Makavelian
Registered User
Modern players would all be winging they lost because of the state of the pitches.
Ronaldo (Brazilian)
- Thread starter sambo692009
- Start date
Sabatasso
Banned
Makes me wonder why the fuck you're on a forum in the first place...
Amateur
Registered User
A classic case of agree to disagree perhaps, albeit the phrase "utter bollocks" is your way of saying that I'm wrong, which is something that I'm more than willing to debate since in my opinion nothing you've said validates your claim with sufficient strength or consistency.
Back when Pele played the game -regardless of getting kicked to pieces- defensive tactics, and I mean tactics, were very ineffective: yes, once the defender got close to you, he would kick the shit out of you and the referee would allow it more times than not, that I fully agree with; however, the essential point as far as I'm concerned, was how a defender would get close to you, the tactical coherence that it would require, and in that very essential respect, defensive tactics were quite simply extremely ineffective and one dimensional.
In the cases when a player didn't knew were to pass it, the player could always pass it to the flank area, fully knowing that one of his teammates would be completely unmarked, because defensive tactics did not properly covered the massive space that was always available to you in the flank areas of the pitch, which is one massive reason why wide players such as Garrincha or George Best were so influential at the time.
So as a defender, if I wanted to kick the shit out of Pele, once I got close to Pele, Pele knew that Garrincha would be unmarked in the flank area of the pitch; and because defensive tactics were so barbaric in one respect yet so naive in the other respect, a player did not needed to have a great deal of football IQ in order to defeat the system, physical attributes and on the ball skills were much more important than tactical intelligence.
The one word that I would use to describe the system is, naive, the defensive system was naive in the off the ball respect: two defenders on Garrincha, then Pele was left unmarked, two defenders on Pele, then Garrincha was left unmarked, the midfield did not defended like a unit, strikers barely tracked back: do you need to be smart to play around getting the shit kicked out of you when the defensive system itself is so unsophisticated? In my opinion you do not.
If you are a defender, and your coach tells you to stay close to Pele at all times, as a defender your task is extremely simple and you do not need any football IQ to carry out the task successfully; more importantly, since the defensive system was so one dimensional, as an attacking player, you really didn't need to have an extraordinary football IQ in order to outsmart the defensive system, it was not difficult to be smart when the game was dumb.
As far as I'm concerned, yes Pele was smart, but by no means did he possessed an extraordinary football IQ and the main reason why he could play around the system so effectively, was because he was a one in a million athlete with exceptional on the ball skills, not because he was incredibly smart off the ball nor on the ball.
As for the benefits of modern nutrition and advanced training etc, I fully agree with that and I have not argued against any of that, my argument is simple: slow football, naive defensive tactics, made Pele look better than he actually was, in my opinion. There's no doubt that Pele would withstand the physical challenge of today's football, but what I argue is, how Pele would be able to cope with not having massive amounts of space to pass the ball towards the flank areas of the pitch, how Pele would outsmart a sophisticated defensive system where the midfield defends like a unit, etc, etc.
One could speculate that Pele would adapt extremely well, it is well possible, but I disagree with such a speculation: in my opinion, during Pele's time, technical attributes and physical attributes were much more important than tactical ability, I will never agree with the notion that a "smart" player from the 1970s would be a "smart" player today.
Personally, I think that late 1980s and early 1990s football players got the worst part, not only did they get kicked almost or perhaps just as badly as 1970s football players, but they also had to play around a competent defensive system.
At the end of the day, I respect your opinion, but I disagree with the general point. Furthermore, I reaffirm that I would never consider Pele the best player of all times, on one hand because there's a lot of speculation around how fast and agile he would be with modern day diet and training, but mainly because there's not enough footage to convince me that he was a better player than either Messi or Maradona.
Sure he did bro ....by letting me know that Pele was great because the game was slower back then and the defensive tactics were poor. :tongue:
How old are you guys....like 10?
I have seen Pele in action via extensive videos on his great achievements and there are many many sites that shows his proven career statistics....so there is no need for me to get "pwned" here by idiots like yourself who thinks that football was a lot easier in Pele's era that why he falsely is called the greatest.
Hate him all you want ...he is still the greatest!
Pure 100% idiots I tell ya....you guys never fail to show ignorance with some bullshit made up reasoning or far fetched story. :no:
Look at this idiot Amatuer above me trying to rationalize his stupid idea of why Pele isn't great.....he is surely long winded.
:bammers:
Sabatasso
Banned
Sure he did bro ....by letting me know that Pele was great because the game was slower back then and the defensive tactics were poor. :tongue:
How old are you guys....like 10?
I have seen Pele in action via extensive videos on his great achievements and there are many many sites that shows his proven career statistics....so there is no need for me to get "pwned" here by idiots like yourself who thinks that football was a lot easier in Pele's era that why he falsely is called the greatest.
Hate him all you want ...he is still the greatest!
Pure 100% idiots I tell ya....you guys never fail to show ignorance with some bullshit made up reasoning or far fetched story. :no:
Look at this idiot Amatuer above me trying to rationalize his stupid idea of why Pele isn't great.....he is surely long winded.
:bammers:
I haven't seen any Pelé hatred, and it's in fact you that act like you're 10 year old when you're unable to answer tidy posts with nothing but aggressive ramblings.
Just to get this straight, are you implying that football hasn't changed since Pelé was active?
Wewillgreetu
Registered User
Well I am here to discuss all things PES surprisingly, although I have been sidetracked a little here. Just saying though, people will always have there differences.
Amateur
Registered User
Sure he did bro ....by letting me know that Pele was great because the game was slower back then and the defensive tactics were poor. :tongue:
How old are you guys....like 10?
I have seen Pele in action via extensive videos on his great achievements and there are many many sites that shows his proven career statistics....so there is no need for me to get "pwned" here by idiots like yourself who thinks that football was a lot easier in Pele's era that why he falsely is called the greatest.
Hate him all you want ...he is still the greatest!
Pure 100% idiots I tell ya....you guys never fail to show ignorance with some bullshit made up reasoning or far fetched story. :no:
Look at this idiot Amatuer above me trying to rationalize his stupid idea of why Pele isn't great.....he is surely long winded.
:bammers:
Have you heard about Pele's teammate "Coutinho" who scored 370 goals? How many players, in the last 30 years, have scored 370 goals?
Should I believe that football players in the 1960s, were simply better goal scorers than the footballers of today, because the footballers of today are just overacting nancy boys despite the fact that they are stronger and healthier than the football players of Pele's era? An illogical argument that falls flat on its face.
One of Pele's teammates scored 370 goals, that's not normal, I cannot remember a player who has scored 370 goals in the last 30 years; only Romario has scored more, but his statistics are surrounded by doubt, since he never scored anything close to 300 goals in European Football.
Am I to believe that Pele and Coutinho are simply better than every single striker that we have seen in the last 30 years of top level football? Or would it be more rational to believe that scoring goals in the 1960s was much easier than scoring goals in the 1980s?
You have your own opinion of course, which is fair enough, but it is in fact pathetic how you try to ridicule any person who doesn't buy that Pele is the greatest player ever.
*
*
If I say that the nutrition and training of the 1960s and 1970s favored natural born athletes.... is it bullshit?
In my opinion, I think that the nutrition and training programs of the time did favored natural born athletes such as Pele.... I say that because I used to play football, and I was naturally faster and more agile than almost all the teammates that I ever had, and I know the difference between playing in a football league where the players are not subjected to severely strict diets and training programs, and playing in a football league where the players are all subjected to severely strict diets and training programs; and in my experience, the difference is that a natural born athlete will have a massive edge when the lesser athletes are not subjected to strict diet and training programs.
Case in point: Xavi Hernandez, Andres Iniesta, did we see players like them in the 1960s and 1970s? No, we saw great natural born athletes such as Eusebio and Pele, Garrincha, Best, Cruijff, etc.
Iniesta would never be strong enough to withstand the physical challenge, and would always be overlooked in favor of stronger athletes; Xavi would probably be overlooked in favor of bigger and faster athletes. It was a completely different ball game back then, tactical discipline was not the winning factor, instead on the ball skills and physical attributes won the titles.
Bottom line: natural born athletes such as Pele and Eusebio looked better than they actually were.... I'm not saying that Cristiano Ronaldo is better than Pele ever was, what I'm saying is, that a striker who scored 1000 goals at a time when it was much easier to score goals, is not necessarily better than a striker who scored 300 goals at a time when it was more difficult to score goals, as simple as.
But I guess you are free to believe that 1960s defenders would break your legs in two, that the nutrition and training programs of the time did not favored natural born athletes, that the football players of today are "nancy boys" despite the fact that they run far more than 1960s football players, that Pele would score 120 goals per season if he played in Europe today, etc, etc. It's your opinion, but you look like a fool when you ridicule others for having perfectly logical opinions.
"Pelé was great, just not as great as he thinks himself... ~700 competitive goals is very impressive, and ~1300 is only true if you bend the truth." (Sabatasso).
If the above statement by you does not show hatred ...it surely shows that you have no respect for a great player such as Pele.
You have, without any proof, tried to discredit his reputation by posting ridiculous statements and a link to a site that does nothing but try to smear his career goals. I am here to call bullshit ..BULLSHIT when i see fit, and your ridiculous statements stinks of hatred for Pele. :realmad:
I am also perturbed by Amateurs explanation which you gleefully accept that football was easier back in Pele's days ...hence the reason why he scored so many goals. How about just saying he was fucking amazing. Nobody ...and i repeat Nobody had the presence, original, unique skills the he possessed during his era....sure we have seen it copied after...but :blush:
I would be stupid not to realize that football has evolved immensely since the 1960 and 70's. How does one compare players from both era when there is so much disparity between the development of the apparels, pitches, players....etc.
We have a right to our own opinions on who we believe is the greatest of all time ....but to make stupid and frivolous statements is just fucking retarded.
I could have argued that Maradona is the only player to have cheated himself to his single world cup title in 1986...remember he/they only advanced after beating England 2-1 in the quarter finals from a handled ball by him that went unpunished. ....maybe that fact pushed him into cocaine addiction year later. Greatest ever?
Reading is fundamental bro......maybe you should start by visiting Wikipedia to find valid information on stuff you have no clue about.
Don't just make shit up and expect ppl to accept it.
Peace
R9NALD9
Registered User
Thank you, exactly why I regard Brazilian Ronaldo being so great. He ridiculed defenses in a age where defensive tactics were at it's best...and he did it in more than one league and in the best league (serie A) at the time.
Wewillgreetu
Registered User
Well put, I have to agree with you here. The Italian league back in that period was the best and probably was the best league in the history of football. You only have to look at the players in the league at that time and how dominate the Italian teams were in Europe. Juventus, AC. Milan, Parma, Napoli, Inter, Lazio and Sampdoria all won european trophies around this period. Plus, you had a whole host of Italian teams reaching the final and later stages of these tournaments.
When Ronaldo was in his prime he was up there with the greats. A definite legend of the game in my book.
fick
Registered User
Not intending to debate this topic if your opinion is effectively "Defenders used to be dumb with no idea of tactics".
A lack of footage from the era is most likely to blame for this, so I shall refrain from any direct comment, but will say however, that the art of defending has changed, not the ability of players or any tactical nous.
I may also highlight that the art has gone from actual tackling to tapping strikers on the shoulder to get them to fall over.
Sorry Amateur, but this is a non event.
Amateur
Registered User
I call bullshit....
I have just seen about three complete matches of Brazil at the 1970 World Cup, and you know what I noticed? Pele was not even Brazil's best player during that World Cup (my opinion, of course). So many crucial goals, in which Pele played absolutely no part.... It's easy to see why so many experts say that Brazil 1970 would win with or without Pele....
Furthermore, the so-called "unique" style of Pele? So many times when I could not distinguish Pele from the rest of Brazil's great players, that I fail to see how Pele's "unique skills" are that unique.
Tell me, by what standards is it more impressive to be "original" in the 1960s, after so many legendary players had played, players so legendary, so mythical, that you don't even know their names: how is that more impressive, than being an original today, after the world has seen players like Pele, Best, Garrincha, Cruijff, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Zidane, etc, etc?
I find that your opinion revolves around a larger than life double standard, where for you, it is more impressive to be an original at a time when the sport barely had any legends, than to be an original when the sport has witnessed the talents of so many legendary players whose names are still known today. I'm curious.... Can you mention 20 legendary players BEFORE the era of Pele? Without the use of Wikipedia?
As for nobody having the presence, original, unique skills the Pele possessed during his era....
As far as I'm concerned, both Lio Messi and Ronaldo are much more distinguishable than Pele ever was, Pele needed to milk the fuck out of his little trademark dribble in order to stand out, when Pele didn't milk the shit out of his patented little dribble you couldn't even distinguish him from the rest of his Brazil teammates, Pele was a fucking diva as far as the 1970 World Cup goes, I find that Messi doesn't need to milk the shit out of his trademark dribbles in order for you to find him on the pitch, and the same goes for Ronaldo, even when they play at 50% of their capacity they still stand out, I cannot say the same for Pele.
Hopefully you do realize that this is very subjective, and that you cannot objectively claim that NOBODY had the presence and originality that Pele possessed during his era. Again: bullshit on your part.
It depends on what you consider to be "fucking retarded", I mean, saying that football was slower in the 1960s and 1970s, saying that defensive tactics were outdated in the 1960s and 1970s.... is not.... a frivolous statement.... it's just a cold fact supported not only by experts but also by actual footage.
Do yourself a favor and stop reading bullshit propaganda, in this respect, watching the actual footage is much more relevant than listening to what a nostalgic 60 year old man has to say about it.
My opinion: I do not think Pele is the greatest player of all times... though I still think he would be ten times better than Cristiano Ronaldo.
Fact: football in the 1960s and 1970s was not only slower, but also dumber, than the game of today.
Hopefully you might understand where I'm coming from; if not, no problem, I would tell you to fuck off, but this really has very little importance to me.
*
*
Nah, frankly, I think your argument falls flat on its face: in no way is my opinion that defenders used to be dumb with no idea of tactics....
But to deny that football started out as a very rigid game, a very rigid game which was revolutionized by the number ten player who was not limited to one specific area of the pitch, a number ten player who drifted in and out of different areas of the pitch at different times; to deny that defensive tactics needed to evolve in order to adequately counter the innovation of the number ten player.... Was it not Pele who established the trend of the number ten shirt?
Is it then, not rational that, since Pele established that trend and effectively revolutionized the game, that defensive tactics had not evolved nearly enough, and that therefore Pele's job was significantly easier due to the fact that defensive tactics were designed in accordance to the rigid nature of pre-Pele football?
I never said that defenders were dumb themselves, I said that defensive tactics were dumb (outdated is a better word for it), and that Brazil created a new way of playing football, and that it payed off for Brazil and for Pele.
Who knows, perhaps if one dug deep enough, one would find that the Second World War was something of a factor, one of the many reasons why Brazilian Football was so far ahead of European Football at the time; I mean, the 1960s are only 15 years away, and perhaps football wasn't a priority considering that far more essential demands were still in the making; or maybe I'm wrong here....
At the end of the day, I believe that if Pele played today, he would be a much better player than Cristiano Ronaldo; but to use his 1000 goals and 3 World Cups, as the perpetual and universal standard to measure all modern players, is just a ridiculous argument.
Bottom line: to say that "defensive tactics were dumb" is the same as saying that "defenders were dumb" just shows how shallow or biased your argument is.... I never suggested that defenders are more intelligent now, I never suggested that a defender from the 1960s would not adapt perfectly into the modern game, I never suggested that Pele would struggle today, however, what I did suggested quite clearly, is that a goal scorer who scored 1000 goals in the 1960s and 1970s, would never get close to that number if he played today.
That I fully agree with, but that has little to do with tactics (albeit diving is a tactic, of course). Out of curiosity, you being older than me, when did you first noticed that the game was "softening" up?
Sabatasso
Banned
Funny you should say that, you're full of it.. bullshit that is.
lol how can anyone even compare brazilian ronaldo to c.ronaldo...
even the brazilian ronaldo supporters will hate on me, but i'm gonna have to say that the brazilian ronaldo in my opinion was the best ever. what i'm saying is if ronaldo, maradona, cruyff, pele could all travel in time and play in the same era, then ronaldo would come out on top.
PS. yes i understand modern nutrition, training, yadda, yadda, but i'm not focusing on variable elements that we cannot control.
even the brazilian ronaldo supporters will hate on me, but i'm gonna have to say that the brazilian ronaldo in my opinion was the best ever. what i'm saying is if ronaldo, maradona, cruyff, pele could all travel in time and play in the same era, then ronaldo would come out on top.
PS. yes i understand modern nutrition, training, yadda, yadda, but i'm not focusing on variable elements that we cannot control.
fick
Registered User
It wasn't an argument, nor even a debate as I'm sure I made quite clear.
Would like to point out the following though...
Amateur said:
Ergo: dumb.
It started for me in the late 80's, early 90's and has escalated in line with the increase of foreign players. European/South American theatrics have been a blight on the English game. Partly as they are pathetic to watch, partly because English players try to copy, but have neither the skill nor the over-acting prowess required to pull it off.
Wewillgreetu
Registered User
I have to agree with this the mid 90's - late 90's is when I started to notice the theatrics. You say they have been a blight on the game? Yes for there theatrics not for there skill. If these players weren't in the english game then it wouldn't be rated as highly, lets not forget that. The premiership continues to be touted as the best league in the world and you will find the best players in this league are actually mostly foreigners.
fick
Registered User
And therein lies one of my biggest frustrations. Everyone bemoans the lack of English talent and our frequent, lacklustre and dearth of skill. Hardly any wonder when doubtless many young English players are overlooked in favour of the next big import.
I can't think of any other league in europe that imports so many (and in most cases, average) foreign players.
Can't wait until the FA get the stones to cap the number of foreign players like other leagues do.
Amateur
Registered User
I am not denying that I did mentioned that tactics were one dimensional and dumb, however, what I fail to understand, is how my reasoning can be twisted into "defenders are dumb" when in fact I never did suggested anything close to that.
My point is simple: I believe that is is well possible, that if certain defenders from the 1960s and 1970s traveled through time, adapted to the new tactical systems, that they would be better than most and perhaps all of the defenders of today; it is well possible as far as I'm concerned.
But to deny, to deny, that defensive tactics (irrespective of the technical or individual ability of the defender) of the 1960s and 1970s, made it easier to score goals, is just delusional, one quick look at Brazil 1970 and you can see all the space and time that you had to: aim, think, re-aim, and then shot, or pass the ball.
Quite simply, you don't have that much time and space today, as simple as that. I can respect the fact that a lot of people think that Pele is the best player of all times, but when 1000 goals and 3 World Cups are the basis for that, I cannot respect the argument. To say that 1000 goals in the 1960s is better than 250 goals in the 1990s, is not only speculation, but utter bullshit, most probably the product of nostalgic fans who haven't taken a second look at their precious generation.
Maybe it was wrong of me to say that "Pele looked better than he actually was", maybe I'm being a hypocritical asshole, but when an attacking player scores 1000 goals whilst at the same time being the playmaker of the team, to me that attacking player looked better than he actually was.
What Pele did in the 1960s can be done today, the only difference is, that the playmaker will never get close to 1000 goals, and that the playmaker will more than likely never win anything of real importance, because the classic number ten tactic is no longer a successful tactic.
Some people might be naive enough to argue that Messi is a playmaker, and that Xavi and Iniesta are also playmakers, which to an extent is true, but to argue that Pele could easily do the job of any of the aforementioned players, is fair enough, just as long as you recognize that Messi will never get close to 1000 goals nor 3 World Cups.
Call it an argument or a debate or whatever, I'm merely making myself clear as I don't like to see my words twisted into something entirely different.
That makes a lot of sense, I'm sure many would agree with you.
For my part, I don't really remember 1990s football all that well, but I have many matches of two players from the late 1980s and early 1990s, Roberto Baggio and Carlos Valderrama, and to me, they got kicked a lot, and it went unpunished many times.
Not to mention the 1990 World Cup, where Maradona was kicked all the time, and one of the toughest and most defensive world cup tournaments in history, it has the all-time record for lowest-goals-scored per game, which I think adequately represents my opinion of late 1980s and early 1990s football, from what I've seen of course.
And from a more statistical point of view: Romario got his leg broken by a brutal and shameless tackle, Maradona got his leg broken by a well known butcher, Baggio suffered a broken leg before he was 20 years old and by the time he was 24 he barely had any cartilage left in his knees, Van Basten retired at a young age due to a fucked up ankle: these are all players from the late 1980s and early 1990s.... I mean, would you say that star players from the same era, getting their legs hacked, is milder than 1970s football?
For my part, and I base my opinion almost solely on World Cup matches, the game started softening up with the 1998 World Cup, I've seen plenty of matches of Italy and Colombia at the 1990 and 1994 World Cups, and the 1998 World Cup, for me, marked the beginning of a new era for football: more fluid, more open spaces, more attacking football, easier to create goal scoring chances, not as boring as the infamous 1990 and 1994 World Cups, and with that, more play acting.
At the end of the day, I'm comparing the 2000s with 1985-1995, and don't know what I would think if I had watched the late 1970s and early 1980s. In any case, I genuinely appreciate your opinion and the time you've dedicated to writing it down.
Wewillgreetu
Registered User
Well there is a lack of english talent at this moment. Quite simply the majority are either promising youngsters or are just not good enough. Yes, alot of foreign players keep the young english players out but this is usually because they are the better option. What gets me is how over rated and over hyped english talent can be. You just need to look at the recent transfers. Andy Carroll 35 million, James Milner 25 million, Gareth Barry 20 odd million, Glen Johnson 20 odd million, Jordan Henderson 20 million, Stewart Downing 20 odd million etc. It is time they valued players realistically.
I agree with you but that is what happens when you bring foreigners in. Some can be hit and miss. Some just don't get with the culture or the style of the game. Right at this moment though the best players in the Premiership are foreigners. I couldn't really name you any worldclass english talent at this time. There are promising youngsters in the horizon, lets see how they develop. What I will say is most of the most memorable players in the last 15 years of the Premiership have been foreign. Names like Henry, Bergkamp, Vieira, Van Nistlerooy, Fabregas, Ginola, Zola, Van Persie, Ronaldo, Vidic, Silva, Aguero, Yaya Toure etc What I will say it is important to have foreign influence in the league. Foreigners bring skill and different cultures to the league. What you need to find is a balance.
I don't know if they will be brave enough to do this right now. The FA are concerned about the image of the Premiership. In there view it is the best league in the World right at this moment. If they capped the number of foreigners the leagues image would be hurt at this stage right now. On the otherhand if they don't do something it will be the English national team that suffers as more and more foreigners come into the game. You are right though, something has to be done. Will they have the stones? It remains to be seen.