v2 G.O.A.T. Round 1 Group 12

First topic message reminder :

Group 11 was won by Usain Bolt who cliamed 51% of the vote, qualifing in second place was Steve Redgrave with 35%.

Today’s group sees football, athletics, boxing and cricket compete for your votes.

We have three participants championed today with articles written by forum members, so please feel free to submit your own argument below for the ones not championed.

Please vote for the competitor you believe has achieved the most in sport and should progress into the next round.

Please leave a comment as to why you voted

Sugar Ray Leonard- Boxing- Championed by- Rowley

Born in 1956 Ray Leoanrd began his amateur career in 1972 and soon marked himself out as something special, whilst still in his teens Ray already had three National Golden Glves, 2 AAU and the 1975 Pan American Games titles to his name. This form guaranteed Ray a place in America's legendary 1976 Olympic team which won no less than five gold medals. Despite his stellar amateur careeer Ray was not favoured to win gold as his his weight division was Cuban Great Andres Aldama who had scored five straight knockouts on his way to the final. However this mattered little when he met Leonard in the final as Ray beat him 5-0 in an absolute master class. Ray finished out his career with a ledger of an unbelievable 155 wins from 160 fights.

Perhaps unbelievably on the back of his amateur success Ray did not intend to turn pro as he expected lucrative endorsement contracts to come his way. However when these contracts failed to materialise and Ray's father became seriously ill Ray needed to raise some money and quick and the obvious way to achieve this was in taking up one of the numerous offers he had received to turn professional.

Ray's early pro career gave some indication of the greatness to come when he amassed a record of 25-0 in less than three years as a paid fighter. This was enough to earn Ray his first world title shot against the then WBC welterweight champion Wilfredo Benitez. Benitez had made boxing history when beating the excellent Antonio Cervantes to become the youngest world champion ever before moving up to win his second world title at welterweight. At the time of the Leonard fight Benitez had an excellent record of 38-0-1. The fight was something of a tactical masterclass with each fighter displaying sublime defensive skills. However it was to be Ray's superior offensive arsenal which won the day and he stopped Benitez with literally seconds left on the clock.

After a routine defence against Britain's own Dave Boy Green Leonard was to experience his first set back when he met all time great Roberto Duran. Throughout the build up Duran insulted Leonard relentlessly, so much so that Ray that come fight night Ray decided to stand and trade with the fearsom Duran, a decision that cost him a close but justified points loss. Whilst Ray was an intelligent fighter inside the ring he was just as shrewd outside of it and when he heard Duran had been partying a bit too hard on the back of beating him Leonard exercised the rematch clause in his contract and little more than five months later was once again in the ring with Duran. This time Ray made sure he did not brawl with Duran and employed all his ring craft to stay on the outside of the marauding Duran even employing showboating and all manner of tricks to frustrate his opponent. So frustrated did Duran become with Leonard's tactics he quit in the eight round in the infamous "no mas" incident with Duran pretty much turning his back on the fight and declaring he no longer wished to fight Leonard.

Leonard went on to win a title at a second weight when he beat the unbeaten Ayub Kalule for the WBA light middle weight title finishing matters with a peach of a right hand in the ninth round. However Ray was not done with the welterweight division as a new star had emerged on the scene in the shape of the fearson 6ft 1 Tommy Hearns who had amassed a record of 32-0 on his way to the WBA weolterweight championship, of those 32 wins only two opponents had heard the final bell. Hearns was an absolute wrecking ball at the weight as anyone who has seen him starching Pipino Cuevas to win the title can testify.

When the two came together Ray struggled to find the answers to Tommy's size and reach and whilst it had not all been one way traffic Ray was clearly behind after 12 rounds. However fighters do not find themselves involved in greatest of all time debates without having an ability and will to rescue a lost cause and between the 12th and 13th rounds Ray's trainer Angelo Dundee uttered the immortal advice "You're blowing it son, You're blowing it." With these words ringing in his ears Ray exploded into action in the 13th and nearly knocked Tommy through the ropes. Ray knew he had his man now and hit Tommy with everything he had in the 14th and refree Davey Pearl had little choice but to stop the fight and declare Ray the undisputed welterweight champion of the world.

After a couple more low key fihts Ray was to retire on medical grounds through a detached retina but this was to remain a temporary retirment. Legend has it Ray was in attendance with Michael J Fox watching middleweight legend Marvin Hagler defend his title against John Mugabi and he decided when watching Hagler he could beat him and he decided there and then to make a comeback against Haglersome three years after he had last stepped through the ropes. For any fighter to come back after three years is hard, to do it against a fighter as good as Hagler in a division you have never fought in is nigh on unprecedented and when a poll of 50 boxing experts was taken before the fight all but four picked Marvin most by KO such was the size of the task Ray faced.

Much has been written about this fight mostly debating who deserved the decision, for what my view is worth I have always felt the decision in Ray's favour is the correct one however whether you agree with the decision or otherwise one can only marvel at the tactics Ray used in the fight never giving Hagler a stationary target and moving yet still controlling the centre of the ring. Ray was now a three wei8ght world champion. Thsi fight very much represented the peak of Ray's career, he would fight on and would win more titles in more divisions (including winning the WBC supermiddle weight and lightheavyweight belts in the same fight!) but his form after the Hagler fight was never to hit the same heights again.

As anyone who has ever ventured to the boxing boards will know there are something of two camps on their with those who believe old time fighters are superior and those who believe (wrongly I might add) that modern fighters are better. There are few fighters who you will get universal agreement that each and everyone will agree is great and would have been great whatever era they would have found themselves in. Sugar Ray Leonard is one such fighter, he could deliver a punch just as well as he could take one, could fight as well defensively as offensively and could match anyone for heart, speed and guts. To even consider taking the nickname of the great Sugar Ray Robinson you have to be good, to deserve the name you have to be great, Ray Leonard deserved to be called Sugar Ray.

Lionel Messi- Football- Championed by- Chris Wilkinson

It may seem ludicrous to talk about a man aged 25 as the Greatest Of All Time. Lionel Messi could easily have ten more years in football, and with talent like his he would have ten years at the top of the sport.

It's no cliche to suggest we are running out of superlatives to describe the Argentinean's performances. Messi is a magician. Young and old are mesmerised watching him at work, a player who has transcended the cynical modern critics, and brings back a level of excitement to the sport that many lose with age. People will watch Spanish football just to see him play.

Even the egomaniacs like Diego Maradona - “his potential is limitless and I think he’s got everything it takes to become Argentina’s greatest player"" - and Cristiano Ronaldo - ""Messi has his personality and I have mine. He has his game and I have mine. I also play in a big club like him. We are different in every aspect. But right now, he is the best"" - have had to give in to the brilliance of Lionel Messi.

The achievements are constantly stacking up. Leading Barcelona goalscorer of all time, four Champions League top goalscorer awards in a row, a Guinness World Record for most goals in a year (91), four Ballon D'Ors, an Olympic Gold Medal five La Liga titles, three Champions League winner's medals and many more.

In a team game, the contribution of others can be noted as one player achieves greatness. There is no doubting he is playing in one of the greatest teams of all time. But, quite possibly, without Messi they would be nowhere near some of the notable greats.

He is a one man sensation. He not only compares to the solo sports star, he eclipses them.

If he was Sampras he'd have won the French Open and won at least 5 more Australian Open's too.

If he were an opening batsman he'd average at least 70, and he'd be racking up 5 for's like he was owed one each game.

Whilst these one man bands have just an opponent to focus on, Leo Messi is a marked man who has players flying at him all game, a constant focus for every outfield player. He plays with a smile, never deceives the referee and never stops running at players, no matter how hard they hit him.

The one grey spot is the lack of international trophies, which must be a driving force to a man who only has Olympic Gold for his national side. To stick with the tennis comparison, the Argentinean side with their appalling defence, line of poor managers and destructive behind the scenes politics are like forcing Federer out on court but banning him from serving.

In a sport where the collective can restrict the achievements of the individual, Lionel Messi is standing head and shoulders above every man playing, and has the ability that no other man before him has had.

They said he didn't turn up in the big games, he couldn't play against English sides and his heading was weak. He scores a header against Manchester United in the Champions League final to clinch victory in Rome.

His weakness is the international stage. He has 76 caps at 25 years old, and 31 goals. Nearly a goal every two games, some weakness.

A boy who had to have hormone treatment as a teenager to help his growth, who was slated as too injury prone at the age of 18, has become a man that every player watches in a daze and no one wants to face.

Whilst much of this may seem trite, his brilliance is almost overwhelming. I cannot list all his achievements, I cannot describe every moment of majesty which outdoes the last. There is not the space nor time.

He's already eclipsed any individual brilliance of any sports star, and at 25 he has years ahead to widen the gap.

Youtube screams legend with every clip of the maestro.

Even in the modern days where to have been great in yesteryear appears to put a man on a pedastal that stars of today cannot match Messi is talked of as greater. In the world's most popular sport the man is head and shoulders above every competitor.

Jesse Owen- Athletics- Championed by 88chris05

"If you subtract the era in which he competed in, the tensions the world over which defined that era and the fact that he carried the hopes of a whole race on his shoulders, and focus purely on Jesse Owens' achievements as a track and field athlete in purely numbers and medals, then he's automatically a sporting legend. However, when you combine all of those elements together, along with those medals, world records and achievements, then he becomes nothing short of a sporting monolith.

Along with Joe Louis, Owens helped to lead what many observers now call the ""quiet revolution."" In fact, a number of similarities can be drawn between Owens and the 'Brown Bomber'; both were born in 1914, both were born in Alabama and both played a critical role in proving that blacks could not only compete - and win - amongst the best athletes in the world, but they could also do so with dignity.

For Owens, it wasn't about black versus white - he just wanted to win, the same as any sportsman. And win he did. Even 77 years on, his haul of four gold medals from four events at the 1936 Olympics, with Hitler watching from the stands, stands as one of the key moments in sport, a remarkable mix of God-given talent and an ability to cope with huge pressure which, quite rightly, is still spoken of in reverent terms in 2013.

And yet, the signs of greatness had been there before those fantastic four days in Berlin. In compete contrast, it was tucked away in front of only a few spectators that Owens announced himself as one of the sporting phenomenons of the twentieth century, in Michigan, 1935. Forget any half of football you've ever seen, because it was on this afternoon, at the Big Ten Athletics Championships, that Owens produced the most remarkable forty-five minute period ever seen on the sporting stage.

Representing Ohio University, Owens got off to a flyer at the May 25 meet, winning the 100 yard dash in an (equal) world record of 9.4 seconds at 3.15 pm. Ten minutes later, he set a world record outright in the long jump, chalking up a distance of 26 foot 8.25 inches (that's 8 metres and 13 centimetres in our currency!). To put that particular record in to context, it was not broken for another twenty-five years, outstanding in track and field terms, and would still have been good enough to take the bronze medal in the long jump at the London 2012 Olympics. At 3.45 pm he took part in 220 yard dash, winning in a world record of 20.3 seconds, and then at 4.00 pm set a new mark of 22.6 seconds in the 220 yard low hurdles - and, what with the transition between metric and imperial records, Owens had also broken the world records for the shorter 200m sprint and 200m hurdles events in doing so.

Sports historians, then, will always argue whether it was three or five world records which Owens set in the space of forty-five minutes on that spring day of 1935 but, whichever side of the line you fall on, you can't see it as anything other than one of the great sporting moments in history.

If 1935 had been Owens' year of arrival, then 1936 was his signature one. The Berlin Olympics came at a time when American blacks had little to be excited about; lynchings of Afro-Americans were commonplace and often met with not so much as a bat of an eyelid. In many of the USA's (and, in fact, the world's) leading sports, such as track and field, boxing, baseball and golf, opportunities for black competitors were rare, and respect / acknowledgement for their talents even rarer than that. Even their music, as sports writer Harry Mullan once penned, had been ""bastardized by white commercial interests.""

Usually, the chance to compete against the best athletes the world had to offer in 1936 at the Olympic Games would have been a welcome relief for a young Afro-American such as Owens. However, the '36 Games, as much as they were a sports meet, were also an exercise in propaganda, a chance for Hitler to showcase to the watching world that his idea of a superior, Aryan race was quickly becoming an inescapable reality.

Owens wasn't just representing himself, and nor was he representing the USA. He was representing, and carrying the hopes of, a whole race. For every man or woman who'd suffered at the hands of discrimination, for every German Jew who was slowly having their rights to work and rights to property systematically stripped by the Nazi regime, an Owens victory would be a cause for celebration, a moral win which they could all lay some claim to.

It would probably be impossible to understand the pressures Owens must have been feeling on August 3, 1936, when he stepped out in to the Olympic Stadium in Berlin to compete in the heats of the 100m sprint. If he'd had any doubts that the crowd of ove 100,000 spectators, as well as most of the officials, were against him before the race, they will have quicly disappeared immediately afterwards; in that heat, Owens beat his own world record but the German timekeepers refused to ratify it, claiming the time had been achieved with a following wind, despite the stadium flags suggesting nothing of the sort.

However, this cheap piece of skullduggery proved only a temporary setback on Owens' road to ultimate glory. Later that same night, he won the final of the event - and with it his first gold medal - in a time of 10.3 seconds, and this time the officials did acknowledge that the world record had been equalled. The following day, he showed his hand in the 200m by beating the world record in the heats, and took his second gold medal of the Games in the long jump with a leap of 26 feet and 5 inches (8.05 metres) which would stand as an Olympic record until 1960.

With Luz Long being the pre-Games favourite to win that particular event, but now merely a vanquished foe, the world was by now realising that Owens, in a wild turn of events, was becoming the face of Berlin 1936 when, in fact, it had been the organizer's hope that black athletes would be seen as the big joke of them. On August 5, the rest of the field were powerless to prevent Owens winning gold in the 200m in another world record of 20.7 seconds, and he put the final seal on his greatness when helping the American 4x100m relay team win gold - yes, in another world record - on August 6.

In four days, Owens had played an ever-lasting role in bringing about a change of how black athletes were viewed, and it says much about his global impact that, despite Germany eventually going on to top the medals table at the Games, Berlin 1936 is still to this day remembered as Jesse Owens' Olympics, the Games in which Hitler's ideologies were put to rest in emphatic style. Even Owens, looking back, commented, ""For a while at least, I really was the most famous and most talked about man in the world.""

The outbreak of World War II, as it did to so many others, called time on Owens' athletics career, which begs the question - has any other athlete in history done so much to challenge people's perceptions and also set such high standards from a sporting perspective in such a small amount of time?

I can't think of many other athletes from any era or any sport who command my respect the way Jesse Owens does - and what leaves me even more impressed with him is the way he conducted himself as a man. It would have been easy and, let's be frank, pretty understandable for him to have been a surly character, a man who fought back against the discrimination and hardships he suffered with an acid tongue and a confrontational, off-putting demeanour, ala Jack Johnson or a young Muhammad Ali. But Owens conducted himself impeccably, maintaining that sports and politics shouldn't mix; before his death, he even did his best to convince President Jimmy Carter to reverse his decision to boycott the 1980 Olympics of Moscow for that very reason.

No, Owens didn't see himself as a black athlete, he was just an athlete who wanted to win. That he carried the hopes of so many with him, and also that he became an icon for a generation that followed, was merely incidental to him, it seems - but that does nothing at all to diminish how wonderfully well he coped with these pressures, and what a fantastic role model he continues to be, even more than three decades after his death. The word 'champion' fits this man perfectly.

And whenever I think of Owens, I'll always remember one quote which summed up his single-mindedness and dignity; when asked what he thought of Hitler refusing to shake his hand and congratulate him after his four gold medals, Owens simply said, ""Well, I didn't come here to shake hands anyway."""

Sachin Tendulkar - championed by ESPNCricinfo
Sachin Tendulkar has been the most complete batsman of his time, the most prolific runmaker of all time, and arguably the biggest cricket icon the game has ever known. His batting is based on the purest principles: perfect balance, economy of movement, precision in stroke-making, and that intangible quality given only to geniuses: anticipation. If he doesn't have a signature stroke - the upright, back-foot punch comes close - it is because he is equally proficient at each of the full range of orthodox shots (and plenty of improvised ones as well) and can pull them out at will.

There are no apparent weaknesses in Tendulkar's game. He can score all around the wicket, off both front foot and back, can tune his technique to suit every condition, temper his game to suit every situation, and has made runs in all parts of the world in all conditions.

Some of his finest performances have come against Australia, the overwhelmingly dominant team of his era. His century as a 19-year-old on a lightning-fast pitch at the WACA is considered one of the best innings ever to have been played in Australia. A few years later he received the ultimate compliment from the ultimate batsman: Don Bradman confided to his wife that Tendulkar reminded him of himself.

Blessed with the keenest of cricket minds, and armed with a loathing for losing, Tendulkar set about doing what it took to become one of the best batsmen in the world. His greatness was established early: he was only 16 when he made his Test debut. He was hit on the mouth by Waqar Younis but continued to bat, in a blood-soaked shirt. His first Test hundred, a match-saving one at Old Trafford, came when he was 17, and he had 16 Test hundreds before he turned 25. In 2000 he became the first batsman to have scored 50 international hundreds, in 2008 he passed Brian Lara as the leading Test run-scorer, and in the years after, he went past 13,000 Test runs 30,000 international runs, and 50 Test hundreds.

He currently holds the record for most hundreds in both Tests and ODIs - remarkable, considering he didn't score his first ODI hundred till his 79th match. Incredibly, he retains a divine enthusiasm for the game: at 36 years and 306 days he broke a 40-year-old barrier by scoring the first double-century in one-day cricket. In 2012, when just one month short of his 39th birthday, he became the first player to score 100 international centuries, which like Bradman's batting average, could be a mark that lasts for ever. Later that year, though, he announced his retirement from ODIs after a disappointing 18 months in international cricket.

Tendulkar's considerable achievements seem greater still when looked at in the light of the burden of expectations he has had to bear from his adoring but somewhat unreasonable followers, who have been prone to regard anything less than a hundred in each innings as a failure. The aura may have dimmed, if only slightly, as the years on the international circuit have taken their toll on the body, but Tendulkar remains, by a distance, the most worshipped cricketer in the world.

As long as you've got David Bairstow behind the sticks captain I'll forgive you.

Good old Sir Roger Bannister would have to make the top 64 surely.
Can we exclude Bobby Charlton just because he annoys me ?

captain carrantuohil wrote:Flintoff and Swann in your all-time 11, Mystir? With selectors like you, it's no wonder we've struggled so much since the war!

name a betting spinner dude!

and flinty in his peak form was by far our best bowler at the time and a very high quality batsamn.. I would say certainly with his bowling better than botham.. He did destroy the aussies.. It was all about him in the ashes 2005(i think)

Bannister for sure....not a fan of the combover then, Diggers?

Diggers

And what they took out of their gymnasts they pumped in to their 400m runners

Mystir - what about Laker over Swann?

Laker, Verity and Underwood all far better spinners, mystir. Flintoff took something like 3 5 fers and no ten fers in his entire career (cf 27 and 4 or something). Botham's average is better, strike rate is better, total wickets are better - take 2005 out of the equation and Fred hasn't a bowling leg to stand on when compared with Botham, greatly though I recognise the fact that Botham wasn't quite superman all the time.

Jim laker was supposedly a top spinner with an exeptional economy and average but from a bygone age.. who does more with the ball?

dummy_half wrote:Diggers

And what they took out of their gymnasts they pumped in to their 400m runners

Well it is good to recycle I suppose....

Charlton makes the shortlist of goat comedy haircuts, stiff competition from Carlos valderrama and Chris waddle

I think there is a point for Swann making an England all-time XI to be honest. I'm fairly certain the current era is the toughest ever for spin bowlers in terms of pitches (a pitch which turns on day 1 is instantly labelled poor), shortened boundaries, heavy bats which mean miscues can go for 6, and a general sense from administrators that cricket has to be "entertaining" (so loads of big hits) playing against them. I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that he is as good a bowler as the likes of Verity, Lock, Laker and would personally have him ahead of Underwood if he finishes as strongly as his career has been so far. Certainly his spell to Michael Clarke at the MCG is amongst the top 4 or 5 spells I've seen by a spinner ever (Warne against South Africa in 99 would be top).

Cook, though? Not yet I have to say.

Can we call Deadly a spinner, I guesss we can but he pretty much bowled at medium pace didnt he ?

Laker does at least as much with the ball - fizzed like a top, his off-break. Honestly, there really isn't too much evidence that makes me say "I'll pick Swann over Laker", if you're looking purely at an off-spinning head to head.

milkyboy wrote:Charlton makes the shortlist of goat comedy haircuts, stiff competition from Carlos valderrama and Chris waddle

He's got a pineapple on his head........Jason Lee has to up there as well.
Of course the true comedy haircuts must be the syrups like Goochie and Warne.

Think underwood, was a category unto himself diggers

Lifetime achievement award for decades of terrible haircuts... Mr Kevin keegan

Mike, Swann has the inestimable advantage of DRS, which has (rightly) given him a far higher percentage of LBWs on the front foot than his predecessors would ever have enjoyed. Think Laker, for example would have got 250 wickets in his 46 Tests with such a weapon at his disposal. Laker had uncovered pitches, to balance that, but the LBW rule up until the late 50s (changed to combat such negativity as that practised by May and Cowdrey) meant that you could play off-spinners with your pads and not get out. Think that Swann does quite well from the alterations in cricket over the years, myself.

milkyboy wrote:Lifetime achievement award for decades of terrible haircuts... Mr Kevin keegan

You just dont like him because he beat up Billy Bremner....

Diggers wrote:Can we call Deadly a spinner, I guesss we can but he pretty much bowled at medium pace didnt he ?

Depended a bit on conditions - he could bowl at close to a conventional spinner's pace if there was turn, but was more effective bowling what were essentially medium paced cutters on a sticky wicket - didn't necessarily get all that much lateral movement on the ball, but the variation in bounce and whether the ball stuck or shot through made him near-unplayable. And then on normal wickets he'd bowl flat and with little spin, just relying on accuracy to starve the batsman of runs.

Laker's career stats are clearly better than Swan's, but Mike makes the good point that playing conditions are hugely different and have been tilted away from spin bowlers (at least until the introduction of the DRS, which means batsmen are less able to just pad the ball away) - covered pitches with more reliable bounce, smaller boundaries and bigger bats all take the game away from the spinner.

Only on camera... Billy did him in the tunnel, whilst johnny giles sniped him from behind and norm bit his legs,

Think that the late Ralph Coates (Burnley, Spurs and briefly England) had a strong argument for the "even worse than Bobby Charlton haircut" award.

My understanding of Messi's condition is that, without the hormone treatment, he would have taken a bit longer than the rest of us to reach his full size. Rather than hitting his physical peak between 18 and 21, he would have been around 25 before he hit the size that he should have been at 18. The treatment he was given accelerated his growth so that he grew at the same rate as everyone else. It wasn't an Armstrongesque complicated doping system intended to give him an advantage.

I've seen footage of him playing at 10 or 11 and he was incredible then. It's on youtube and its the quality of his finishing that stands out.

sfw

As I've said, I think what happened with Messi is just a grey area ethically, not reason to condemn him. No-one has ever questioned his ability.

Having said that, one day someone in football is going to start taking drug testing seriously, and I suspect it will not be good for the game...

88Chris05 wrote:...As I said in the article, in 1935 Owens jumped 8.13 metres in the long jump. Fast forward 77 years, and that distance would have taken a bronze medal in the London 2012 Olympics...

Now that is pretty mind-boggling. For that and the rest of his record, Owens it is for me.

navyblueshorts wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:...As I said in the article, in 1935 Owens jumped 8.13 metres in the long jump. Fast forward 77 years, and that distance would have taken a bronze medal in the London 2012 Olympics...

Now that is pretty mind-boggling. For that and the rest of his record, Owens it is for me.

Depends how you choose to look at it really I think it speaks more for the standard of the event last year and the weather conditions having an adverse effect on distances. 8.13 is at very best fringe world class these days, low 8 meters shouldnt make you a top drawer long jumper.
If you were to take the differential between the world record of 8.95 and Owens 8.13 I would imagine its pretty much on a par with other events, 82 centimeters is a big difference.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Think that the late Ralph Coates (Burnley, Spurs and briefly England) had a strong argument for the "even worse than Bobby Charlton haircut" award.

Did Coates stiles and charlton ever play together for england.. That 's one hell of a comb over pretty boy midfield

To be sure Digs but we're talking ~80 years on with all the increased understanding of training, spikes, tracks, nutrition etc etc. I don't know what the weather was like when Owens jumped that but maybe it wasn't a perfect day either?

Quite a difficult group this one really.

navyblueshorts wrote:To be sure Digs but we're talking ~80 years on with all the increased understanding of training, spikes, tracks, nutrition etc etc. I don't know what the weather was like when Owens jumped that but maybe it wasn't a perfect day either?

Quite a difficult group this one really.

In 2003 Kim Collins won the 100 meters at the worlds in 10.07, wasnt particularly into a headwind as far as I can remember, was just a bad year..would have to be for Darren Campbell to get a medal when he never broke 10 seconds in his career. It just happens sometimes.

I think with people like Owens a more useful way of measuring them is against how far in front of those around in their era they were and whilst my knowledge of Owens stretches to one book about him and Joe Louis my recollection he is a country mile in front of his nearest contemporaries, that suggests to me a unique talent and a guy who represented a quantum leap forward in his sport. Am no real fan of just saying he is slower than guys now so obviously should not be in this debate because conditions, nutrition, environment equipment all change. From what I recall when Owens was achieving his feats he was still working as a lift boy in a hotel, unless we are going to ask Bolt or modern guys to do likewise we should not make comparisons solely on times. If we do go down this route we find ourselves saying Mark Lewis Francis is better than Owens which does not seem to sit right from my way of thinking.

10% improvemnt over 80 years...

that is actually probally very similar in most track and field sports.. I would like to actually know for sure mind but felling lazy!!

captain carrantuohil wrote:To me, this is one of the easiest quartets we've ever had to sift. Leonard is one of the all-time greats of boxing - a top 15 pound for pound man all time. Others will place him in the top ten, a very few in the top 5, but almost no-one will place him at the top of their list. We've had the original Sugar Ray here, who rightly progresses to the next round. This one, with his great spell essentially shoehorned into four years, lacks the longevity to join him.

It's my opinion that Tendulkar wasn't even the most effective batsman in his own team much of the time. As an agent of Indian victories, his runs were never as important as Rahul Dravid's, who was the architect of victory after victory, particularly overseas (Adelaide, Rawalpindi, Leeds), in the Indian team's golden era. Yes, one of the best of his era, but the stats don't show Sachin to be much ahead of Lara or Dravid and they show him to be demonstrably behind someone like Kallis. This is without even going near legends of Bradman's stature, so Tendulkar is easily discarded, by me at least.

The big problem with Messi is that he's 25, and great as he is (and he may become even greater), there is no sensible way to assess his career, impact or legacy in the round. It's all speculation. He would still be my second choice based on his exploits to date, but he is a day's march behind....

...Jesse Owens. Five world records in three-quarters of an hour, 4 Olympic Golds, a long jump record that stood for a quarter of a century, Olympic times that would have won medals well into the fifties...the stats and the achievements match anyone's. The impact, though, on a global stage. Equalled by Ali, maybe. No-one else. The practical destruction of the hateful Aryan notion of the genetic supremacy of a single race, achieved in its arch-exponent's backyard. The proof, via his friendship with the excellent German long-jumper, Luz Long, that humanity can rise above such tawdry ideologies.

As I say, not close, in my opinion. Owens wins this one by a street.

Totally agree.

This isn't even close. Owens wins this by a mile. He is one of the top contendors for this title. Messi is not.



emancipator

Actually, Owens had a rival just as quick and as good a long jumper. He too was black. He tore his hamstring before the olympics. I give you the Pete best of athletics, eulace peacock.

Tendulkar gets my vote. Remarkable batsman.

Owens is a very close second.

Myst

the 10% improvement in distance in 80 years is on the low side of average (400m about 8%, 10000m about 13%, high jump about 18%) but has an unusual progression - whereas records in most events get broken by a small margin every few years, the long jump record has seen long periods of not being broken followed by an outstanding distance being set - Owens record lasted 25 years, then there was a spell of 7 years (1960 to 67) when Ralph Boston and Igor Ter-Ovanesyan nudged the record up from 8.21 to 8.35 (8 new or equalled records in that spell). Then came Bob Beamon in 1968, absolutely smashing the record (8.90m), and holding it for 23 years before Mike Powell broke it (8.95 in 1991). And there it has remained ever since.

Not sure what all the above really proves, except perhaps that maximising the potential in a long jump is extremely difficult - high run-in pace is very difficult to control and transfer into the right combination of lift and forward momentum.

I voted for Sugar Ray purely for tactical reasons, hoping he will be able to catch Messi and stop him getting through to the next round. Yes he is probably the best footballer on the planet right now but he is only 25. I think its too early to consider him the G.O.A.T of football let alone all sports. What if he suddenly loses his form ala Torres and never regains it. Will he be considered the greatest of all time for what he has done to date? I'm not so sure.

Plus I have an irrational dislike of the man. I have absolutely no idea why, I just don't like him.

When it comes to sprinting, I think there different ways of looking it. Obviously the holy grail of sprinting is to be the fastest of all time. But beyond that what is it? Do you measure success in races and medals won, or in times clocked?

I don’t think theres any point in denying that the runners that have clocked faster times since Owens were quicker. Im not a fan of arguments about how old era guys didn’t have nike airs or worked night shifts etc. Maybe today they could have been faster, but they weren’t so whats the point of speculating or rating on conjecture? However in sprinting does being faster qualify as more successful? The unfortunate collection of quality sprinters that happened to co-exist with Bolt I suspect would be willing to trade their faster times for some of the gold medals that guys like Owens had. Owens may not have been as fast, but I think he was more successful.

ta dummy

Chris's earlier excellent post having pretty much totally overridden my original concerns, I go for Owens.

Not that unusual for records to get shattered, or dramatically lowered by one man, followed by a period of consolidation. Johnson smashed the 200, Reynolds (drug tainted) the 400, Coe the 800, moorcroft the 5000. Beamon's was such that the world got a new adjective for it, but it was at altitude in a games where a lot of bests were set. dont think the pattern is something unique to the long jump, just 2 exceptional athletes. Owen's record length is flattered to some degree by a world war, Beamon's was just freakish and took a long time to subsequently lower.

Jonathon edwards world record at the triple jump still stands doesnt it and he beat it by 31 centimetres..

its been going since 1995.. so 18 years- that is some record.

I bet he doesnt even get a spot in this.. So i wouldnt say this board is overly brit centric!!

He beat a 10 year record with as much of a margin as what bolt did!

mystiroakey wrote:Jonathon edwards world record at the triple jump still stands doesnt it and he beat it by 31 centimetres..

its been going since 1995.. so 18 years- that is some record.

I bet he doesnt even get a spot in this.. So i wouldnt say this board is overly brit centric!!

He beat a 10 year record with as much of a margin as what bolt did!

Im sure Edwards was probably just a hop, skip and a jump away from making the final 64......

milkyboy wrote:... Owen's record length is flattered to some degree by a world war, Beamon's was just freakish and took a long time to subsequently lower.

Except it took 15 years after the end of WW2 for Owen's best to be beaten. Also, there's the question of whether Owens himself would have bettered his mark had he been able to continue his competetive career after 1936 (he was only 22 at the time).

Conditions of Beamon's jump did contribute to the freakish distance, but no-one else in the competition got anywhere near it, and 44 years later it is still the 2nd best ever legal distance including other jumps at altitude. Suggests it was just one of those occurrences when everythign came together in that one moment.

I think the need to win the WC is slightly overhyped for Messi, it's no longer the pinnacle of world football.

But to be considered the GOAT he needs to do something outside of that Barca team.

Went for Owen's I was aware of him for cultural reasons but on examination his sporting record is extraordinary.

Were the collective of Pele's Brazil better than Messi's Barcelona? Id suggest Messi carries his team through more matches than Pele did.

Im intrigued to see which footballers are on this list. Any defenders? I'd have Moore in there.

I can get people voting for Owens though, guy was fantastic. I'm a big fan of Sachin too, and I'd annoy the cricket board, Im sure, by voting for him over Bradman

Barcelona's defence is actually quite useful, chris, while Brazil's 1970 defence and goalkeeper were among the worst ever to claim a World Cup. Pele and his midfield and forward cohorts had an awful lot of defects to cover; Messi, quite apart from benefiting from the company of Iniesta and Xavi, has some team-mates who actually understand what marking and shot-stopping are all about.

Personally can't vote for Messi because of the growth hormone issue, I don't agree with anyone getting an advantage regardless of whether they have growth issues, I never have and never will be able to consider him amongst the greats and question his availability to play full stop.

Leonard was a hugely talented boxer but he I would have 11/12 above him so can't consider him either.

Tendulkar wasn't even the best batsmen in his team so again is ruled out.

So that leaves Owens for a fairly easy vote today.

First off, excellent write ups today from Jeff and the two Chrises.

There is an extremely strong case for Messi being the greatest footballer in the world today - he's certainly a notch above those I regularly see at Woking FC on a Saturday afternoon! However, I feel it's far too premature to say Of All Time. That was being said of Georgie Best when he was the same age as Messi is now and look how that ended up.

I suspect this thread hasn't done justice to the following and influence that Tendulkar has in India. However, great batman that he undoubtedly is / was (?), he wouldn't be an automatic pick for my All Time World XI.

Jeff throws some very good punches on behalf of Sugar Ray Leonard and brings out a stunning record that I hadn't properly appreciated. I do though happily remember watching (on terrestial tv) some of his fights in the early '80s. Jeff has shown that Leonard merits the name Sugar Ray. However, I'm not sure that even Jeff would claim that the later version has overtaken the original. I still hope he gets through.

With so much discussion understandably and deservedly devoted to Owens' political and cultural significance, I'm not sure we've paid enough attention to his athletic prowess and triumphs. Yes, those four golds were subsequently equalled by Carl Lewis. However, Owens was first and will remain so for the rest of time. Being first carries a lot of weight for me and will probably clinch it.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Personally can't vote for Messi because of the growth hormone issue, I don't agree with anyone getting an advantage regardless of whether they have growth issues, I never have and never will be able to consider him amongst the greats and question his availability to play full stop.

Leonard was a hugely talented boxer but he I would have 11/12 above him so can't consider him either.

Tendulkar wasn't even the best batsmen in his team so again is ruled out.

So that leaves Owens for a fairly easy vote today.

Why do you hold the growth hormone treatment against him? It was used to treat a childhood ailment, not gain an unfair advantage. Would you object to a player who had steroid treatment for childhood asthma?

In my opinion no one who has used human growth hormones should be able to compete in any sport professionally.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:In my opinion no one who has used human growth hormones should be able to compete in any sport professionally.

hard lines..

The problem is we have kids that are perscribed it for good reasons. Yet across the other side of the world we have kids on a factory line being pumped full of stuff to gain an advantage...