Mortal Games wrote on 05/21/12 at 14:28:41:

Italian football has always had results like that. If a match there has/had more than 3 goals it must be either bribed, 3 men sent off or there were no italian players present.

Still I see your point, though I dont entirely agree. If you take for example champions league finals, you dont see any major trend. I think one of the main differences in the WC is that the difference in playing strength is less.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/21/12 at 11:53:02:


In the singular instance of penalty kicks, Chelsea did deserve to win. After the game the manager of Bayern explained that Neuer took the third penalty after a long pause because nobody wanted to step up and take it! 

In order to win a championship, the players have to believe in themselves. Robben lacked the confidence to take the kick because he had already missed one in the extra time. While I think Robben should still have taken either the third or fourth penalty, the rest of the players had no such excuse.

I didn't know that Torres was refused an opportunity in the first five, but it's a wonderful problem to have as a manager that so many players wanted to step up and take the risk.

Cruyff is. And that has everything to do with him being Dutch.

Quote:

Pele had promoted himself very well along the years joining FIFA burocrats, but Maradona is best. The only problem is that he is a rebel.   

Quote:


You are right about the heavy leather ball and shoes but in those times football was in slow motion too and defenders could be like Vince Jones but were like girlscouts without agressive play. Any footage of those times makes anyone laughing about the ingenuity of defenders or the way they score goals. On the other hand, if Pele was playing today no doubt he will be a good player but far away from the best, because it is much more dificult for a forward to score then in those times. Today football is much more physical and the tactics had a big evolution, thats why it is not very apropriate to compare diferent times.

Mortal Games wrote on 05/19/12 at 22:44:15:

Pele said the same of Romario.

Quote:

Wow, He is a very humble guy. I only give him the benefit of a doubt, because I know the rivalry between brasilians and argentinians, but if Messi was playing in those times of slowmotion football and easy defenders, he will score 3,000 goals. Even today, brasilian football have nothing to compare to Europe. As for World Cups it´s a tournament of one week but much more important is the Champions League because a team needs to work all season and there we see the real work of coaches and automatic movements of all team. One year work of national championships and Champions League represent much more than one weak event for me.
http://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/news?slug=ycn-11071584
I never heard of this guy too! New Jersey State Youth Soccer??   

Maradona and Messi are the best. Argentinian player as natural talent that I never saw anywhere. If someone has doubts about Messi, just put the tv in slowmotion and look at what he does with his foot.

Gilchrist is a legend wrote on 05/19/12 at 21:16:41:

Very strange! In England it is a known fact that German teams always beat English teams on penalties.
I can only guess that the fact that the Chelsea goalie is Czech and that only two of the penalty takers were English made all the difference.

Gerd Müller and Romario belong to my favourites. They all in all only play 10 minutes a match but score two or three times in those few minutes.

In any case we wont see my taxeuros at work in the final

Still the best player ever?

Interesting. When it's about football I have to agree to nearly everything Willempie is writing. *thumbsup*

To talk about the greatest ever is in football even more difficult than in chess. Put Pele to Peru, put Cruyff to Iran, but Beckenbauer to Angola. Forwards and offensive midfields have it a lot easier than goalies ....

Gary Linekar, Michael Owen and Wayne Rooney all agree. Arsene Wenger said last season that Messi is the best ever, without question.

But it's true. Pele's life-time achievements appear to be untouchable. Pele scored more than 1200 goals in all competitions! Maradona's dribbling skills are still incredible. His "goal of the century" against England is one of the most memorable goals in World Cup history.

I will stick with my previous statement. In terms of making his teammates better, finding and creating open passing lanes, and finishing, Lionel Messi is at least as good as Pele, and FAR better than Maradona was. 

For me, Maradona is perhaps in the top five in the world, but never absolute best. Granted, that is in part because of his disrespect for the game (the Hand of God goal and his drug abuse come to mind). But also his ball-hogging. He created some amazing feats when he got into trouble due to his selfishness, but he also lost the ball needlessly countless times as well.

I wouldnt call him the best ever, certainly not yet (though I'd say atm he is equal with Cruyff). If you have a team of such a quality playing in your service, it is a little bit easier to shine. Compare that with another Argentinian who led a very mediocre team to the WC or yet another Argentinian who won the European cup 5 times in a row.

The best ever is of course purely personal, but personally I'd go for Maradonna who apart from being exceptional also took the team up a couple of levels..