Messi's most exciting seasons were when Barcelona won the UCL in 2011 and his 91 goal season in 2012.
I dunno, but this season Messi did many exciting things IMO, plus him being more mature is also a big plus for me. but than arguing about what gets you excited is stupid IMO, i mean I might find Adriana hotter, while you want to get inside Pampita. I think we should not argue on this.
Last year's Argentina was very solid defensively to the point where Messi didn't have to worry about about attacking too much and losing the ball since Argentina wouldn't have conceded a goal.
well any defense will be in great danger of conceding if they lose the ball in danger areas, lets not forget it. And you cannot say Messi should have taken ball everytime he wanted, because that is not always possible. And lets be clear, it is not like Messi did not tried, he did as evident with him making most chances of all players. He was the team's main creator who did what he was meant to do.
He should have taken the initiative to finish several plays himself. He tried to implement a passing game but it didn't work. When something doesn't work you change it up and find other ways to get the team to play better.
easier said than done. You cannot perform as a lone attacking force, if your teammates are not performing to their standard. no one has, no one will.
and dont think that Messi did not tried the efforts himself. After all he was the most numbers of dribbles, and also was high on shots taken.
He did tried to take things in his hand, which worked against the likes of Iran, Bosnia and Switzerland. While did not against Germany. He tored apart Germany at times but the glory was not for him, simple.
I mean just watch the final again, and analyse. Messi was not at all poor or shite, he performed well on his own, just that he did received help from his teammates.
Mascherano is hailed as one of the best players because he was the unofficial captain of the team and he was the one who was organizing the defense. He is the reason why Argentina held on against the tough teams despite not having a strong midfield.
I have no problem with him being hailed as one of the best. I have problem when people say he was the real MVP of Argentina. He shone in ultradefensive setups in the latter stage, it was not like he carried the midfield alone, while Messi was left alone.
I agree the Argentinian forwards flopped greatly and missed some incredible chances in the final where Argentina should have comfortably won in normal time.
agree.
Messi did help Argentina reach the final since the entire Argentina attack was based on him. However, he still had a very mediocre world cup.
he was good, not mediocre. His only problem was he does not get angry when his teammates ignore him and pass to others.
As for the best players I think Robben or Schweinsteiger deserved it.
Robben showed class in every game he played and practically carried the Dutch team when the rest of his teammates went to sleep, especially van Persie.
I disagree if you are trying to make it like Robben carried the team??
the only decisive contribution of him in the KOs was that dive vs Mexico. Sneijder despite being marked heavily score the all important equaliser, Sneijder was the best performer against Costa Rica. In the semis, I dont blame any of the attackers as both team played shit defensive game, still Messi created 3 goalscoring opportunities : one where Aguero passed instead of shooting, one where Palacio headed the ball and the one where Maxi got a lousy volley. He might be bad by his standards but he still created 3 goalscoring opportunities..
Schweinsteiger because of how influential he was for that German team. He was the one making numerous interceptions every game, starting plays with his distribution, chasing down players, dispossessing them, and kept possession of the ball well. He kept that German team ticking.
He was a good team player, but not the most outstanding individual. I did not found any German outstanding, even Muller despite his stats. Neuer and Kroos were the most remarkables of them IMO.
Messi is a better player than Suarez but Suarez has been irreplaceable just like Messi has. Either way Messi will end up winning the Balon d'Or because of his stats. However, Barcelona's MVP this year is Suarez since he was crucial to making that Barcelona attack work with his movement and assists. Take out Suarez and I doubt Neymar would have done what Suarez did, which is pull defenders and open up space for Messi to exploit.
(i) the same can be said for Suarez?? Him playing with Messi means, the opposition will put 2-3players paying attention to Messi.
(ii) Messi will not win Ballon DOr because of his stats, he will win because he has dominated all aspects of attacking game at the highest level. The guy was the best scorer(without penalties), best assister, best dribbler, best creator.
just look at his stats before the final:
it is not about just goals and assists, it is about whole package as an attacker
even has better defensive stats than Suarez. I mean the guy was the best dribbler, playmaker and scorer of his team, they guy is so less, but somehow his sidekick is better and more influential. It is like some people who say Garrincha was better than Pele, which makes me laugh always.
Messi doesn't need a CF to be great but he does need a forward to assist him and Barcelona win a UCL title. Eto'o and Villa are evidence of that.
winning CL is not because of CF alone, there are many things. Eto and Villa were there with Messi many seasons, Barsa did not won all CLs.
Maldini won 3 UCL titles and reached a world cup final by the age of 26 and yet he never got lazy or complacent in his late career. He should have reached another world cup final in 2002 and ended up winning 2 more UCL titles. Despite his age, Maldini always performed well. I think Maldini earned the same right Messi did in being lazy for Milan but Maldini never did get lazy. That's the thing that differentiates them: mentality and strive.
Messi is not complacent all the times, you are making it like he is not giving efforts or has not performed. He does not need to make mad man runs all the time, he has performed great in almost every game this season bar few. Even those where he was far from the best, he still created chances that rarely few did.
And I did found Maldini complacent in the 2002 world cup, he was beaten in air by a midget ffs. Also Maldini has struggled many times, it was not like he was flawless all his life, I have seen many games where Maldini was did not performed to his best, just like Messi.
Napoli were basically the Atletico Madrid of 13-14 who had a few world class players and mostly good players that played in a good system. The only world class players that Napoli really had was Maradona, Alemao, Careca, and Ferrara, despite being so young. De Napoli and Bagni were very good but not world class.
so are you telling me Atletico Madrid also were an average side??? I guess they were not. neither were the Napoli sides which had won scudetto. Yes the sides that Maradona played in the early seasons were average, but later they did strengthen the teams. And you are saying their were 4 players who were world class and two very good ones, but still they are average.
lets not overrate Maradona here by saying he played in average teams. They were also strong teams who played to his strength.
This Maradona played with shit players and still won, hence he is better than anyone, is bullshit arguement IMO.
what should guys like Pele, Cruyff, Di Stefano,Platini have done or messi should do?? Moved to inferior clubs to "prove" themselves, that they could win with inferior teammates?
And who can tell what Maradona would have done with legendary teammates? He could not win anything other than a Copa Del Rey with Barcelona and according to Maradona himself in his autobiography, Bar?a "the best team in the world" and a team that "had the best players in Spain". Maradona actually said that he could play that style of football, because he could not keep up with all the running. Maybe Maradona needed a team playing for and around him. Maybe he could not play that great with players closer to his level? Who knows?
The 1986 Argentina team was a decent side but far from a "very good" side if you take out Maradona. The one big positive about that Argentinian team was how good it was defensively thanks to the great Ruggeri and mentally strong players like Olarticoechea and Brown, who made up for their lack of talent with grit in defense. Burruchaga and Valdano were also above average players but besides that; it was a pretty average team. The team had more hard-workers than creative, skilled players and Maradona was the conductor and creative spark of that team. Without him, Argentina definitely wouldn't have reached the final or have been able to beat the Germans.
you are getting me wrong. ofcourse The 86 side is all about Diego really and the way the rest worked around him and for him, but that is the thing, that team played for Maradona, with every player performing to his best, the attackers(Burruchaga and Valdano) scored 6goals, while only Higuian scored for Argentina. Same cannot be said about Messi in 2014. They performed really well in 1986. And Maradona was never a conductor for Argentina, he was ofcourse the creator, the guy on whom the attacking play depended but he was no way the conductor.