy considering he also works for the BBC as does Robbie Savage, Mike Parry and lots of other people with zero creditability. It’s not the BBC eulogising over Messi, it is Pat Nevin. Pat’s a good guy though. Always enjoy his work with Stanley Victor Doggymore on C5.

Oh, I see. I don't know about the credibility of the pundit in question. I guess you have a point there.

Watched the goal, it was very good, but a tad overhyped. Liked the goal that Thierry Henry scored against Madrid (the year Arsenal made the finals) more. Still, Messi's consistency at his age is frightening.

The pundit in question is a contender for greatest player of all-time IMO

Yep, you can be considered a great player without winning a World Cup, but it would be nice if you played well at one, when you were there.

This was my first thought. Messi won't be an ATG until he performs on the biggest stage.

 

[Ikki]

Maybe a little, but there is a good reason a players creativity in attack is rated so highly. Defending is easier. It's a simple point but the area you have to score in is tiny compared to the area you have to miss, and goals happen only a few times a game as a result. Not to mention defense has more to do with organization, strength and determination than it does individual skill. Those things are easier to come by, and much of it can even be trained so guys like Messi/Zidane really stand out and are frankly worth more pound for pound than their defensive counterparts.

Just on Gerrard you make him sound like he was dragging along a complete basket case single handedly in that Liverpool team. If he's that good why hasn't he done the same at international level?

To the bolded parts: Who says so? Attacking players stand out because they score goals. In defence, being perfect for 89 minutes and faltering for one minute ****s all over your team. In attack, being crap for 89 minutes and scoring in one minute means more often than not you've had a good match. And more to the point, defending whilst also contributing to attack is harder than just defending or just attacking. It is requires a greater skillset and more energy/concentration.

Gerrard was carrying a bunch of numpties on his back most of the time. I recall a comment from Southgate a few years ago (whilst he was still playing) saying that players used to joke around that Gerrard would not only cross the ball but be the one to head it in. You look at that Liverpool squad throughout the years and realise the fact that he has won every honour at club level besides the league (although runner-up twice) and you appreciate what I am saying. Especially that CL season where there were a lot of injuries and we won it with the likes of Biscan, Diao, Mellor, Nunez, Traore, Dudek, etc. That he got to another final (although with some better players) is also quite amazing.

Gerrard for England has almost always been used in the wrong way and that is one of the great tragedies IMO for England and himself. He'll always be a good player no matter where you put him but he is best when he has a free-er role and given the trust to make things happen. He's either been covering for Lampard or played on the wings to fit other players in. It'd be akin to playing Zidane as a holding midfielder. Sure, he could do it, and he may be still one of the best players in the team but his influence on the game is going to be limited - with respect to what it could be. Out of the 80+ caps he's had Gerrard's played very few in his strongest position.

Also, to achieve such a feat (lifting an unfavoured side to trophies) with such regularity is unfair to ask of. Not even Maradona won every important trophy. He won the league and WC but never the European Cup (club) or the Copa America, for example. It doesn't detract from the instances he did do it, it's just not something that is going to happen with great regularity because football is a team game and individuals who can fight the tide are very rare.

 

[Ikki]

Hmm:

Brazil legend Pele: I was better than both Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi - Goal.com

I think when all is said and done Messi will have a bigger legacy than Zizou (**** I love Zizou) but KFC Ronaldo without the injuries would have eclipsed both of them.

He may have been better as a goalscorer...not sure as a player though. Messi has an incredible output of goals and assists. If he continues this way he will be the greatest attacking player of all-time, IMO.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I find him very hard to warm to, for some reason.

Obviously being Argentinian and scoring shed loads of goals against Arsenal aren't characteristics likely to endear him to me but it goes deeper than that.

I suspect it's because he so closely resembles that other tubby diminutive Argentine great both physically and in being a footballing savant. He's not a **** in the same way as Maradona was, but seems to share his lack of intelligence, both actual and in the footballing sense.

Being as good as he is it must be tempting to try to do it all yourself, but often you wish he'd look up more and play the easier ball.

He'e the kind of player who makes one wish the almighty was more discerning when giving out his natural talents.

 

[Ausage]

To the bolded parts: Who says so? Attacking players stand out because they score goals. In defence, being perfect for 89 minutes and faltering for one minute ****s all over your team. In attack, being crap for 89 minutes and scoring in one minute means more often than not you've had a good match. And more to the point, defending whilst also contributing to attack is harder than just defending or just attacking. It is requires a greater skillset and more energy/concentration.

On the bolded part, who says so? I would say a player who showed up for one minute to bob up for a goal after doing nothing for the other 89 was either lucky or lazy. The great players don't just bob up for the odd goal, they are absolute constant threats who pose continuous questions at defenders.

But seriously I say defending is easier because keeping the ball out is far easier than getting it in. The odds are always stacked in the favor of the defense so the attacker has to be significantly better than his opponent to score. The pressure is on the defender because he is expected to come out on top, similar to how the pressure is on the attacker rather than the goalkeeper in a shootout.

Secondly in defense the structure of the team is more important so an individual is worth less than the overall team output. Concentration, determination, quick thinking and strength are all fine characteristics in a football player, but they're also the most common ones. You can build all of them to a degree through training and hard work. Creative flair of the type of Messi and Zidane is nearly impossible to teach, which is why those individuals are more important to the team, and consequently rated higher.

None of this is to say defense is easy, or unimportant. It's obviously far from it. Just that the talents required of a defender are easier to come by, therefore a defender needs to have something extra to really be considered amongst the greats.

Gerrard for England has almost always been used in the wrong way and that is one of the great tragedies IMO for England and himself. He'll always be a good player no matter where you put him but he is best when he has a free-er role and given the trust to make things happen. He's either been covering for Lampard or played on the wings to fit other players in. It'd be akin to playing Zidane as a holding midfielder. Sure, he could do it, and he may be still one of the best players in the team but his influence on the game is going to be limited - with respect to what it could be. Out of the 80+ caps he's had Gerrard's played very few in his strongest position.

Wouldn't that suggest that he's not the versatile genius you're putting him forth as? If his work all over the field is one of his strengths, shouldn't he be able to adapt to whatever role is required of him? I take your point though, there is a specific role that he's best suited for, and he didn't get that chance for England for various reasons. Fact remains though that he hasn't performed at his best at the highest level, and plenty of great players aren't included in these discussions because they weren't in great teams. Life is unfortunately not fair.

Not denying he wasn't brilliant over those years tbh, nor that he didn't drag Liverpool far further than they would have gotten without him. I understand why you rate him, but he doesn't belong alongside Zidane.

 

[Ikki]

On the bolded part, who says so? I would say a player who showed up for one minute to bob up for a goal after doing nothing for the other 89 was either lucky or lazy. The great players don't just bob up for the odd goal, they are absolute constant threats who pose continuous questions at defenders.

But seriously I say defending is easier because keeping the ball out is far easier than getting it in. The odds are always stacked in the favor of the defense so the attacker has to be significantly better than his opponent to score. The pressure is on the defender because he is expected to come out on top, similar to how the pressure is on the attacker rather than the goalkeeper in a shootout.

Whether one is a great player or not depends on a myriad of criteria. I am talking about the actual argument regarding defenders and attackers. If an attacker does little else but score a goal in a game, he has done his job. Whereas a defender has to be wary of the threat of goal at all times and a brilliant display can be undone by just one moment - whether that is luck, skill or what have you.

Even the great players (attacking players) have plenty of games where they do little, except pop up a few moments in a game. Ronaldo (Cristiano) is one such player that has many of these games where he often isn't contributing a whole lot apart from attacking forays that result in goals. Messi in the Real game did little else till he scored.

A defender by contrast will rarely have a woeful game and make one crucial intervention and be deemed to have had a good game. I am not sure what you're really saying or how you're quantifying odds in favour of a defender to comment.

Secondly in defense the structure of the team is more important so an individual is worth less than the overall team output. Concentration, determination, quick thinking and strength are all fine characteristics in a football player, but they're also the most common ones. You can build all of them to a degree through training and hard work. Creative flair of the type of Messi and Zidane is nearly impossible to teach, which is why those individuals are more important to the team, and consequently rated higher.

I agree with the first part - a lot of defence's impact is due to a group of players being drilled well enough to stop dangerous plays. But here's the thing, it only takes one of them screwing up for a goal to occur. Whereas you can also drill a team to have a sort of tactic to attack, yet you do not need any of them to be on the same page for a goal to occur.

I disagree with you on it being harder to teach flair as opposed to creating good defenders. Again, it's not something you can quantify to any real extent and depends on perspective. I grew up with Italian football coaches and they made defending into an art. In places like Brazil - or any place with a strong presence of street football - players of flair are a dime a dozen and disciplined defenders are the rarities.

None of this is to say defense is easy, or unimportant. It's obviously far from it. Just that the talents required of a defender are easier to come by, therefore a defender needs to have something extra to really be considered amongst the greats.

Well, we are not talking about a strict defender being the best ever player. If you were talking about a pure attacker vs a pure defender, I'd even sway towards your side of the fence. That is precisely why I tend to rate midfielders, and especially those who contribute in both facets.

Wouldn't that suggest that he's not the versatile genius you're putting him forth as? If his work all over the field is one of his strengths, shouldn't he be able to adapt to whatever role is required of him? I take your point though, there is a specific role that he's best suited for, and he didn't get that chance for England for various reasons. Fact remains though that he hasn't performed at his best at the highest level, and plenty of great players aren't included in these discussions because they weren't in great teams. Life is unfortunately not fair.

Not denying he wasn't brilliant over those years tbh, nor that he didn't drag Liverpool far further than they would have gotten without him. I understand why you rate him, but he doesn't belong alongside Zidane.

Not really, because whilst he was a DM, RM, LM (positions not his best but utilised the most whilst playing in England) he could be a great player and no worse than the player whose natural position it would be. But it would take away from his biggest strength which is to be "the man" in a team and take on responsibility. With Liverpool, regardless where he played he had the onus to make things happen. With England, it didn't happen and what is sad is that they expected him to be the Gerrard of Liverpool, without giving him the tools to make that happen. I am not saying he would bring home a WC (even the best group of players won't guarantee a WC) but he would have had a far bigger influence on the team if those things had gone his way.

Those years for me won't be matched by any attacking player - nevermind Zidane who I think is a bit overrated. Zidane could never do what Gerrard did for Liverpool. I don't mean just Liverpool, I mean a weaker team in general. In such teams it is not enough to just be one thing and be good at that only. I can only imagine what Gerrard could have been if he had better players around him and he could thrive on just concentrating on attacking. During those years Gerrard put better numbers than Zidane has ever put up, and that is despite having far more responsibility as well as being in a far inferior team.

You may say I am biased because I am Liverpool fan but I think it is because I am a fan that I can truly appreciate just HOW many times this guy has saved our skin. You can probably make a 10 top video of goals he's scored just in the last minute. He's done it so many times it's almost gotten a "meh" feeling to it. Like it's expected. Theirry Henry said something fantastic about Gerrard before, he essentially said: not even forwards have scored as many important goals as Gerrard has, who is a midfielder. It's a disgrace he didn't win the Ballon d'Or in 04-05.

 

[Ikki]

Wenger on the subject:
BBC Sport - Arsene Wenger defends Barca after Jose Mourinho outburst

 

[cpr]

For me to consider someone like Messi world class, he needs to leave his comfort zone. In Spain he's feared, and defenders are frightened to tackle him, much in the same way Henry was in his Arsenal days. I always feel with Messi a strong and focused defence can keep him quiet, and I'm hoping a fully fit Rio-Vidic with Fletcher in front defensive triangle will keep him out in May (we did it in 08, the midfield element was missing in 09 which really played to his strength of running at a defence).

The fact that defenders in Spain, and the weaker European teams, don't like to tackle him, plays to his strength of running. Take that chance away and he's quiet. He doesn't produce the special strikes a la Henry/Maradonna/Ronaldo the elder could. For me, he needs to take his game abroad, face a different mentality of defending and conquer that before he can be elevated up to the heights. Zidane, Maradonna, Ronaldo, Cruyff.... All excelled in world class teams, in different countries, hence why they deserve the adulation. Some players considered fantastic at the time tried at and failed, and thus wont be remembered worldwide, players like Owen spring to mind (he was the dogs at Liverpool). Also those mentioned before excelled on the World stage, even if they didn't all take home a World Cup.

Interestingly, no one mentions Raul in these discussions, and I think its for the reasons above, he never left his comfort zone and showed he's got what it takes to dominate whereever until it was far too late.... No one can doubt his quality and sucess, but still never gets a second glace as he's not done anything to spread his reputation (alas, call me blinkered, but Giggs fits into that category for me.... has the skill, but wont capture the imagination of the world)



In response to Ikki's nomination for Gerrard, I'm arguing against it, not because I think he's a bad player, but because

A) Whilst he has the talent, he's not consistent with it, and it's very noticable when its going to waste, his 'Hollywood ball' mickey-take isn't made up, its due to the amount he wastes trying to be flash when there isnt a need. Level that one against Zidane, Platini, Beckenbaur, Matthaius etc

B) Whilst he's been the kingpin in a team built around him, outside of his comfort zone he's not produced the way a world class player should (same argument used against Messi so far). In 10 years as an England regular, he's only sparingly offered glimpses of what he can do, and is regularly accused of being wasteful. I'll take his argument that he's not in his best position, and playing at the same time as Scholes and Lampard has meant he's been shunted about, but still, his performances at the top have raised too many questions too many times.


Saying all that, for the last 10 years he's been the one scouse **** i wouldn't mind in our team.

 

[vcs]

I think you're selling Messi way, way short there.. maybe he can't curl in 30 yard freekicks or score towering headers from a corner, but he already produces special strikes with far more regularity than some amazing footballers like Henry, van Nistelrooy, and fat Ronaldo in his latter years. I mean the kind where he goes past 2-3 players as if they aren't even there. And he's already been matching their numbers for three seasons, plus everything else that he brings to the team in terms of playmaking and the space his dribbling opens up for his teammates. You could argue his numbers are probably inflated by uncompetitiveness of the Spanish League, but his CL goal-scoring record indicates he'd have no problem scoring regardless of the league. I mean, those numbers are staggering, even if you took away 10% of the goals (arbitrary figure) to account for the suspicion that Spanish teams are not that good at defending (though I find it vastly overstated). Ronaldo was special no doubt, but his injuries did not allow him to keep up that level for more than two or three seasons. Let's hope the same doesn't happen to Messi.

The other admirable thing about Messi is how smart and tactically adaptable he is. I remember in the '09 final, Guardiola played him not as a traditional wing-forward in the 4-3-3 like he'd done all season, but slightly withdrawn into midfield. His performance in that game might appear less spectacular than his usual, but it was very effective nonetheless, as Man United simply didn't see the ball again after 10 minutes. Their midfielders found it very hard to get the ball off Xavi, Iniesta and Messi. He will not stay forward at all costs hoping the ball will reach him, like Cristiano Ronaldo and wave his arms around when his team are getting outplayed. He is smart and humble enough to put the team above his own ego. Plus he has the ability to keep things simple and do that role very effectively.

As for Gerrard, fine player though he is, I don't believe he is anywhere close to any of the above names, but not going to get into a debate with Ikki over this.

 

[biased indian]

For me to consider someone like Messi world class, he needs to leave his comfort zone. In Spain he's feared, and defenders are frightened to tackle him, much in the same way Henry was in his Arsenal days. I always feel with Messi a strong and focused defence can keep him quiet, and I'm hoping a fully fit Rio-Vidic with Fletcher in front defensive triangle will keep him out in May (we did it in 08, the midfield element was missing in 09 which really played to his strength of running at a defence).

while they are busy doing that villa to score a couple and Barca to win it 3-1

 

[Ikki]

Gerrard is wasteful.

He has almost as many goals/assists per game as Lampard (who probably has the most consistent output for a midfielder during the last 20 years) - despite being in a far inferior side for most his career and being asked to play all over the place. Any more consistent and he'd be God. How can Gerrard be wasteful if, for example, despite all his weaknesses and the weaknesses in his team he is easily outperforming Zidane in terms of goals and assists if the latter player only really had to worry about playmaking and was almost always in a star-studded team?

The hollywood-ball criticism is just lazy for me and doesn't account for the environment Gerrard has had to play in. Gerrard has regularly been in a team where he has had to do everything and often create something out of nothing. And it's way overblown; his passing completion rate is up there with the likes of Cesc and Lampard - and they don't really have to go for low-percentage passes. Gerrard can't hide and delegate to his teammates because they've often not been good enough. It's actually been in seasons where Alonso played a lot that his passing was around 80% IIRC, which is very very good.

Saying all that, for the last 10 years he's been the one scouse **** i wouldn't mind in our team.

United fan saying this...

Also tend to agree with you re: Messi. I kind of doubt how good he'd be in another team/league that isn't geared towards playing the exact kind of football that would benefit him. I think he is better than Ronaldo, but Ronaldo doesn't get enough credit for jumping to another league and team and scoring almost at a rate of a goal a game, pretty much instantly.

 

[Furball]

In addition to his 52 goals, Messi also has 25 assists this season.

It's ridiculous to suggest Spanish defences are scared of tackling him. I've seen him get booted from pillar to post in games and he still comes back for more.

 

[marc71178]

It's also ridiculous to suggest that Spanish defences are very good.

I'd look to someone who's done it in more than one league (or internationally) first personally.