How do you rate players? I mean, how do you do it exactly?
Ever since the dawn of time, players have been compared to each other. Teams have been compared to each other. Players have been described as great, brilliant, poor, and average. But when it boils right down to it, what do you look for in a player?
Recently, there has been a plethora of David Beckham articles, and the core of each of these articles centres on whether he should get his 108th cap...or not.
The argument for Beckham seems to centre on his great service for club and country.
The argument against focuses on whether he deserves to be treated as a legend, an honour that the cap would undoubtedly bring.
When you get right down to the nitty-gritty, what are the elements that make a player, never mind a great player.
Skill, technique, strength, speed, stamina, tactical acumen, desire, belief, drive, and these are only a few of the elements needed to make it as a professional footballer, the list is endless.
These days, in our media driven age (and us on Bleacher are party to it too) greatness is a term that is used too often (in my opinion, anyway).
To me, there have been two truly great players. Pele and Maradona. No-one else comes near. But how do you describe them?
If Christiano Ronaldo and David Beckham are viewed upon as being "World Class", how do you rate Pele and Diego?
Universal class? Out of this world? The point is (again my opinion) that Pele and Maradona were the greatest players to ever play the game, so I view them as being World Class. (Legends if you like).
You can't keep inventing terms to describe a players ability.
The way I look upon footballers could be construed as being strange but to me there's a logic there.
Pele and Maradona were "World Class" ***** (five stars) (or Legend's), they had all the attributes necessary to make it in any league.
Cruyff, Puskas, Charlton, Beckenbauer, Platini to me were what I'd call "Continental Class" **** (four stars), they had the attributes to play in most leagues, but not every league.
Beckam, Giggs, Guardiola, Totti, Rodney Marsh, Stan Bowles, Matt Le Tissier are "Premiership Class" *** (three stars) these are players who usually only excels in one major league.
Players like Gerrard and Lampard would also figure in here, in my reckoning, because part of what makes a footballer great is his desire and drive to prove himself in other climates. And while these two players are brilliant players, they have chosen to stay in the comfort of home rather than move abroad.
Now I know that Bobby Charlton only ever played in England, but when his career is analysed, he was just a phenomenal player, and is deserving of the legend status.
When Gerrard and Lampard have retired, their careers will have to be forensically analysed to see if they reach this status.
"Lower Premiership Class" gets ** (two stars), players like Danny Murphy, Kevin Davies, really good pro's who have dined at the top table but aren't exactly what you'd call great.
And finally "Championship Class" * (One Star), your average Crystal Palace player, or Ireland player for that matter.
Being "anal", I further break these allocations down again, from 5* to 1*.
For example, Roy Keane is a five star premiership player, but Jermaine Jenas is a three star premiership player. Beckham would be a four star premiership player, in case you are wondering.
Anyway, I've shown you how I rate players. How I begrudgingly recognise their greatness, because lets face it, even Kevin Davies is Pele when compared to us writing here.
But how do you rate players? Am I being too harsh? Am I not harsh enough? Are there more terms to describe our idol's that I haven't thought of?
Some are just better than others. And everyone views it differently.
comments (68) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
That is actually a really good way of rating players there! Nice to see Matt Le Tissier not get overlooked as Premiership class as well! Good article Willie!
from about 1 month ago
Couldn't leave out Le Tissier Barney, the skill the man had was unreal. I can picture him now, juggling that ball and thumping it into the top corner....
about 1 month ago
I don't like the traditional belief that maradona and pele were head and shoulders better than everyone else around them. Of course they were at the top of the pile but what if Maradona had got injured the week before mexico 86. Would he have been less of a player? no. But would he be remembered as less of a player? yes. The same can be said of a lot of Legends. It isn't solely talent that propels these people to this legendary status its luck too. Who they're team mates are, who they're opponents are, which country they are born in. I rate players on what they achieved with the resources available and whether they played in a way that makes you stand back and admire. Pele and maradona both did that but i think there were players just as good who werent as blessed by circumstance. Nice article Willie.
from about 1 month ago
Pele was seriously injured before his first world cup. He was lucky to get a chance to play mostly on the insistence of Garrincha who claimed that the lad was young and would heal in time.
Pele was also hacked to death by the Portuguese and put out of commission in 1966.
Maradona was kicked out of the 1994 World Cup for using a weight loss product.
Yet they are remembered as true greats. For no matter how much they suffered or were intentionally put down they still managed to win key titles and wow us.
As for luck well Jose Raul Capablanca (Cuban and world chess legend) had this to say about luck - `Great champions are always lucky`.
from about 1 month ago
Jose Raul Capablanca proves my point then S. Great Champions are always lucky. But there are some great great players who were very Unlucky. How can we ever say Teofilo Cubillas,George Best or George weah weren't at the level of Pele or Maradona. They never got the chance to play in a national team that gave them the chance to test themselves at the highest level. You told me yourself that brazil see their 78 team as thier greatest team.Bad luck and a suspect peru keeper denied them the chance of proving it. If they had won the world cup the world might rate Zico alongside Pele. I personally rate Brazil's Ronaldo way above Pele he proved himself in so many leagues and so many teams. Brazil's greatest player for me. If he hadn't been drugged in 98 and overweight in 2006 I don't don't doubt for a minute we'd be calling him the greatest.
from about 1 month ago
I would place the likes of Cubillas, Best, Fachetti, Boniek firmly in the Continental catagory Anthony, great players one and all.
But even when compared to these players, Pele and Maradona seem to have that little bit extra.
from about 1 month ago
Teofilo Cubillas,George Best or George Weah are no where near Maradona and Pele.
If they were they would have been capable of qualifying and winning a World Cup with any other ten players - Maradona did it in 86.
Certainly Zico and Brazil being cheated in 78 is repulsive but he had his chance in 82 and even in 86 where he missed a penalty which could have made him a football god. So he had his chances which he was incapable of taking and that`s what separates him from Pele.
By the way the best ever Brazilian squad is actually the 82 team....or maybe 78 as you put it ...so Zico played with the best Brazil has ever produced and still could not win. He`s great but no cigar. His only consolation is a Continental cup blasting Ian Rush`s Liverpool 3-0 (Michelle please don`t hate me for writing this).
As for Ronaldo being drugged in 98 I`d say that he bounced back pretty well in 2002 - winning. You can`t keep true champs down. Ronaldo is actually a strong contender for football first class status as he does have 2 W.Cups a second place and is the leading scorer ever. Also won all the club things and the voted titles etc. but as Willie puts it the lists are not complete.
I mean how good are you when they give you the nickname - The Phenomenon....?
Think about that for a second people....let it sink in.
I can`t think of any other player in the history of the sport (or any sport) who had a nickname quite like that including Maradona and Pele. This plus his achievements should put him on that short first list.
from about 1 month ago
If Pele was born in Northern Ireland he wouldn't have won dick. That is an undisputible fact. Same goes for Maradona and Peru. Just watched Kaka and Ronaldinho struggle to get a draw against Portsmouth. Not sure they're even premiership class.
from about 1 month ago
Cubillas got knocked out of the 1970 world cup by Brazil anyway. Should he have been able to beat THAT team with any other 10 players? come on be fair. He scored I think thats more than could have been expected of him.
from about 1 month ago
If Pele was born in Northern Ireland. That`s such a strange statement that I don`t know how to deal with it. A hypothetical. I`ll do my best. (no pun intended)
Well, if we assume he kept all his skill and talent then I presume he`d have ten others he could count on much like Maradona in 86. George Best would be one he could count on for sure. The others could defend like Brazil`s 94 team, try to keep possession and always looking for Pele and Best . Best and Pele could also try to convince the coach that perhaps shooting the ball up-field aimlessly is not always the way to go.
I think they would have won much.
from about 1 month ago
We'll agree to disagree. If he could only manage 1-0 win against England in the blistering hot mexican sun with BRAZIL in 1970. Imagine if he played them with Northern Ireland he might have scored a goal or two but he couldn't have done anything about the defence letting in 5 at the other end!
from about 1 month ago
Maradona single handedly and embarrassingly eliminated Brazil in 90. (ask any Brazilian)
Theorectically he could have done the same in 70. (perhaps an injured Pele would have helped)
If he could do it then Teofilo Cubillas could too.
Only thing is he`s no Maradona is he?
from about 1 month ago
No offense S but Brazil where rubbish in 1990 not even close to the 1970 team. Argentina weren't all that either. Thier performance in the 1990 world cup final was one of the most embarassing performances i've ever seen. Typical of Argentina though great teams but everybody knows as soon as they know they ain't gonna win they turn nasty.
from about 1 month ago
But that`s exactly my point.
Maradona took that rubbish 90 Argentinian team all the way to the final.
If it were not for a cheat penalty they would have won their third W.C.
What`s more is that after losing their opener he told reporters that they would still get to the final.
So said so done.
This is precisely my point all along. Maradona and any 10 could win a world cup.
I stick by this statement.
I`d even go further to say that Brazil`s 70 team looked great cause there was no Maradona to play against.
I think that Maradona, Pele, Ronaldo (real one) or Garrincha were unstoppable at the top of their games....and could do it all alone.
Perhaps for this solo notion Ronaldo may be the only question mark but I`m sure of the other three cause they actually did. Not in any hypothetical way but for real.
from about 1 month ago
Dinho`s free kick looked above anything you`d see in EPL.
A la Seaman!
about 1 month ago
Nice article. I like some of your points. However, I have to agree with Anthony here as it is the same view as me. Anyway..nice job Willie.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks JukeBox,
Luck is part of everyones career, but to achieve greatness it's only a minor attribute. Attitude will bring you so far, luck a little further, skill some more, etc
To be great you need everything to line up.
about 1 month ago
Good article Will, I like the way you break the ratings down.
But as ever, there is no real scientific formula for such things.
The stats that sky use that are ever so popular these days and can be used to prove anything.
Football is a Mass-debator to take a phrase from Jamie, and you could never get everyone to agree on who's good and who' not so good.
But this is a really good effort at trying to formulise something. And funnily enough I agree with a lot of your ratings, your system really makes sense.
from about 1 month ago
And there was me thinking that article title slipped everyone by...... :-D
from about 1 month ago
Thanks John,
Sure, theres no formula...but it's nice to try.
Most definitely a Mass-Debator!!!
about 1 month ago
Mostly perfectly fine, except for one thing I took issue with regarding what you say about a player's drive to prove himself in other climates. Gerrard, for example, has said he wouldn't want to play in another league, not because he's comfortable, but because they're not physical and difficult enough. In my view, the Premier is the best league in the world, and the harshest, so if I were a top player of their standard, I wouldn't want to move anywhere else either. Playing in the Premier League is a step up in terms of quality and your career, like the Italian league was in the 90s.
from about 1 month ago
I did not know that football was about harshness?
We in Brazil seem to go by the misconception that putting a ball in a goal is what it`s all about.
Robinho is a light player who seems to be treating the EPL like it were a cake walk.
A truly skillful player will put clumsy oafs to cut grass.
from about 1 month ago
Harshness, as in the rough side of the game that Steven Gerrard excels in. The stuff that Robinho is incapable of, like tackling or muscling out of tackles. If you watch the Premier League, it's a very physical game, and players like Gerrard enjoy that side of it. Robinho, far from gracing the league, has been struggling since he arrived to deal with the physical aspect that players like Drogba, Gerrard, Torres and Ronaldo enjoy. I'm sure he will adapt, but at the moment he hasn't.
Football is indeed about scoring and winning, but it's also about defending and not losing. The opposing teams in England know how to stop you scoring against them. It isn't as simple as you just said, every game has two teams in it and neither of them intend to let the other side score. They do everything in their power to stop you, whether those methods are glamorous or not.
from about 1 month ago
And players like Gerrard, Rooney and Drogba are hardly clumsy oafs.
from about 1 month ago
Physically the Premier League is the most demanding.
Tactically the Italian league is the most demanding.
Technically the Spanish league is the most demanding.
And I think that while Gerrard will move into a higher bracket when he's retired, for me he is still in bracket 3 for the moment.
I'd grade him as a 5star Premiership player, and without knowing a lot on Robinho I'd probably look at him as being a 4star Prem player....at the moment.
from about 1 month ago
I'm afraid I'm gonna have to disagree, Willie. I think that Gerrard is actually very nearly the perfect Premiership player, capable of not only holding his own in the most physical league, but also powerful enough to give it out, and technically gifted enough to win matches almost on his own. To my mind his status as the best midfielder in the most difficult, midfield-based league in the world makes him one of the best players in world football.
Robinho, on the other hand, although a decent player with some pace, was a bit-part player in the Spanish league and is not missed by Real Madrid, and at the moment he is no more important to inconsistent Man City than Shaun Wright-Phillips, another decent, but easily pushed off the ball, player. Robinho also doesn't move enough, and all too often I've watched him strolling through games instead of running. I very much doubt that he'll stay a Premiership player for a few years. To my mind, Robinho is the Robben of Brazil: a very good player, but nowhere near the likes of Gerrard, Torres, Rooney or Ronaldo.
I also watch alot of Spanish football, and I doubt very much that there's more technically brilliant players in Spain, when you look at players like Ronaldo, Torres, Gerrard, Rooney, Drogba, Anelka, Lampard, Fabregas, Alonso, Mascherano, Modric, Zaki and Essien.
from about 1 month ago
But as you say, that's the great thing about sport: It's all about ideas and opinions!
from about 1 month ago
Thanks for clearing that up David. So you meant that certain players like it rough. I understand.
It`s like in Brazil where Rio de Janeiro is more art, São Paulo (Robinho) more speed and Rio Grande do Sul (where your Chelsea coach first made his name) is more physical.
from about 1 month ago
I can see where you're coming from with your description of Robinho, a little harsh I think but I know exactly what you mean.
And you are right in all the players you name, they're all technically brilliant, and are more than a match for any league.
But I feel that when looked at as a whole, La Liga is superior to the Prem. I mean the top 4 are probably 4 of the strongest (technique wise) teams in the world, but I think that Spain offers far greater strength in depth overall.
I don't view Gerrard as being as good as You think, but even I can recognise that he is a special player. I've been to Anfield a few times over that last couple of seasons and you can hear the intake of breath every time he touches the ball, something special is gonna happen.
Personally I feel his game is let down by his lack of grasping the tactical side of the game, but in his new position pushed further forward he easily makes up for it.
from about 1 month ago
Sure that's cool, I suppose he does wander a little too much sometimes, but weirdly that's part of his strength, he kind of dictates play. I agree the Spanish league as a whole is very technically strong, but I think the Premiership is very nearly, if not already, on a par. When you see performances like last night's teams in the UEFA Cup, as well as the shows of our top 4 in the Champions League, it's good signs for the Prem.
from about 1 month ago
As perverse as it sounds, the UEFA Cup is normally a better barometer when judging a leagues strength in depth.
Great result for Portsmouth, good result against poor opposition for Spurs and result of the night for City. Schalke is a tough place to go to, I didn't think City would fancy the trip there, but they produced a really good performance.
From an Irish point of view Stephen Ireland's form is really frustrating.
about 1 month ago
I totally agree with your assesment and the very nice way you catigorise the players.
Perfectly done in my opinion.
I would however assume that your first and second lists only show some examples and not all the actual names.
The first list glaringly lacks the football deity Garrincha and the second rank lacks Zidane, Baggio, Zico, Romario among many other greats but not quite Gods.
Fantastic article I could not have done it better myself...been thinking about this very topic for a long time with all the media made heroes of today's game simply not up to scratch.
Cristiano came to Brazil and did nothing...Pele went to Portugal and scored a hat-trick.
I mean the gap between the two is a few million light years at least.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks a lot S,
It's hard to quantify, and harder still to put into words.
You're right to assume that the names I gave were only examples, the lists are too long, too many great and good players.
My point on Ronaldo and Pele exactly.
about 1 month ago
Great way to messure a players attributes and nice article mate.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks Benjamin, appreciate it.
At least I made sense to someone.
about 1 month ago
Great article,
I'd put Ian Rush, George Best , Fowler, Kaka and Carragher in continental class.
And Gerrard , like you , i'm not too sure. But he is a great football and might be on his way to legendary status.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks Michelle,
It's always a great debating point....
I've got to disagree with you about Fowler and Carragher though....
That's one of the great things about sport, a million people see a million different things.
about 1 month ago
Something as subjective as this can never be qualified into a 5* rating system in my opinion. A fine concept as an idea, but in practice I think it falls down. Giggs and Le Tissier in the same bracket? Come on…in terms of sheer ability…maybe. But in terms of achievement? Come on, think about it… It’s like comparing Giuseppe Bergomi to Paolo Maldini. Yeah Bergomi was a good player and he won a couple of things, but compared to Maldini who has won about four times as many trophies?
In my opinion greatness is defined through a combination of actual ability and also achievement. Talent tends to gravitate towards the top (the best teams want the best players – duh…) so you have to wonder why no-one ever came calling for Le Tiss, or whether he was just too scared/loyal to leave?
Le Tiss served his club and no-one will forget him, but Giggs has done exactly the same and at a much higher level (ie European competition) and he’s reached the very top of both, something Le Tissier and all his talent never managed. For me the two are on a completely different level.
from about 1 month ago
You say the best team want the best players but someone like Pele isn't famous for what he did at Santos. He's famous for what he did for Brazil. What if he'd been born in Costa Rica? he'd be about as famous as Paulo Wanchope!
from about 1 month ago
Well Matt I have a five star rating system within a five star rating system so I end up with 25 levels if that makes sense. Giggs and Le Tissier both fit into the second bracket, but Giggs would be regarded as a 5star Prem while Le Tissier would be a 3 or 4 star prem, depending on your point of view.
And theres a big difference between each level.
Jaysus, I sound like a physics tutor!!
about 1 month ago
Interesting read Willie.
I would never class Beckham as a legend, he can whip in a great cross, pass well and score from free kicks but so can many other players. Beckham was very well marketed in my view. While he was very good for United, take Scholes and Keane out of the teams that won the premiership and Beckham may of had no medal. He became the poster boy for their success.
Since I started following football 17-18 years ago, I have always placed Maldini at a level above everyone else in football. The lack of international success may be an unfair reflection on him and that he is a defender. We all know they don't always get the plaudits they should.
I like the way you break up the different levels - World Class, Premiership class etc. I think if the likes of Lampard and Gerrard moved to Spain their career may take a nose dive.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks Mary,
It was hard to make sense of, I had to dig through tons of crap floating around my brain before I came up with it.
Obviously it's not scientific, just the ramblings of someone too dangerous to let other people talk too....
maybe I'll patent it....
Maldini would be in my Continental Level, if that's ok with you? Scholes and Keane wouldn't be far behind, currently I'd rate them higher than Gerrard and Lampard.
And I can see your point about Lamps and Gerrard exactly.
about 1 month ago
Hey Willie....shouldn`t the Phenomenon definitely be with Maradona and Pele?
They call him Ronaldo the Phenomenon and he`s won -
2 World Cups 1 second place (That`s one better than Maradona and a hair shy of Pele)
2 Copa Americas (Neither Pele nor Maradona could manage one)
Highest World Cup scorer ever - 15 goals (that`s 3 more than Pele)
Plus won club cup titles in 3 countries, won the continental European titles, Intercontinental and FIFA Club W.C. world titles and elected 3 times world`s best player to top it off.
They don`t call him the Phenomenon for nothing.
There are those who even use his name to get attention. chortle.
from about 1 month ago
whoa...I didn't know that the real Ronaldo's record was that good.
You know, when he was at his peak (Barca) he was virtually unplayable, a true "phenomenon".
But when he was off his game he was awful. A true footballing schizophrenic.
I'd definitely rate him as phenomenal, but just below Diego and Edson.
He'd have great neighbours in Cruyff, Best, Beckenbauer, Charlton, Garrincha, Jairzinho and a few others I could mention.
He is miles better than the other Ronaldo though.
about 1 month ago
World Class - being the best player in the world at your position any given year.
from about 1 month ago
Nothing wrong with that statement.
But to be truly considered World Class, the player needs to perform at the highest level over his entire career. One or two great seasons don't make a great player.
And just because Christiano Ronaldo is considered World Class this year, doesn't mean he is now placed on the same pedastal as Pele and Maradona.
That's the point I tried to make. If a player who is obviously inferior to other players is held up as being World Class, how do you rate the superior players.
The terms I used to catagorise the players can easily be changed, but what do you change them too?
I mean, most would regard Pele and Maradona as being a cut above the rest so how do you refer to them?
We as football supporters have a responsibility to recognise players for what they are worth, not to keep inventing terms terms for players who catch the eye and gain media recognition.
If we did that then players of yester-year would never get recognised for the greatness they had.
from about 1 month ago
legendary.
from about 1 month ago
there are many types of legends too Matt.
Club legends, league legends, International legends...legends in their own lifetime.
about 1 month ago
Great insight, but have to argue on a few points;
I think its very harsh on Giggsy to be placed in the 'three star' stating he wouldnt be able to play in every league and place George Best above him. Both men I think are virtually equal in skill and Giggsy has maintained a world class level of performance for longer than Besty did. Best's career did do downhil when he reached his late 20's and United got relegated.
Also Beckenbaur and Muller should be in the World Class (I think placing only Maradona and Pele is abit underrating the great players that have come) category along with Zidane and Maldini aswell. All these players have shown a tremendous level of football throughout their careers not only in their leagues but also on the European and World stage.
from about 1 month ago
I think that Beckenbauer and Muller were awesome players, and like I said, World Class (for the purpose of my article) is only a phrase.
The sytem is hardly a science, and the likes of Beckenbauer are easily world class but would be a notch or two below Pele and Maradona.
On Giggsy, he is a true professional, and I agree with everything you mentioned about him. I just didn't push him up because, while he is a United legend (no doubt) he hasn't achieved the same level as George....just yet. It's not that Giggs wouldn't be able to play in any league, it's that he hasn't. He had many a chance to join whoever he wanted but chose not to.
The really great players test themselves in many leagues, (now-a-days)
My viewpoints are always open to change, and I'd rate Giggs the same as Keane, a 5* Prem Player.
While I'd rate Zidane and Maldini as 5* Continental players, the difference between my versions of World Class, Continental, Premier, Championship are minimal between them all.
about 1 month ago
Interesting article Willie.
But I don't necessarily agree that World Class players are limited to Pele and Maradona. They are the best of the lot during their time - like Thierry Henry or Zinedine Zidane.
Of course, some players like Pele and Maradona are legendary - not necessarily "world class."
But this is a matter of opinions, you have yours - and so do many others.
from about 1 month ago
"World Class" is only a term I used Shyam. But like I said, if Zidane was world class and Maradona was better what do you call him?
they're both legends.
but then again, players like Francis Benali and Perry Groves are often described as legends too.
The main cut and thrust of the article was not to pigeon hole players, but to recognise that we use terms like World Class too freely. Zidane yes, but I think that even a player like Henry falls short when compared to players like Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Platini, Vava, Didi, Puskas and Di Stefano.
about 1 month ago
Curiousity of an Irish level Willie, where would you place the following:
Johnny Giles, Liam Brady, Paul McGrath, Denis Irwin and Ronnie Whelan
Also, Stephen Ireland isn't it time the Irish setup sorted out whatever problems he has and try to bring him back, he's on fire at the moment.
from about 1 month ago
Tough one.
God, you could devote an article to comparisons alone...
Giles, Brady, McGrath, Keane to me were all good enough to have played continental football. But Brady was the only one to do it. Giles played in an era where players didn't move though.
I know I classed Keane as a 5*Prem player but after thinking about it for a while, I'd give them all a Continental rating.
Whelan would be a top Prem player.
Part of the decision making has to be on desire and drive to suceed, Mark Kennedy had more skill than them all put together but didn't have the drive. Mick McCarthy had the drive but limited skill.
Kennedy was a Championship player at best 1*, but Big Mick did enough to come in as a low 3*.
Don't forget about Dunphy...
Oh, and don't forget about Dunphy...
from about 1 month ago
How would you rate them?
Arsenal players? Ireland players? Managers even?
from about 1 month ago
LOL I was going to put in Dunphy for the laugh but thought I'd be serious ha ha
From what I had seen of Giles I reckon he could of made it on the continent, maybe too McGrath - I wonder did we really ever see the best of him, remember the game against Italy in 1994, that was the real Paul McGrath and obviously Brady made it at Juve.
I rate Arsenal players by whether they are good enough for Arsenal so the Arsenal players I rate: Clichy (just needs to get rid of the stupid mistakes), Sagna, Fabregas, Van Persie (he does have talent), Adebayor, Rosicky, Eduardo even Gallas - none of these are world class as you term it but they are players that I feel are good enough for Arsenal.
It is hard to rate Irish players, isn't it. I like: Given, Dunne, Finnan, A+S Reid, Ireland (grr), Keane and Doyle. McGeady and Duff are ok as well at the moment. Sometimes with Irish players you have the rate the effort and not the skill: S.Hunt :-)
Managers is a bit difficult: I think Mourinho, Benitez and Renhaggel's tactics are terribly boring but the I have to respect what they won. Hey where we complaining when Big Jack was getting us to World Cup's by putting 'em under pressure?
If you put a gun to my head and said you have to pick five great managers at the current moment I would say: Arsene Wenger, Alex Ferguson, Martin O'Neill, Gus Hiddink and Carlo Ancelotti.
about 1 month ago
Well done Willie with a thought provoking article.
To me, a player does not need to have all the elements in equal balance, but they do need to have a great deal of each. They also need to excel for many years. Championships are nice, but events out of a players control—even a great player—may prevent him from reaching the ultimate seasonal goal.
I would put Pele a step higher than anyone else, but Maradona would have more than a few keeping him company such as Cruyff, Best, Beckenbauer, Muller, and Charlton.
Downgrading Giggs or others for being happy and loyal to team and the league doesn't wash with me, and trying to rank active players the one's who have retired I see as being a fool's errand. To do the job right, you need complete data.
While I do not agree with all your theories put forth here, I do respect them and believe they would keep a pub busy til closing debating the finer points. This is one of the great things about being a sports fan, and something those who are not will never understand—the poor bastards.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks JC,
What do you mean? You don't agree with me? Why I oughta?
I agree with you entirely on the Giggs point. To me as a player at the moment, that's where I'd place him. Obviously with time and looking back over his career he should be elevated to his rightful place amongst the games legends.
This topic has kept many a break-room in the morning busy too. And your final point about sports fans is just about perfect.
about 1 month ago
sweet article, with some great methods, should keep my football team busy in the pub for a while.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks Gerry,
Hope they stay busy for a while.
about 1 month ago
This is probably one of the best debates ever seen - however i feel like it has spirraled so out of control commenting will be futile - so i will address a couple of points i thought warrant it!
1. It is all relative - players today have better ball, pitches, training, diet etc.... and the skillful players have alot nmore protection.
2. The luck factor - if Pele hadnt been kicked out of the 1966 world cup he would have been even greater and had another world cup to his name! so yes luck plays a part but he was great despite bad luck.
3. Gerrard is a brilliant all-round player with potentially the best shot in the world, however i think although world class he has to play better and win medals on the international stage before he can be called great.
4. I do not believe there is a truly "Great" player in world football today - last one was Zidane, hasnt been one since....... and certainly not Christiano Ronaldo....
from about 1 month ago
Thanks for the response and the fan-add T.
Your 4 points are all valid.
1. There are different circumstances in every era and every region, great players overcome them no matter the obstacle. Even to make the grade as a professional footballer is a huge reward for the player, it's an incredibly tough profession to make it in.
2. Luck is a factor true. But If Pele hadn't of been kicked from pillar to post by Portugal in 66, would he have had the same drive to make such a contribution in 70?
Great players have ways of making things happen.
Vince Lombardi was probably the greatest NFL coach of all time, his favourite saying was "The harder I try, the luckier I get"
3. I agree with you about Gerrard. Unfortunetly for Liverpool fans I don't think he will achieve everything he could there.
4. Most definitely.
It's really hard to define greatness, especially on a pitch. But it sure is fun to try!
about 1 month ago
Gerrard is the best central-midfielder in the world, and I'm a United fan. The idea that the notion is disputable only highlights the strange disparities in everyone's individual reading of the game and rating of players. Gerrard does everything brilliantly and has great character.
from about 1 month ago
Can't say I agree with you Nathan. Gerrard is supremely talented and without doubt is one of the best players in the Premiership, but the best central midfielder he is not.
He is quite poor tactically and struggles in central midfield as an orthodox midfielder. He can't dictate the game the way a natural midfielder does either.
Saying that, in his new role as an attacking midfielder behind Torres, he is right up there with the best of them at the moment.
I've been to Anfield many times, and there is such a buzz when he gets the ball it's incredible, great player.
about 1 month ago
At this point in time, he's the best for me. I like De Rossi and Schneider a lot, but Gerrard has been unparalleled in leading his team this year (so far) to the top o the Premiership summit.
from about 1 month ago
I can dig that Nathan, he's such a good player I can see why people hold him in such high esteem. A great professional, with moral courage that's second to none at Anfield.
about 1 month ago
To be fair I never really liked him. But both Gerrard and Lampard are having -outstanding- seasons. Now, in 20 year, that doesn't mean they'll hold the same esteem that Paul Scholes does in my heart!
from about 1 month ago
Gerrard is a smashing player, and is completely different to Scholes in type.
I've got to admit that to me, Keane is the best midfielder I've ever seen. To me he was the ultimate central midfielder, I'd rate Scholes as a close second, neither player ever got as many headlines as Gerrard but to me they were both miles better when they were at the top of their game.
Both Keane and Scholes could control games, their passing was exemplary and they rarely gave the ball away, Gerrarg does his best work in the final third of the pitch and he probably shades Scholes in that department of his game, most people tend to forget how good these two were in midfield because they weren't on every back page or front page ala Beckham.
write a new comment