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.
