Argentine Football Thread

[Sven]

I watched this Brazil x Italy in 1982, and Italy totally deserved to go through. I don't get all the hype over it.

Brazil had all the talent upfront, but look at Italy defense... Zoff, Cabrini, Scirea, Gentile, Collovati, Oriali just in front... Talent alone won't beat a classic defense just like that. Brazil wasn't very solid defensively.

[Sven]

serious calcio 3 x 2 samba

[Allan_Sombrero]

Originally Posted by Massaro94

He was Brazils best player and i think scored in every game apart from the final... he would get the first goal more often than not.



Btw that was one of the most boring finals of any football match

Damn you Brazil... why you produce so many Elite tier forwards. Not fair man.

Brazil just have that much talent and amazing academies.

But I was at awe when I watched the 1994 final. Thankfully they have the full match on YouTube. Baresi's performance was something else. Coming from an injury and playing on a hot day? Baresi is incredible

Originally Posted by Sven

I watched this Brazil x Italy in 1982, and Italy totally deserved to go through. I don't get all the hype over it.

Brazil had all the talent upfront, but look at Italy defense... Zoff, Cabrini, Scirea, Gentile, Collovati, Oriali just in front... Talent alone won't beat a classic defense just like that. Brazil wasn't very solid defensively.

I know Italy deserved it bro. They were more decisive and scored first too. Scirea is a player I've come to respect a lot. He isn't your typical dirty Juventus defender like Gentile. Nonetheless Gentile had a great world cup in 1982 and was better than Scirea. However, I was just making a point to Australiano that Zico played with great players like Socrates, Falcao, Eder, Junior, and Luisinho whereas Maradona didn't have that kind of talent in his Argentina team but still won the world cup.

[Sven]

Scirea was an old school sweeper. And players like him usually need a grit and physical CB together, like Gentile

Baresi had Billy.

[Australiano1980]

Originally Posted by Allan_Somewhere

Zico and Socrates are two of my favorite footballers but I can't put them above Maradona for the following reasons.

 

Overall in his career Maradona took teams to the next level consistently in comparison to Zico who helped Flamengo more than Brazil. That Brazil team of 1982 was very talented and should have reached the final but the players didn?t perform well enough against Italy. Gentile specifically marked Zico out of the game.

Anyways on to Maradona. The year Maradona started his career in Argentinos Juniors (1976) the club was fighting to avoid relegation. In 1977 they finished 9th (Diego established himself as a starter at the age of 17); in 1978 they finished 5th; in 1979 they finished 2nd (though it was done in a groups format, so it was 2nd only of the group), and in 1980 Argentinos was title runner-up (back to the normal league format). So you see he carried Argentinos starting at the age of 18. What was more incredible is that he kept Argentinos competing the whole season against giants like River and Boca. For a low-budget team like Argentinos it was an unexpected and truly amazing performance since they were more used to struggling against relegation every year than competing for a title.

Maradona then signs with Boca the next year (1981) and obtains the league title with them before leaving Argentina at the age of 21 to play the next 10 years in Europe. He transferred to Barcelona for a world record fee in 1982 and again broke the world record fee when he moves to Napoli in 1984 (being the only player to ever break a transfer fee twice). In the Argentinian league, Maradona was a more deadly goalscorer than playmaker. Then Maradona played between the ages of 24 and 31 in Italy where he was more of a playmaker than goalscorer. VERY complete attacking player.

The season previous to Maradona's arrival Napoli finishes in the 11th place with 26 points (7 games won and 11 games lost). The first season with Maradona in the squad Napoli finishes in the 8th place with 33 points (10 games won and 7 lost). The following season Napoli is 3rd before reaching the title in 1987. In 1988 Napoli is second only to Milan, in 1989 they are second only to Inter and in 1990 they are champions again. In those years Napoli and Maradona had to compete against Platini's Juventus, Sacchi's Milan, and two very strong Inter and Roma teams. I mean people tend to think Maradona only did wonders for Argentina and Napoli but he has consistently performed for every team. Even in Barcelona he scored 38 goals in 58 games before he got kicked out for fighting players from Atletico Bilbao. Honestly anyone would be angry if they got tackled as violently as Maradona did by Olaskoaga (Butcher of Bilbao).

Overall Maradona was more influential than Zico was for many teams and was much more clutch. He carried Argentina to the final in 1986 and helped them reach the final in 1990 with his assists. One of his best assists ever came against Brazil as well.



People can hate Maradona as a person because of his drug addictions but as a footballer he was extraordinary. Yeah he had two hand ball incidents but he still was able to carry a team based on skill and not cheating. Idk if people realize this but cocaine makes your body weak and would have lowered his performances drastically. However, Maradona was able to play at a high level consistently. People say cocaine enhanced his performances but it didn't. If he never did cocaine he would have been an even greater player. So as much as I like Zico; I can't say he is individually better than Maradona.

in numbers maradona stay even more behind.. u see

maradona is way more charismatic/midiatic.. always in the midia kicking and shooting reporters and all that.. he is a midia man.. loves to show up.. if he was a real problematic player would be dead already or atleast in gazza's situation.

im not saying he was a terrible players.. he was a realy realy good one.. but not better than romario and zico.. if he had better numbers i would put him on the same level. is just my opinion.. i was lucky enough to watch all 3 playing.

Originally Posted by Allan_Somewhere

I know. But he said Socrates was the brain of the 1982 side and I said Zico should have still been able to carry that very talented Brazil side. Romario I wouldn't dare compare to Maradona for 3 reasons: Romario did not have a long peak at a high level, arrogant and undisciplined (refused to train at times and was lazy), and not a consistent clutch big game player.

i said falcao(the king of rome) not socrates

romario was decisive.. look at his average goal per game anywhere he played.. because of 94' finals nobody cant say that he is a flop in finals..

the man lead brasil to a world cup, 2 american cups.. thanx to him we played the world cup in 1994... he came for the last match and we need to beat uruguay in maracana and he came and resolved

zico was unlucky against the catenaccio in 1982.. tough lucky.. but the team make history

Originally Posted by Allan_Somewhere

UCL final 1994 and World Cup 1994. Romario was nowhere to be seen bro. Don't get me wrong he was a smart and lethal striker but inconsistent and wasn't good in finals.

romario lead brasil to a 1 world cup, 2 american cups.. thanx to him we played the world cup in 1994... he came for the last match we needed to beat uruguay in maracana, the team were terrible.. he came and resolved.. in world cup finals-eight against usa assisted bebeto.. semi finals against a giant defense of sweden he scored a header.. quarters-finals against holand.. brasil from 1994 was pretty average, i mean who are mazinho and zinho?
i you what i mean?

shame that romario broke his leg in 1989 and was fit for 1990 world cup.. played only one game

Originally Posted by Allan_Somewhere

I know Italy deserved it bro. They were more decisive and scored first too. Scirea is a player I've come to respect a lot. He isn't your typical dirty Juventus defender like Gentile. Nonetheless Gentile had a great world cup in 1982 and was better than Scirea. However, I was just making a point to Australiano that Zico played with great players like Socrates, Falcao, Eder, Junior, and Luisinho whereas Maradona didn't have that kind of talent in his Argentina team but still won the world cup.

pumpido was a great keeper.. rugerri was a rock.. burruchaga a great striker, argentina didnt won a world cup for free.. maradona had his moment but the team was pretty good..
like i said in only 7 games even toto schilacci can shine.. paolo rossi needed just 1 game in 1982..

career for career, romario and zico where better.

put on this days.. maradona is just a bad boy neymarketing.

[Australiano1980]

Originally Posted by Sven

I watched this Brazil x Italy in 1982, and Italy totally deserved to go through. I don't get all the hype over it.

Brazil had all the talent upfront, but look at Italy defense... Zoff, Cabrini, Scirea, Gentile, Collovati, Oriali just in front... Talent alone won't beat a classic defense just like that. Brazil wasn't very solid defensively.

i think the hype came after the years.. like the team of 1994.. that today they classified as great.. but at the time they said that was the most mediocre team to won a world cup.

[Australiano1980]

i forgot to mention batista and valdano in argentina's team from 1986.. was a hell of a team allan

forgot to mention too that zico is kinda of a god in japan too.

[joy]

Originally Posted by Australiano1980

i forgot to mention batista and valdano in argentina's team from 1986.. was a hell of a team allan

forgot to mention too that zico is kinda of a god in japan too.

Please discuss Maradona@Napoli. And how he did against the top teams with top defenders in the top league of that time. Interested.

[Australiano1980]

Originally Posted by joy

Please discuss Maradona@Napoli. And how he did against the top teams with top defenders in the top league of that time. Interested.

wasnt alone. maradona is very technical.. much more technical than romario and zico together.. but he wasnt alone at napoli.. napoli did have a excelent team..

[Allan_Sombrero]

Originally Posted by Australiano1980

in numbers maradona stay even more behind.. u see

maradona is way more charismatic/midiatic.. always in the midia kicking and shooting reporters and all that.. he is a midia man.. loves to show up.. if he was a real problematic player would be dead already or atleast in gazza's situation.

im not saying he was a terrible players.. he was a realy realy good one.. but not better than romario and zico.. if he had better numbers i would put him on the same level. is just my opinion.. i was lucky enough to watch all 3 playing.

Why compare numbers with Romario when the only two comparable in position are Zico and Maradona? Romario is supposed to score more goals since he is a CF whereas Maradona is an attacking midfielder. People say Romario scored 1000 goals (which he never did, the real number is 691). Pele is the same story. Pele did score 1,283 goals, but 526 goals came in unofficial friendlies and tour games. I don't know why Brazilian strikers like to exaggerate their numbers a lot.

But since we're talking about stats here: number wise Maradona had a very good appearance/goal ratio in South America. Maradona played 207 games in the Argentinean league scoring 143 goals (0.69 goals/game). Zico played 504 games scoring 378 goals (0.75 goals/game). For Argentinos Juniors he had 167 games and 115 goals (excellent ratio for playing in a weak team like Argentinos whereas Zico played with a strong Flamengo side). For Boca Juniors he had 40 games and 28 goals. So you see if he played his prime in Argentina his numbers would be higher but he decided to go and play in Italy where he played against the best defenses and became a great playmaker. In his career from what I remember he had over 300 assists and 47 for Argentina. So like I mentioned before: Maradona in Argentina = forward, Maradona in Italy = playmaker (#10). Obviously he won't score as much in Italy due to better defenses and change of role. Romario might have a better goal per game ratio but I know you wouldn't compare him to the other two.

Romario is a CF and hence he stayed in the box more than Maradona and Zico did. For Romario there's maybe only one season (1994) when he was truly the best player in the world and overall he didn't help his teams achieve much in PSV and Barcelona. Romario was always a selfish player. He didn't care how the team was doing as long as he got his goals. You say Maradona is problematic but Romario is worse. How many teams did he get kicked out of for being lazy, undisciplined, and not getting along with coaches?

Originally Posted by Australiano1980

i said falcao(the king of rome) not socrates

romario was decisive.. look at his average goal per game anywhere he played.. because of 94' finals nobody cant say that he is a flop in finals..

the man lead brasil to a world cup, 2 american cups.. thanx to him we played the world cup in 1994... he came for the last match and we need to beat uruguay in maracana and he came and resolved

zico was unlucky against the catenaccio in 1982.. tough lucky.. but the team make history

You're right it was Falcao. My mistake on that part. But Brazil had a very good midfield though when Zico played (something Maradona's team did not have) and lost because the Italians were able to shut them down very well and Paolo Rossi had a spectacular game. However, it was a very tough match for both teams overall.

For Copa America 1989 it's true that Romario scored the only goal against Uruguay but Bebeto carried that Brazil side scoring in almost every game. Without Bebeto, Brazil wouldn't have even reached the final phase or have enough points to overcome Uruguay in the last match. Maradona meanwhile in that same Copa America wasn't at 100% due to a long season at Napoli when they played hard on three fronts. That season he won the UEFA cup, reached the Coppa Italia final, and ended 2nd in Serie A. When he is at 100% I don't have to remind anyone how Maradona can carry a team by himself; something Romario cannot do despite his great goal average per game. Just goes to show numbers aren't as important as the influence players bring on the pitch.

In Copa America 1997 Ronaldo outshined Romario as well when he was only 21 years old. Furthermore, Romario did nothing in the final vs. Italy and against Milan. He had a great team in Barcelona (The Dream Team) and Brazil. Honestly without Bebeto, Romario wouldn't have done half of what he did in 1994. Romario scored in the previous matches but in the big game itself did nothing whereas Maradona scored in previous matches and assisted in the 1986 final vs. Germany despite getting constantly fouled and marked by 2-3 German players at times. I remember Maradona was also the most fouled player in 1990, with a lot of those fouls coming from Brazilian players themselves. Yet he still helped his team reach the final where Germany only won by a questionable penalty and playing against a 9-man Argentina.

Not to mention Romario had a very short peak in Europe in comparison to Maradona. Romario played the majority of his career in Brazil (very offensive league) whereas Maradona played his majority in Italy (very defensive league). I still don't understand how people can say Romario is better than Maradona when Maradona played against the best defenses and teams in the world. Diego was able to carry Napoli to 1st and 2nd place finishes where he still scored a good amount of goals despite playing as a #10 and even ended as top scorer in one season (1987-88). I seriously doubt Romario could have done what Maradona did in Italy.

Maradona helped Napoli win its first Serie A title before the arrival of the two Brazilians Alemao and Careca. While at that time Ciro Ferrara was also very young and was not at his peak yet. Bagni and De Napoli were also good players for Napoli. However, after Maradona left Napoli those same players were not able to win more silverware. Kinda shows how great Diego was doesn't it?

Originally Posted by Australiano1980

romario lead brasil to a 1 world cup, 2 american cups.. thanx to him we played the world cup in 1994... he came for the last match we needed to beat uruguay in maracana, the team were terrible.. he came and resolved.. in world cup finals-eight against usa assisted bebeto.. semi finals against a giant defense of sweden he scored a header.. quarters-finals against holand.. brasil from 1994 was pretty average, i mean who are mazinho and zinho?
i you what i mean?

shame that romario broke his leg in 1989 and was fit for 1990 world cup.. played only one game

Brazil in 1994 didn't have an incredible midfield (Dunga was the main man in midfield) but they had a brilliant defense and great forwards. It's not like Brazil was as weak as Maradona's Argentina team and Romario even had a great partner in Bebeto.

Originally Posted by Australiano1980

pumpido was a great keeper.. rugerri was a rock.. burruchaga a great striker, argentina didnt won a world cup for free.. maradona had his moment but the team was pretty good..
like i said in only 7 games even toto schilacci can shine.. paolo rossi needed just 1 game in 1982..

career for career, romario and zico where better.

put on this days.. maradona is just a bad boy neymarketing.

Argentina in 1986 and in 1990 did not have a good team. That's the truth. It was a bunch of average players who played under the guidance of Maradona. Without Maradona Argentina wouldn't have gotten to those two finals (except in 1990 where Goycochea had an incredible world cup as well). Arguably, the most outstanding footballers besides Maradona were Ruggeri (world-class defender in his prime), Burruchaga (never the leader nor star player anywhere), and Valdano (a striker with an unimpressive goal ratio). Burruchaga, Valdano, nor Caniggia can carry Argentina the way Maradona did. Maradona was the only player in Argentina who could pick the ball from midfield and perform magic. Without him, Argentina did not have the offensive power to break down defenses.

Furthermore, Valdano and Burruchaga are not the same level as Romario and Bebeto. Nobody would know who Burruchaga is if he didn't play with Maradona in 1986. Valdano played for Real Madrid but that doesn't mean he is an all-time great striker. If you look at his stats, they are quite unimpressive.

Overall, Maradona still had the better career. He proved way more than Zico and Romario did on two different continents with different clubs, played well against the best teams consistently, maintained a high level for many years, carried teams by himself to titles, and was a big game player. There's a reason why he's considered one of the best of all times, if not the best.

He is nothing like Neymar. Neymar is more hype than contribution whereas Maradona was able to perform week in and week out since the age of 17 for every team he's played for.

Originally Posted by joy

Please discuss Maradona@Napoli. And how he did against the top teams with top defenders in the top league of that time. Interested.

It's simple Joy. Without Maradona, Napoli would not be the team it is today.

[Australiano1980]

Originally Posted by Allan_Somewhere

Why compare numbers with Romario when the only two comparable in position are Zico and Maradona? Romario is supposed to score more goals since he is a CF whereas Maradona is an attacking midfielder. People say Romario scored 1000 goals (which he never did, the real number is 691). Pele is the same story. Pele did score 1,283 goals, but 526 goals came in unofficial friendlies and tour games. I don't know why Brazilian strikers like to exaggerate their numbers a lot.

But since we're talking about stats here: number wise Maradona had a very good appearance/goal ratio in South America. Maradona played 207 games in the Argentinean league scoring 143 goals (0.69 goals/game). Zico played 504 games scoring 378 goals (0.75 goals/game). For Argentinos Juniors he had 167 games and 115 goals (excellent ratio for playing in a weak team like Argentinos whereas Zico played with a strong Flamengo side). For Boca Juniors he had 40 games and 28 goals. So you see if he played his prime in Argentina his numbers would be higher but he decided to go and play in Italy where he played against the best defenses and became a great playmaker. In his career from what I remember he had over 300 assists and 47 for Argentina. So like I mentioned before: Maradona in Argentina = forward, Maradona in Italy = playmaker (#10). Obviously he won't score as much in Italy due to better defenses and change of role. Romario might have a better goal per game ratio but I know you wouldn't compare him to the other two.

Romario is a CF and hence he stayed in the box more than Maradona and Zico did. For Romario there's maybe only one season (1994) when he was truly the best player in the world and overall he didn't help his teams achieve much in PSV and Barcelona. Romario was always a selfish player. He didn't care how the team was doing as long as he got his goals. You say Maradona is problematic but Romario is worse. How many teams did he get kicked out of for being lazy, undisciplined, and not getting along with coaches?



You're right it was Falcao. My mistake on that part. But Brazil had a very good midfield though when Zico played (something Maradona's team did not have) and lost because the Italians were able to shut them down very well and Paolo Rossi had a spectacular game. However, it was a very tough match for both teams overall.

For Copa America 1989 it's true that Romario scored the only goal against Uruguay but Bebeto carried that Brazil side scoring in almost every game. Without Bebeto, Brazil wouldn't have even reached the final phase or have enough points to overcome Uruguay in the last match. Maradona meanwhile in that same Copa America wasn't at 100% due to a long season at Napoli when they played hard on three fronts. That season he won the UEFA cup, reached the Coppa Italia final, and ended 2nd in Serie A. When he is at 100% I don't have to remind anyone how Maradona can carry a team by himself; something Romario cannot do despite his great goal average per game. Just goes to show numbers aren't as important as the influence players bring on the pitch.

In Copa America 1997 Ronaldo outshined Romario as well when he was only 21 years old. Furthermore, Romario did nothing in the final vs. Italy and against Milan. He had a great team in Barcelona (The Dream Team) and Brazil. Honestly without Bebeto, Romario wouldn't have done half of what he did in 1994. Romario scored in the previous matches but in the big game itself did nothing whereas Maradona scored in previous matches and assisted in the 1986 final vs. Germany despite getting constantly fouled and marked by 2-3 German players at times. I remember Maradona was also the most fouled player in 1990, with a lot of those fouls coming from Brazilian players themselves. Yet he still helped his team reach the final where Germany only won by a questionable penalty and playing against a 9-man Argentina.

Not to mention Romario had a very short peak in Europe in comparison to Maradona. Romario played the majority of his career in Brazil (very offensive league) whereas Maradona played his majority in Italy (very defensive league). I still don't understand how people can say Romario is better than Maradona when Maradona played against the best defenses and teams in the world. Diego was able to carry Napoli to 1st and 2nd place finishes where he still scored a good amount of goals despite playing as a #10 and even ended as top scorer in one season (1987-88). I seriously doubt Romario could have done what Maradona did in Italy.

Maradona helped Napoli win its first Serie A title before the arrival of the two Brazilians Alemao and Careca. While at that time Ciro Ferrara was also very young and was not at his peak yet. Bagni and De Napoli were also good players for Napoli. However, after Maradona left Napoli those same players were not able to win more silverware. Kinda shows how great Diego was doesn't it?




Brazil in 1994 didn't have an incredible midfield (Dunga was the main man in midfield) but they had a brilliant defense and great forwards. It's not like Brazil was as weak as Maradona's Argentina team and Romario even had a great partner in Bebeto.






Argentina in 1986 and in 1990 did not have a good team. That's the truth. It was a bunch of average players who played under the guidance of Maradona. Without Maradona Argentina wouldn't have gotten to those two finals (except in 1990 where Goycochea had an incredible world cup as well). Arguably, the most outstanding footballers besides Maradona were Ruggeri (world-class defender in his prime), Burruchaga (never the leader nor star player anywhere), and Valdano (a striker with an unimpressive goal ratio). Burruchaga, Valdano, nor Caniggia can carry Argentina the way Maradona did. Maradona was the only player in Argentina who could pick the ball from midfield and perform magic. Without him, Argentina did not have the offensive power to break down defenses.

Furthermore, Valdano and Burruchaga are not the same level as Romario and Bebeto. Nobody would know who Burruchaga is if he didn't play with Maradona in 1986. Valdano played for Real Madrid but that doesn't mean he is an all-time great striker. If you look at his stats, they are quite unimpressive.

Overall, Maradona still had the better career. He proved way more than Zico and Romario did on two different continents with different clubs, played well against the best teams consistently, maintained a high level for many years, carried teams by himself to titles, and was a big game player. There's a reason why he's considered one of the best of all times, if not the best.

He is nothing like Neymar. Neymar is more hype than contribution whereas Maradona was able to perform week in and week out since the age of 17 for every team he's played for.

what a wall

like i said i watched all 3 play(zico on his downfall only and he was still very good) based on this i have my opinion.. i cant say that pele was the best player that ever lived for example.. many say specially argentinians that maradona were better than pele.. i dont have argues to discuss with that.. maradona didnt even used his right foot for example.. wasnt a complete player.. pele could.. so i think this discuss would end here.

maradona's lifestyle(drugs/mab/womens/gambling/guns) outside of the field help create this legend he is today.. on the field he wasnt objective like others.. but he was really really good no doubt about it.. messi is more objective than maradona.. even ronaldinho gaucho was too.. platini for example was pretty amz with juventus and for his NT too.. but he dont get this legend hype maradona has for some reason.. i believe thats the reason.

many were better than him imo.. but i cannot say that owairan was better than maradona
but he also score 'the goal of the century' or maybe michael owen.. no.. michael owen also wasnt close to maradona's football.

[Allan_Sombrero]

Originally Posted by Australiano1980

what a wall

like i said i watched all 3 play(zico on his downfall only and he was still very good) based on this i have my opinion.. i cant say that pele was the best player that ever lived for example.. many say specially argentinians that maradona were better than pele.. i dont have argues to discuss with that.. maradona didnt even used his right foot for example.. wasnt a complete player.. pele could.. so i think this discuss would end here.

maradona's lifestyle(drugs/mab/womens/gambling/guns) outside of the field help create this legend he is today.. on the field he wasnt objective like others.. but he was really really good no doubt about it.. messi is more objective than maradona.. even ronaldinho gaucho was too.. platini for example was pretty amz with juventus and for his NT too.. but he dont get this legend hype maradona has for some reason.. i believe thats the reason.

many were better than him imo.. but i cannot say that owairan was better than maradona
but he also score 'the goal of the century' or maybe michael owen.. no.. michael owen also wasnt close to maradona's football.

Even if it was true that Maradona didn't score with his head nor right foot; one can't say a player is not complete because of that. It would be like saying Pele wasn't complete since he couldn't dribble well or take good free kicks. That would be a very weak argument against Pele. However, Maradona did score with his head and right foot when he played with Napoli. To top it off Maradona was very complete. He was a great scorer, playmaker, dribbler, free kick taker, and had amazing technique to go along with his vision. Tell me how many players would use rabonas in the way he did?



Btw I love Platini. Imo the best French player ever and better than Zidane in many ways. But you have to remember he played in a strong Juventus side and his NT had Tigana, Giresse, and Luis Fernandez (who formed the French quartet with Platini). Not to mention France had Amoros and Tresor in defense. Obviously the France defense wasn't as good as 1998 but still solid. What the French side didn't have was good forwards.

The reason Maradona gets hype is because he carried several weak teams to titles by himself. Messi up to this day does not win a world cup (even with a good team) because he doesn't have the "garra" Maradona had to win games. Ronaldinho was very good but inconsistent. No other player in football history can say they carried teams like Maradona. He is truly a GOAT level player. You're right his lifestyle wasn't/isn't the best but it wasn't as bad as George Best's lifestyle.

[Australiano1980]

Originally Posted by Allan_Somewhere

Even if it was true that Maradona didn't score with his head nor right foot; one can't say a player is not complete because of that. It would be like saying Pele wasn't complete since he couldn't dribble well or take good free kicks. That would be a very weak argument against Pele. However, Maradona did score with his head and right foot when he played with Napoli. To top it off Maradona was very complete. He was a great scorer, playmaker, dribbler, free kick taker, and had amazing technique to go along with his vision. Tell me how many players would use rabonas in the way he did?



Btw I love Platini. Imo the best French player ever and better than Zidane in many ways. But you have to remember he played in a strong Juventus side and his NT had Tigana, Giresse, and Luis Fernandez (who formed the French quartet with Platini). Not to mention France had Amoros and Tresor in defense. Obviously the France defense wasn't as good as 1998 but still solid. What the French side didn't have was good forwards.

The reason Maradona gets hype is because he carried several weak teams to titles by himself. Messi up to this day does not win a world cup (even with a good team) because he doesn't have the "garra" Maradona had to win games. Ronaldinho was very good but inconsistent. No other player in football history can say they carried teams like Maradona. He is truly a GOAT level player. You're right his lifestyle wasn't/isn't the best but it wasn't as bad as George Best's lifestyle.

impressive very impressive.. but again is a hype that doesnt go with what he plays
Very similar to rivelino on football skills.. pretty cool to watch.

[Massaro94]

Oh yeah.... it's the big one tonight, SuperClasico.

Boca Juniors vs River Plate at 22:15 GMT

[Australiano1980]

Originally Posted by Massaro94

Oh yeah.... it's the big one tonight, SuperClasico.

Boca Juniors vs River Plate at 22:15 GMT

always full of pressure

[Massaro94]

3 Superclassicos in 11 days

Fuerzaaaa Bocaaaaaaaa

[Australiano1980]

Originally Posted by Massaro94

Oh yeah.... it's the big one tonight, SuperClasico.

Boca Juniors vs River Plate at 22:15 GMT

2x0 boca.. very equal game decided in details in the end

obs: sad watch boca depending on lodero.

[Australiano1980]

river and boca today again.. libertadores final sixteen.. will be a great game.

[AC Kid]

Gooooo Riverrrrrr

[Sven]

http://forum.acmilan-online.com/show...88#post2271988

There's that too