• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Pele vs Maradona

Who is better ?


  • Total voters
    32

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
No problem. I just assumed it was something that people who have followed football for a long time would know. I have no problem with being asked for a source.

I dont know the medical science but its been said on a number of occasions that Maradona had to have his knees scraped regularly, in addition to other medical problems, to get rid of build up due to the growth agents he was fed as a child.
I'd heard it a lot of times of course, but you hear these things all the time, mainly in taxis, usually labelled as "widely-accepted facts". Definitely worth investigating in any case. My now-deceased Grandfather used to rant about it all the time, which if anything made me more skeptical since he was a renowned bull**** artist.
 
Last edited:

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
they didn't, though. All those ATGs you mentioned, during Santos' great age in the early 1960s, played for different clubs - and yet it was Pelé's club that won nearly everything. Only Zito - whose name hardly carries any recognition today - and the goalkeeper Gilmar played regularly for the Brazil national team in World Cups.
Coutinho and Pepe don't count? They had a fantastic team and had a MUnited-like domination of the league during the late 50s to pretty much the whole of the 60s.

The 58 squad, for example, had a range of players from numerous clubs and Santos was represented well with 3 and only Flamengo had more players with 4 in the team.

The 62 squad had 7 players from Santos - the most with Botafogo 2nd at 5. The 66 squad had 6 Santos players - again the most from any Brazilian club, with Botafogo with 4 the second most. The 70 team had 5 players from Santos - again the most players from any Brazilian club, Cruzeiro and Botafogo with 3 each.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Wow, you really know nothing about this and, worse than that, you dont even realize.

Firstly regarding the sources I quoted, the NYT and The Guardian would not be able to print such things if untrue without fear of being sued. As I said, this isnt new stuff.
You know why? Because there is no proof. As Uppercut has said, you hear about this kind of thing all the time, but frankly I don't make it a point to remember crap that can't be proven.

Secondly, you want a 10 year old Maradona tested? You have an unreasonable expectation of what is possible.
You show me any proof, like that it was common or that someone from then admitted to it, etc and that'll at least make it interesting. You pretending as if it's some fact, and then only have 1-2 articles to back it up is not really an argument worth listening to.

Thirdly,as a pre-pubesant child he was taken to 'Dr.' Cacho Paladino who was told to 'fix him' and, with the tacit approval of his family, Maradona was fed a concoction of drugs and vitamins though injections and tablets that hurt his long term health. Of course you will never have heard of Cacho Paladino but given you are so well aquainted with the Maradona story perhaps he is a figment of my imagination 8-)
It could be Dr. Seuss for all I care. Show me proof of Maradona's family accepting or admitting such a thing.

Im not saying this to criticise Maradona. If anything, he is a victim. Im just a little suprised by your combination of lack of knowledge with such a staunch and uncompromising position.
My position isn't uncompromising. You said your story is factual...I am asking you to prove it. Hearsay is not very strong for me. Maybe my standards for proof are too high? :laugh:
 

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
Coutinho and Pepe don't count?
Yes, well done, you found the same wikipedia article. :p You failed to click on their articles, though, which would reveal that neither Coutinho nor Pepe have World Cup appearances.
 
Last edited:

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
I'm sorry but it's the most glaring difference and one that I haven't found an explanation for. The guy played for about 20 years at one club and kept up a goal rate of a goal a game (at least) and yet...never top scored at a WC. I have no doubts that he is amongst the greatest goalscorers/footballers of all time, but to that extent? No, I think he is overrated.
Well, I think we realised your last point a while ago.

As for never topscoring in world cups:
1958 - only 17 years old and not picked for the first two games.
1962 - missed most of the game through injury
1966 - Brazil only played 3 games

So that leaves 1970, when he's generally reckoned to have been outstanding but didn't happen to top score.

Anyway, you've made it clear that your minds made up despite what others may offer to the contrary, so time to do something else.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Yes, well done, you found the same wikipedia article. :p You failed to click on their articles, though, which would reveal that neither Coutinho nor Pepe have World Cup appearances.
Actually, I wasn't referring to them having WC appearances or them being ATGs. I hadn't even checked. I am talking about the fact that they were regularly in the Brazilian side and won a mass of titles with Pele. Frankly, I did have to look at the WC squads WC by WC because I can't/haven't memorised them all. I just knew that Santos regularly had a large portion of their side in the national team and were the strongest team easily during that period. And by practically all measures they were.

I think I pretty much proved you wrong with regards to them not having a strong side. Even when you check the squads in the WC, they come from all over and aren't concentrated. The players that regularly played were of few who both started for Brazil and played in the same at club level. And even in that respect Santos was well represented with often 2-3 players even in 58 where they had their least amount of players in the side during Pele's career.

Well, I think we realised your last point a while ago.

As for never topscoring in world cups:
1958 - only 17 years old and not picked for the first two games.
1962 - missed most of the game through injury
1966 - Brazil only played 3 games

So that leaves 1970, when he's generally reckoned to have been outstanding but didn't happen to top score.

Anyway, you've made it clear that your minds made up despite what others may offer to the contrary, so time to do something else.
In 66 Brazil were eliminated precisely because Pele didn't score enough, that's why they only played 3 games. The only tourney really that you can scrap is 62 where he only played 1 full game. You can strike off 58 for thinking he was too young but, ironically, that's the tourney he scored the most in. At his peak in 1970 he had the best team, won the tourney comfortably and was outscored by even his teammates.

So of course I won't change my mind, nothing's been brought to me to consider otherwise. For me his goal-scoring is amongst the best ever, but for me the Bradmanesque likeness people depict for his goal-scoring is exaggerated. Hence, why I think he is overrated. I call the guy one of the greatest of all time, I am certainly not being unfair to him. It's not like you have to be a great goal scorer to be a great player for it to hinge on this point - that's not my argument at all. He could have been the best player at all those WCs and I'd have no trouble accepting that as such a feat is not really about goal-scoring. My points were regarding his goal-scoring only. It's undoubtable that he had an affect on his team, the WCs and the world.
 
Last edited:

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
You know why? Because there is no proof. As Uppercut has said, you hear about this kind of thing all the time, but frankly I don't make it a point to remember crap that can't be proven.

You show me any proof, like that it was common or that someone from then admitted to it, etc and that'll at least make it interesting. You pretending as if it's some fact, and then only have 1-2 articles to back it up is not really an argument worth listening to.

It could be Dr. Seuss for all I care. Show me proof of Maradona's family accepting or admitting such a thing.

My position isn't uncompromising. You said your story is factual...I am asking you to prove it. Hearsay is not very strong for me. Maybe my standards for proof are too high? :laugh:
Firstly, if that is your standard of proof then yes, it is too high. If you only accept unequivocal, primary evidence then you have just wiped out a lot of the history of the world.

My big problem is that you are ignorant on Maradona and his life and story and yet are trying to speak from a position of authority. I could keep giving you names such as Francisco Cornejo who has talked about how he looked after Maradona and had permission from his parents to do what was needed and how he took him to Paladino but there is no point.

There is a whole host of stuff out there on this and other topics. Rather than me spoon feeding you it, how about you read a book or two and bring your knowledge level to where you incorrectly think it already is.
 
Last edited:

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Firstly, if that is your standard of proof then yes, it is too high. If you only accept unequivocal, primary evidence then you have just wiped out a lot of the history of the world.

My big problem is that you are ignorant on Maradona and his life and story and yet are trying to speak from a position of authority. I could keep giving you names such as Francisco Cornejo who has talked about how he looked after Maradona and had permission from his parents to do what was needed and how he took him to Paladino but there is no point.

There is a whole host of stuff out there on this and other topics. Rather than me spoon feeding you it, how about you read a book or two and bring your knowledge level to where you incorrectly think it already is.
Sorry, but this is rubbish. I am an avid football follower. Do I know everything? No, and I don't claim to know. But I know a lot about Maradona and had your story been true/verified I would certainly have known about it. You've got some ****amamie story that even if you Google you can't find much on and you think my standard is too high. You say his parents agreed to him getting those shots, I say show me where that information is validated. All you've done is bring forth a story, name 2 articles, name a doctor, and not even shown how in anyway they connect to Maradona or the truth. If such a thing were so true and widespread you'd hear about it much, much, more often in every kind of medium. This is the world game and one of it's biggest stars, it'd be pretty hard to hide.

I'll be even more frank with you; whilst it appears I am way in favour of Maradona over Pele, he is not even close to what I consider my favourite footballer so he is no such idol that I can't hear ill about. You prove it beyond silly hearsay and I'll accept it. This "wow, I can't believe you didn't know this story" is not endearing nor does it help your case any. You spoon-feed me some proof and if you're right I'll apologise and change my stance, until then...turn down the crap.
 
Last edited:

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Firstly regarding the sources I quoted, the NYT and The Guardian would not be able to print such things if untrue without fear of being sued. As I said, this isnt new stuff.
You know why? Because there is no proof.
Thats not how it works. Newspapers (and lots of them) printing untrue stories get sued for libel or at the least print an apology or retraction.

Saying there is no proof does not allow you carte blanche to print what you want. Newspapers like The Independent, The Guardian and The New York Times, amongst others printing stories that talk about the childhood drug usage of Maradona would be in a pretty sticky situation if there was no proof.

Im not really arguing about the evidence here, just your bizarre method of dismissing pretty reputable newspapers and saying they can print what they want without evidence.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
Thats not how it works. Newspapers (and lots of them) printing untrue stories get sued for libel or at the least print an apology or retraction.

Saying there is no proof does not allow you carte blanche to print what you want. Newspapers like The Independent, The Guardian and The New York Times, amongst others printing stories that talk about the childhood drug usage of Maradona would be in a pretty sticky situation if there was no proof.

Im not really arguing about the evidence here, just your bizarre method of dismissing pretty reputable newspapers and saying they can print what they want without evidence.
Ok, let's make it clear...I am not dismissing the story because it was the NYT that printed it. Stop building a strawman. I don't think the NYT is much of an authority on football or Maradona but that's not my argument. I simply said the article sounds like a hit-job the way the author keeps attacking Diego.

I am dismissing it because no one else has printed it...and there is no proof I can find, and apparently that you can show me. The NYT is not a bastion of journalism. It's a reputable source, but a story without proof is ultimately worthless. Naming a doctor who claims to have worked with Maradona is not proof. You claimed this story is widely known...it's not even easily found on Google and non-existant on Wikipedia. And I don't mention those two sources as if the story will be validated by them mentioning it...but at least it would be as you claim widespread enough for people to quiz over.

You claimed it has been talked about years upon years and in documentaries, books, etc. Ok, name some or quote something that can prove it to some extent. Either you man up and admit it isn't, or you prove it is and I man up and admit I was wrong. It's no skin off my nose to admit being wrong; but I hate being treated like an idiot.
 
Last edited:

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Ok, let's make it clear...I am not dismissing the story because it was the NYT that printed it. Stop building a strawman. I don't think the NYT is much of an authority on football or Maradona but that's not my argument. I simply said the article sounds like a hit-job the way the author keeps attacking Diego.

I am dismissing it because no one else has printed it...and there is no proof I can find, and apparently that you can show me. The NYT is not a bastion of journalism. It's a reputable source, but a story without proof is ultimately worthless. Naming a doctor who claims to have worked with Maradona is not proof. You claimed this story is widely known...it's not even easily found on Google and non-existant on Wikipedia. And I don't mention those two sources as if the story will be validated by them mentioning it...but at least it would be as you claim widespread enough for people to quiz over.

You claimed it has been talked about years upon years and in documentaries, books, etc. Ok, name some or quote something that can prove it to some extent. Either you man up and admit it isn't, or you prove it is and I man up and admit I was wrong. It's no skin off my nose to admit being wrong; but I hate being treated like an idiot.
Ok, lets take a variety of print publications that mention it. That in itself isnt proof but it shows that it is out there, printed and commonly accepted. Certainly widespread and accepted enough that it has never been challenged as false by Maradona or anyone else. In an earler post you claim that this is being hidden. It isnt. It is openly out there in mainstream publications.

Maradona's latest crusade - Soccer, Sport - Independent.ie
Cornejo became an early influence on Maradona's career and he became the first to allow him to tangle with medicine men and Dr Feelgoods. Cornejo persuaded Maradona's parents to allow him to take the boy to a local doctor, 'Cacho' Paladino, who had a dubious reputation but specialised in building up boxers with vitamins and drugs. "Diego was so small when I took him on that he didn't seem to be strong enough," Cornejo told Burns. "I wanted Paladino to round him off, get him fatter and bigger. So I asked the doctor to give him vitamins and other things to help him develop. 'Cacho', I said to him, 'you fix him. This boy is going to grow up to be a star'." Nothing was getting in the way of the dream.

Chris Taylor: The Observer Profile: Diego Maradona | Football | The Observer
As a boy, he had been given steroids to build him up and as a player he regularly received cortisone shots to play while injured, but it was in Barcelona that he discovered the recreational use of cocaine, a habit that grew in Naples.

Diego Armando Maradona - The Sorrow and the Pity - NYTimes.com
Drugs and Maradona are more linked than is at first apparent. He was weaned on them even before he knew it. Scurrilous men in his past, so-called doctors, mixed steroids with his food to build a frail physique into something bull-like.

In his teens, he was administered more drugs. These, the appalling painkillers that sporting authorities incongruously allow, racked and distorted the ankle, the knee, the suffering back of a superstar whose multimillion-dollar transfer fees and million-dollar salary were the excuses to patch him up, to push him through nature's warning, to play him on half a leg.


Diego Maradona in FHM, April 2000 | Reviews | 16 Dec 2009 | FHM.com
Aged eight, he signed up to the youth wing of Argentinos Juniors, then a first division side. On arrival, however, the youth trainer noted that the kid was exceptionally small, almost dwarf-like. It was at this point that Maradona first became aware of the power of drugs.

The point I am trying to make with these, regardless of sources, is that this isnt something that is hidden or unknown. This is out there and have been for years with a wide variety of publications making note of it and stating it as fact rather than rumour.

Now without a doubt a lot of this was influenced by the book "Hand of God: The Life of Diego Maradona, Soccer's Fallen Star" by Jimmy Burns and others have taken it further.





That has direct quotes from his mentor and doctor on their backroom medicine methods.

In an effort to be fair, here is the author on how Maradona found the book.

I cant find any of the documentaries online that I have seen that have looked into it. So you can either take my word on that, which I doubt you will do or dismiss it, which you are within your rights to do.

You want a wiki mention? Well Id argue that that doesnt mean much but there are lots of mentions on non-English language wikipedia pages.
Here is the translated page of Serbian language Wikipedia and it is in a lot of others. I have no idea why it is not on the English language page.

"Uz dopuštenje roditelja odveo je Diega lekaru sumnjive reputacije. With the permission of parents took the dubious reputation Diego doctor. Kačo Paladino, injekcijama, je podignuo mišiće buduće zvijezde. Paladin je to 1995 . Kačo Paladino, injections, the muscles podignuo future stars. Paladin is 1995 . godine, nakon penzionisanja, priznao pred novinarima rekavši: Kad sam okončao tretman, Diego je izgledao poput najboljeg trkačkog konja. years after retirement, admitted to reporters saying: When I completed treatment, Diego looked like the best horse racing. Pri tom uopšte nije pocrveneo, a trebao je, jer je tim činom odveo Maradonu u svet dopinga. At the same time did not blush, and was supposed to, because that act took Maradona to the world of doping."

Now it is fine if you don't believe it. But it is more than just rumours and most in the game have little to no problem accepting the words of his mentor, doctor and those around him and believe it to be true.

As I said previously, I dont hold this against Maradona. I see him as a victim of a twisted combination of the will of others to help him and themselves.
 
Last edited:

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Why is there a cricket chat style thread in this part of the forum?

Get rid of it please.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
As I said previously, I dont hold this against Maradona. I see him as a victim of a twisted combination of the will of others to help him and themselves.
TBF, I am still cynical about it all but I don't hold the same reservation about it. It's quite possible it happened and, in light of reading the above, even probable. What he was given at such a young age is anyone's guess. The fact that they gave it to him, the fact that the person administering the concoctions didn't really know what he was doing, leaves one to question the sanity of it all. But I guess in poverty you are searching for any way out. I am not sure how this diminishes the guy's legacy but it's a strange thing. One wonders if players of that generation or even now are still doing it.

Thanks for the research, I appreciate the trouble of making the post.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
TBF, I am still cynical about it all but I don't hold the same reservation about it. It's quite possible it happened and, in light of reading the above, even probable. What he was given at such a young age is anyone's guess. The fact that they gave it to him, the fact that the person administering the concoctions didn't really know what he was doing, leaves one to question the sanity of it all. But I guess in poverty you are searching for any way out. I am not sure how this diminishes the guy's legacy but it's a strange thing. One wonders if players of that generation or even now are still doing it.

Thanks for the research, I appreciate the trouble of making the post.
No problem. It was actually fun to keyboard bash to see what I could find to back something Id read and watched a long time ago. Its something that if true, and I would guess it is, that Maradona had no say over and still has no idea what went into his body. Its sad that this mistreatment probably led to his body breaking down as he got older. Also sad that people believe that his self destructive streak came from believing that people didnt love him and treated him as a commodity. Which would be entirely understandable.

The man is a **** but there are aspects of his story that are unfortunate and that he isnt responsible for. Still a great player though.
 
Last edited:

Magrat Garlick

Global Moderator
. At his peak in 1970 he had the best team, won the tourney comfortably and was outscored by even his teammates.
That wasn't his peak though. He'd stopped top scoring in that São Paulo league in 1965.

I'm still stunned as to how 12 from 14 is a 'much inferior' record than 1200 in 1300. It's basically the same rate ffs.
 

Ikki

Hall of Fame Member
That wasn't his peak though. He'd stopped top scoring in that São Paulo league in 1965.

I'm still stunned as to how 12 from 14 is a 'much inferior' record than 1200 in 1300. It's basically the same rate ffs.
I don't mean his absolute peak but to separate that from the period after 1970 where he practically retired/played in US. In his peak he didn't have good WCs. Also I never claimed the bolded, where did you get that from?

Well, in his first WC he scored 6 goals, for the rest he was below a goal a game. In 62 he scored 1 goal, got injured and didn't play again. In 66 he scored 1 goal in the 2 games he played and Brazil were eliminated. In 70, they went all the way and he scored 4 goals.

It's much more achievable to get that kind of SR in a relatively small tourney...whereas that 20 year SR is matched by maybe 1-2 other players in history - Puskas and Muller?* Ronaldo IIRC has 15 goals in 17 games but even he cannot get close to that kind of dominance. It's not really the SR that matters but what it suggests. It's akin to a batsman averaging 100 over a 20 year career against one that averages that in a few series.

It's basically this:

58 - 6 goals but top scorer was Fountaine with 13.
62 - 1 goal, injured and out for the rest of the tourney.
66 - 1 goal and Brazil eliminated from the tourney.
70 - 4 goals, Gerd Muller with 10 and Jairzinho with 7.

*Puskas was injured in 54 and didn't play most of the tourney/was 35 in 62 - Muller actually did win the Golden boot.
 
Last edited:

Top