v2 G.O.A.T The Last 16 Match 1

Yesterday’s final two matches concluded round 2 with both Mohammed Ali and Steffi Graf progressing into the last 16 (17 with SRR now included), falling short and failing to make the next stage Sergei Bubka and Brain Lara.

With 17 sporting greats through to the next round we kick off today with a blockbuster match up, pitting two of the current generations elite against each other: Roger Federer vs. Lionel Messi.

Please vote for the participant you believe has achieved the most in sport

Please leave a comment as to why you voted

Roger Federer - Tennis - Championed by Emancipator

"2001, Wimbledon Centre Court; defending and seven time Wimbledon champion 'Pistol' Pete Sampras, the man who had reigned at the top of men's tennis for close to a decade and considered by many to be unbeatable on this hallowed turf is at crisis point. At two sets all, 5-6 and 15-40 down in the deciding set, the ruthlessly efficient Sampras is facing match point. It had been five years since anyone had managed to beat him in this tournament. His opponent is a relatively unknown challenger in the form of Swiss teenager, 19 year old Roger Federer. On countless occasions throughout his career Sampras had bailed himself out of tight spots with his booming, swerving, pin-point accurate serve; the serve universally acclaimed as the greatest in history. He wipes sweat from his brow, bounces the ball twice, looks up, coils himself into the releasing position, then with a seamlessly fluid motion he serves a missile out wide to Federer's forehand and charges towards the net. Federer takes a step towards the ball and unleashes a forehand that whizzes past Sampras for a clean winner. He crumples to his knees in disbelief and celebration. The BBC commentator proclaims the birth of a new star. The crowd rise as one to salute the new King. It is the dawn of a new era.. The Federer era.

It would be another couple of years before Federer would really hit the heights, and what heights! 17 grand slams from 24 finals, including 7 Wimbledon titles. Over 300 weeks as the number one player in the world, including 237 consecutive weeks at the top spot. 6 World Tour Final victories from 8 finals. 23 consecutive grand slam semi-finals; 34 consecutive grand slam quarter finals (and counting); a run of 24 consecutive finals victories in all tournaments, 65 consecutive match wins on grass, 56 consecutive match wins on hardcourt, five consecutive Wimbledon and US Open titles, a run of 18 grand slam finals out of 19 grand slam tournaments played, 21 masters titles.. and on and on.. all of them records, many of them by a considerable distance. There are at least half a dozen Wikipedia articles dedicated to the career achievements and complied statistics/records of Roger Federer. Peruse them at your own leisure - if you've got a few days to spare that is

But what makes Federer really stand out amongst the legends of tennis and indeed any sport is his unique game. Everything about his game is beautiful, everything is seemingly effortless. He glides around the court unhurried, with uncanny footwork and balletic grace. A sixth sense for being at the right place at the right time. He plays with perfect technique. Like an artist, Federer creates masterpieces; the court is his canvas. At heart, he is an attacking player who plays the game the right way; always looking to seize the initiative, to hit outright winners, to win spectacularly and brilliantly. He can hit every shot in the book. But he can also grind and play great defense. If it is so required he can switch to plan b, c, d, whatever it takes. In a sport dominated by super athletes, Federer at his peak was as fast and durable as they come. Modern tennis is played predominantly from the baseline (a stark difference to the tennis of Sampras's heydey which was mainly serve and volley based, with the majority of points won at the net) and Roger Federer can play the baseline game as well as anyone. But he can do so much more. He can mix spins and slices, lobs and dropshots, powerful winners and delicate touch, from the back of the court or at the net. It is this unique fusion of power, skill and aesthetic grace, that has captured the imagination of millions of fans around the world. Federer doesn't just win, he wins with style.

Federer's style and success has allowed him to transcend the sport in a way that few sportsmen in history can match. He is a record four time winner of the prestigious Laureus Sportsman of the Year Award. In a recent poll conducted across 25 countries with 51,000 participants he was voted as the second most trusted person in the world after Nelson Mandela. During the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony, Federer received the loudest cheer of the night when he carried the Swiss flag into the stadium https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddojLWIjKK4 At the London Olympics Federer's pre-Olympic presser had more than 700 journalists, more than any other star at the games. He was mobbed by crowds during his recent tour of South America with political and sporting dignitaries (including Pele and Maradonna) feting him. He has the most impressive endorsement portfolio in all of sports including blue chip companies such as Nike, Mercedes-Benz (global ambassador), Wilson, Rolex, Credite Suisse, Gillette, Moet & Chandon etc.

But despite all the accolades Federer has remained a likeable, down to earth person. His fellow tennis professionals have voted him the winner of the annual Steffan Edberg Sportsmanship award a record eight times. He is the President of the ATP players council and in this capacity has campaigned for the benefit of all the players on the tour, including negotiating a fairer distribution of prize money for players who lose in the earlier rounds of the slams. The Roger Federer foundation is a charitable organisation with the stated mission of empowering children through education; it is involved in numerous projects throughout Africa.

It is incredible that with so many distractions (he's married with two young children to boot) Federer has still managed to stay at the top of such a global and competitive sport. As things stand he is the number 2 ranked player in the world and indeed was, just a few short months ago, the number one player in the world. Tennis has traditionally been a young man's sport but Roger Federer has redefined the parameters. An incredible work ethic, pure sporting genius with exemplary conduct has moulded one of the greatest sporting careers ever witnessed. And it's not over yet. Federer has declared his intention to play until the 2016 Olympic Games. There may yet be a few more pages to add to Wikipedia

Some quotes:

""[In the modern game], you're either a clay court specialist, a grass court specialist or a hard court specialist ... or you're Roger Federer"" - Jimmy Connors

""He is the most naturally talented player I have ever seen in my life"" - John McEnroe

""He moves like a whisper and executes like a wrecking ball"" - Nick Bollettieri (legendary tennis coach)

""He is the most perfect machine I have ever seen playing tennis"" - Diego Maradonna

""Federer plays shots that other players don't even think of"" - Ivan Lendl

""We are witnessing history. This is the most dominant athlete on planet earth today"" - Jim Courier (4 time grand slam champion)

""Federer is the best player in history - no other player has ever had so much quality"" - Rafael Nadal

""Roger's got too many shots, too much talent in one body. It's hardly fair that one person can do all this—his backhands, his forehands, volleys, serving, his court position. The way he moves around the court, you feel like he's barely touching the ground. That's the sign of a great champion."" - Rod Laver

""He's the best I've ever played against. There's nowhere to go. There's nothing to do except hit fairways, hit greens and make putts. Every shot has that sort of urgency on it. I've played a lot of them [other players], so many years; there's a safety zone, there's a place to get to, there's something to focus on, there's a way. Anything you try to do, he potentially has an answer for and it's just a function of when he starts pulling the triggers necessary to get you to change to that decision."" - Andre Agassi

""He's a real person. He's not an enigma. Off the court he's not trying to be somebody. If you met him at McDonald's and you didn't know who he was, you would have no idea that he's one of the best athletes in the world"" - Andy Roddick

""Today I was playing my best tennis, trying lots of different things, but nothing worked. When you're playing like that and he still comes up with all those great shots you really have to wonder if he's even from the same planet"" - Novak Djokovic



emancipator

ps - For those of you who haven't seen the The Fed Express in action, the following video might give you some idea of what he's all about
http://vimeo.com/40765561"

Lionel Messi- Football- Championed by Chris W

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), three 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

The anti-Federer article doesn't sway me one iota. To me, he is the most fantastic tennis player to watch and the best I have ever seen.

Some greats have struggles against particular opponents. Be it style, a mental aspect or whatever, but it doesn't take away the consistent greatness achieved in the mean time.

I'm thinking Norton/Ali could be a good example.

Federer. A great champion and a beautiful player to watch, not thay I'm a big tennis fan.

As for Messi. he may well be the GOAT in 10 years time, IF he carries on as he is doing.

Oh great!!!

I am suppose to choice between these so early on..

grrr, gone for messi but i flipped a coin- I honestly cant split them

MtotheC

Please get rid of IMBL's incredibly one-eyed (as a Nadal fan) write up on Federer and get any of the sensible contributors on the tennis board to provide a more balanced piece.

As I've argued before, I simply can't vote for Messi because he's only half way through his career - clearly a very talented player, but so far all he has to show for it is a couple of Champions League titles and a few Spanish League titles while playing for the best club side in the world. Ryan Giggs has a more impressive haul of medals (admitedly in a longer career) and earlier in his career had some moment so magic too (OK, maybe fewer and less spectacular than Messi).
A few years ago Kaka was talked about in similar terms - one good World Cup away from eclipsing the legacy of Pele or Maradona; he didn't have a good WC and since then has been a shadow of the player he used to be, to the extent that no-one even talks of him being the best player of this era. I'm not saying this will happen to Messi, just that to judge him the GOAT you are basing it as much on potential for the near future as on past performances and achievements. Call me back in a decade and I'll see where I place him in the GOAT debate then.

As for Federer, well, he's still playing and still a threat at the business end of major tournaments, but at 31 almost everyone accepts that he is not quite the player he was in his mid 20s - despite that, he is still ranked #2 in the world and held the #1 spot for a while last year and won Wimbledon plus three Masters 1000 series events (the same number as Djokovic). The point though (by comparison with Messi) is that if Federer was to retire tomorrow, he would do so with almost all major (mens) tennis records - Most slam titles, most weeks and longest streak as the #1 player, absurd streak records for most consecutive appearances in slam finals (streaks of 10 and 8, next best is 4), semi-finals (22, next best is 10) and quarter finals (35 not out, no idea who'se next or with how many - it's rare for players to even compete in 35 consecutive slams). All this, and achieved with a style and grace on the court that is very old-fashioned compared with the physicality of most of his rivals.
Federer is one of those rare people in sport where the most naturally gifted and entertaining player also happens to be the most successful.

What's with the anti-Federer offering at the top in the article? In the interests of this process surely it can't be fair to have one candidate being talked up and the other talked down?

Anyway, Federer takes this for me. Iroically, if Federer were a poorer clay court player, his head to head record against Nadal would look much better, but even so, Nadal holding the Indian sign over him is not enough of a reason to diminish his claims here. Sometimes people just have the wood on certain others; Krajicek had Sampras' number, but I'll be damned if I ever put the Dutchman as a greater player than Pistol Pete!

Anyway, a more telling statistic for me is that when Federer was at his peak, he kept Nadal pinned at the number two spot in the rankings for 160 consecutive weeks.

From a technical and aesthetics point of view, I consider his tennis to be the highest standard I've seen in my own lifetime, and it bears repeating again that he hasn't just broken records, he's demolished them; Borg and McEnroe's joint record of victory in 12 successive ATP finals was taken to 24 by Federer, Connors' run of 160 weeks consecutively as world number one was stretched to 237 by Federer, and the Swiss didn't taste defeat in any of his first 7 Grand Slam finals, compared to the former record of 3.

And then there's more singles Slams than any other man, more weeks as world number one in all than any other man, more Slam finals than any other man, highest ever amount of ranking points achieved by a male at any one time etc etc etc.

Even more remarkable is that, aged 31 (pretty damn old in tennis), he was able to pick up a 17th Slam title at Wimbledon last year and regain the world number one ranking; all of this with more or less peak versions of Djokovic, Nadal and Murray to contend with.

Messi is a phenomenon too, of course, but until he has a good World Cup there's no way he can be ahead of a man who has been so utterly dominant and awe-inspiring on the biggest stage like Federer.

Alas, having read IMBL on the tennis forum, I can safely say that his 'anti-Fed' article is solely fuelled and motivated by his desire to proclaim Nadal as the GOAT (see also previous posts on the GOAT thread).

Tennis is not about H2H records (Sampras is 4-5 down to Stich, Stich is 0-6 down to Agassi, Agassi is 14-20 to Sampras - clearly they are all better than each other)

Fed was No 1. in the world in 2004 with one bunch of rivals and No 1. in the world in 2012 with an entirely different bunch of rivals.

It's also rather sad, on a thread where we are supposed to be celebrating sporting greatness, to see such bitterness and jealousy creep in.

Has to be Federer despite the bizarra anti-championing.

I think its fair to say with Federer he will not add too many more major titles to his collection but that doesn't matter as he has accumulated enought to be called great already.

Messi is just too early in his career for me to vote for him. I personally need to see him influence a World Cup to even be my football GOAT let alone overall at this stage.

I think in the interests of debate and considering both sides of the story it's interesting and thought provoking to have another view point hence an anti champion.

If you disagree with IMBL's viewpoint then as a non tennis expect I for one would be keen to no why?

IMO it's done with an end goal of debate rather than Wuming

After not much digging it seems the head to heads put together at the top are a little misleading.

Rafa leads overall 18-10, but inclusive in that is 12-2 in his favour solely on clay courts. Not surprising considering Nadal is possibly the greatest clay court player ever?

I do think that Messi may already be the best footballer we have ever seen (and I've argued for him all the way through this process) but as others have said, I'm not sure he can go further in this process at this stage of his career, certainly not against a giant like Federer.

Ask me again in five years or so and I may answer differently, but at the moment, Federer wins this round.

It must be love? Nah, it must be drunk?

MtotheC wrote:I think in the interests of debate and considering both sides of the story it's interesting and thought provoking to have another view point hence an anti champion.

If there was an anti-champion piece for both (as well as a championing one), then I'd be more inclined to agree. But having one championed and the other trashed surely can't be fair, and doesn't sit well with me.

Candidates should have a level playing field, for me.

Any chance someone could create a world cup type draw to show who has got through?

I agree on the level playing field thing and I've replaced the write ups.

superflyweight

regarding your comment on Messi being possibly the best footballer you've ever seen (something for which a good argument can be put forward), I think there is a distinction between this and being an all time great or a GOAT candidate:

Is Messi able to do things on the pitch that simply make you go 'WOW'? Absolutely. Whether he is better at these than Maradona at his very best was (think goals v England and Belgium in the 86 WC) is a good pub discussion.

Does Messi score a shed-load of goals? Absolutely. He does this playing for the best side in the world at the moment (so has fantastic support from the likes of Iniesta, Xavi etc). How you compare this with Pele scroing a similar shed load of goals for a weaker team against probably on average weaker opposition (noting that while playing for Santos, he was regularly playing against the other Brazilian and South American greats, as transferring to Europe was a rare thing - as such the opposition wasn't as weak as some here have tried to imply, and La Liga is not as strong a league in total as some portray, two great teams and a few good ones, but the lower half are less competetive than say the Premier League or the Bundesliga) is again a good discussion point.

Based on the two points above, he's clearly a fantastic player. However, greatness and GOATness require something more - legacy on the world stage. So far, Messi simply hasn't done enough to achieve that, whereas Pele and Maradona did. It's not necessarily about World Cups (I think most of us consider the top club teams to have far surpassed the strongest national sides), but it does need him to shine in a couple more CL finals or other high profile games.

Hmm.

I think Messi will become hailed as the greatest footballer ever. He is arguably that already, and I personally think he is the best (but can see the arguments against). He hasn't won the World Cup, and tbh I doubt he will do in the current Argentine set up. Does this prevent him from becoming the one GOAT? At this moment in time, I'd have to agree it probably does work against him as he hasn't peaked in his sport let alone transcended beyond to the extent, say, Pele has. However, does it prevent him going through against Federer today?

Federer is the most successful Grand Slam event winner in tennis with 17 but quality of opposition during the bulk of them is being put forward as a mitigating factor in his greatness (incidentally it's interesting to say the least to have a "why you shouldn't vote for" write up against a "why you should vote for"). Also, his record "only" includes one French Open title (OK - it's still more than the majority of tennis-istas have managed). I think that if he were truly the greatest he would have a better record in all slams across all surfaces, regardless of being against Nadal or Djokovic. A great, yes undoubtedly. The greatest? Jury's still out in my mind.

Major stats (still comparing apples and oranges in buzzword terms though!)

Messi 3 Champions League wins in 8 years (since 2004/2005 debut) = 37.5% win %

Fed since 2000 (first year he progressed in each of the 4 slams) 17 wins in 53 events 32%

Today - Messi wins for me.

Dummy
I reckon Messi has done enough domestically already. A great world cup and another 50 odd international goals should see him be dubbed the best ever Footballer. Time will tell.

I'm not sure I regard it as all that complicated, dummy_half. Messi's certainly the best I've seen in my lifetime (which would include Maradona) and I think there is a solid argument for him to be the best footballer of all time. That argument may or may not become more solid over the next few years but he's certainly worhty for consideration as the GOAT.

Except MtotheC We know IMBL very well from the tennis boards. His raison d'etre on that board is to laude anything that may make Federer look bad and to promote Nadal tirelessly. It's partly why the tennis board is clogged with repetitive drivel about weak eras and so forth and it is also why I decided to leave the board.

Anyway in the interest of fair play I think you should also put up my Federer article above his anti-Fed article so people can make a fair comparison. Please put up the revised edition

Just a few quick points and I'll try to keep them quick because I have know interest in dragging this place down to the level of petty squabbling that dominates on the tennis board:

1) Re: Nadal. Federer was trailing Nadal 6-8 in the H2H up until the end of 2007 (most of Rafa's wins were on clay). Fed had won 3 of the five meetings in 2007. 2008 was a disaster for Fed. He caught Infective mononucleosis and missed training blocks, which meant he had to play catch up all year with his fitness. He was pouring sweat on the court which many people observed (Federer usually hardly breaks a sweat). He lost 15 matches that year compared to an average of just 5 matches a year in the previous four. He has not lost as many matches in a season since! He was losing to players he had never lost to before or hadn't lost to in years. Jim Courier stated that the fact that Federer still managed to reach 3 slam finals that year despite the ongoing effects of mono probably makes it one of the greatest sporting years in the history of tennis.

2) It was in this period that Nadal established his dominance over Federer winning five matches in a row. Since this period the H2H has been 5-4 to Nadal with Roger clearly past his best.

3) Rafa has a huge match-up advantage over Fed being a lefty that can generate incredible amounts of spin. His Cross court FH to Federer's single handed BH is always going to be tough to handle particularly when it bounces up so high. It's common knowledge in tennis that match-ups play a big part in outcome. Davydenko (a player that Federer owns 18-2) leads Rafa 6-5 with all but one of Rafa's wins coming on clay. Is Davydenko better than Rafa? Djokovic has owned Rafa at his peak. He beat him seven times in a row from 2011 to 2012. During this period only the 30 year old Fed managed to beat Djokovic in a slam. He nearly did it twice after serving for the match at the USO.

4) Finally regarding the competition. Federer has competed against and beaten the likes Sampras, Ivanisevic, Henman, Agassi, Roddick, Safin, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Ferrero, Davydenko, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro to win his slams. Even against the latest emerging generation of players predicted to be the stars of the future (Raonic, Tomic, Harrison etc) Fed is 10-0. That's basically four generations of players.

5) To claim that Federer won his titles in 'one of the weakest periods at the top of the game in decades' and then to compare that to the reign of the K brothers is churlish. It shows that some people know nothing about either tennis or boxing. Federer has played (and still plays) in the ultra-modern era. The field is huge, the competition immense. He thorughly dominated his group of players and continues to have regular success up till today.

6) Finally, the stat quoted regarding Murray having more wins against Federer than his other competitors is misleading. All bar one of those Murray wins came in 2008 when Federer had been struggling all year. It took Murray till 2013 when Fed was 31 to finally get a win over him in a slam. Even then it took five sets and Fed had just played a five setter two days earlier. Safin beat peak Federer in the AUS semi final in 2005 so I'm not sure how that particular (bolded) stat proves anything.

Oh darn

If only I'd waited a little longer.

You can ignore the above post.

Hero please can you add my revised Fed article instead of the old one. I can send it to you if you like.

Stella

Certainly agree with your second sentence. Also, I half agree with your first comment - I'm not sure Messi's future achievements in La Liga will greatly sway anyone's opinions as to just how good he is (hell, you could put me in the 10 shirt in that Barca side and they'd still challenge Real Madrid for the title). Champions League is a slightly different matter - I don't recall Messi really dominating a CL semi-final or final in the way that Zidane did a few years ago (noting that I think Messi is more talented that ZZ). Maybe it's because Barca are such an outstanding team that individuals shine less.

Oh, and crediting Messi with 3 CL wins is a bit generous - he didn't play in the later stages of the competition in the first of Barca's 3 recent wins.

Ima bigger football fan than tennis but federer here no doubt

Messi has gone missing on the biggest stage an for that reason alone Federer gets my vote.

Federer for me, GOAT at Tennis. Messi, not even in the top 10 for football.

dummy_half wrote:Stella

Certainly agree with your second sentence. Also, I half agree with your first comment - I'm not sure Messi's future achievements in La Liga will greatly sway anyone's opinions as to just how good he is (hell, you could put me in the 10 shirt in that Barca side and they'd still challenge Real Madrid for the title). Champions League is a slightly different matter - I don't recall Messi really dominating a CL semi-final or final in the way that Zidane did a few years ago (noting that I think Messi is more talented that ZZ). Maybe it's because Barca are such an outstanding team that individuals shine less.

Oh, and crediting Messi with 3 CL wins is a bit generous - he didn't play in the later stages of the competition in the first of Barca's 3 recent wins.

He has scored two in two finals, but he hasn't dominated a final, as yet.

I'm looking forward to Brazil next year, where I'm hoping he'll have a cracker.

I chose Federer, probably the best tennis player of all time, proven at all levels of the game, and a true gentleman to boot.

Messi is a prodigious talent, but until he's performed on the international stage like the true greats of the game (Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, Van Basten etc), I can't consider him a GOAT.

This really is the exciting stage of the competition!

Duty281 wrote:Federer for me, GOAT at Tennis. Messi, not even in the top 10 for football.

Really?

superflyweight wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Federer for me, GOAT at Tennis. Messi, not even in the top 10 for football.

Really?

See I'd agree with him, but only because Messi hasn't done anything internationally. If he does well at next year's World Cup, or takes Argentina single-handedly to a couple of Copa America wins, I'll put him in my top 10. But he's just not done it at the very top level, whereas there are a whole host of players who have.

Messi has scored 31 goals for Argentina, which ain't shabby.

Peter Crouch has scored 22 goals for England. So 31 for Argentina, when you're playing with better players, against easier opposition, with 1000x the ability, is very poor.

Of Messi's 31 international goals, 1 came at a World Cup (the 6th goal in a 6-0 win), and two came at a Copa America tournament (the second goals in a 3-0 and a 4-0 win). He's made no impact at tournament level on the international stage.

Now, 12 of those goals came in 2012, so perhaps he's ready to make his mark? Until he does, we can't possibly proclaim him as the GOAT.

International football shouldn't be the benchmark any more I don't think. Yes, they are the best players for each nation, but in a national team I think you will find more weak links than a CL side where you can constantly upgrade with no restriction.

But to say he hasn't done anything internationally is a bit harsh. Plus, like you say, his record is getting better and he has arguably yet to reach his peak.

No restriction? What about transfer windows? Budgets? Wage limits? Fifa fair play? Financial stability? There are plenty of restrictions on club teams.

Messi has achieved nothing with Argentina. His direct comparator, Maradona, was player of the tournament in 86, scored 5 and set up 5, and won it as captain aged...25. Messi might score more goals, but he's not done it at all levels of the game like Diego did. Not to mention Pele of the 1,000 goals and 3 world cups.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Federer for me, GOAT at Tennis. Messi, not even in the top 10 for football.

Really?

See I'd agree with him, but only because Messi hasn't done anything internationally. If he does well at next year's World Cup, or takes Argentina single-handedly to a couple of Copa America wins, I'll put him in my top 10. But he's just not done it at the very top level, whereas there are a whole host of players who have.

International football is no longer the pinnacle (Champions League is clearly of a higher standard and Messi has done it plenty well enough in that competition). Putting aside 2006 when he was still a teenager, he can only really be judged on one World Cup - 2010. Argentina were an utter shambles with Messi's performances the only bright thing about them (he was very unlucky not to score on a number of occasions). It's not his fault that Maradona decided to forego training so he could have a lie-in and its not his fault that El Diego the "tactical mastermind" chose to play only one player (Mascherano) against the German pairing of Schweinsteiger and Khedira. Argentina were torn apart by Germany but the blame can only be laid at one person't door - and it aint Messi. As for Copa America, why does he have to do it singehandedly to be considered great?

Messi suffers when being compared against previous greats because we have access to more footgae of him than any great footballer that has gone before. Because we’ve seen highlights and numerous clips of other greats performing remarkable feats, we think that they did them all the time and that by extension, If Messi has a quiet game he somehow doesn’t measure up. Pele, Maradona, Cruyff and any other great will have had their quiet games but footage of those games is hardly going to be winging its way onto youtube anytime soon.

The 1000 goals is the biggest crock of Bs in sport when it comes to Pele. Lets think about it sensibly he would have had to score 50 goals every season for 20 seasons, my arse he did.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:No restriction? What about transfer windows? Budgets? Wage limits? Fifa fair play? Financial stability? There are plenty of restrictions on club teams.

Messi has achieved nothing with Argentina. His direct comparator, Maradona, was player of the tournament in 86, scored 5 and set up 5, and won it as captain aged...25. Messi might score more goals, but he's not done it at all levels of the game like Diego did. Not to mention Pele of the 1,000 goals and 3 world cups.

For the top CL teams like Barca, Real, United, Chelsea et al, there seems to be far less of those restrictions that actually matter to them. Besides that, my main point is that you aren't restricted by who you can buy and thus the pool of talent is far larger and better teams will be formed than a national team could possibly be.

Diego never won a European Cup. That's playing devil's advocate, but all the same, he never "did it" at that level, supposedly the highest in all of European football.

Rowley wrote:The 1000 goals is the biggest crock of Bs in sport when it comes to Pele. Lets think about it sensibly he would have had to score 50 goals every season for 20 seasons, my arse he did.

The record includes friendlies - which is debateable as to whether you consider they count. Romario claims to have scored 1,000 goals too, but he went further to include youth goals...

Azzy Mahmood wrote:No restriction? What about transfer windows? Budgets? Wage limits? Fifa fair play? Financial stability? There are plenty of restrictions on club teams.

Messi has achieved nothing with Argentina. His direct comparator, Maradona, was player of the tournament in 86, scored 5 and set up 5, and won it as captain aged...25. Messi might score more goals, but he's not done it at all levels of the game like Diego did. Not to mention Pele of the 1,000 goals and 3 world cups.

Fifa fair play? Yeah like that actually means something

How is Champions League football 'clearly' of a higher standard? I'd disagree with that statement myself.

And I think you remember Messi's performances in 2010 differently to me. I remember him missing several 'easy' chances that cost his team. I've not blamed him for Argentina's continued failures, only said that he's not driven them to success, like the true GOATs of football have with their countries.

As for single-handedly, it's what separates the wheat from the chaff. There are plenty of good players in football history - but the true greats win big games by themselves.

And I think we all understand the problem with footage. Even Peter Crouch has the odd bad game.

Rowley, Messi scored 80+ goals last season. He'd have to do that for 12.5 years to get to 1,000. I can see him doing it 4/5 times, but then again, he's playing better opposition. Pele could easily have scored 80 goals for 12.5 consecutive seasons at the level he was competing at.

Messi hasn't exactly been too shabby in Champions League finals

sodhat wrote:

Rowley wrote:The 1000 goals is the biggest crock of Bs in sport when it comes to Pele. Lets think about it sensibly he would have had to score 50 goals every season for 20 seasons, my arse he did.

The record includes friendlies - which is debateable as to whether you consider they count. Romario claims to have scored 1,000 goals too, but he went further to include youth goals...

Well I scored 80 in a season on FIFA once and notched two in my nephews Parents vs Dads pre season friendly, can i count them, if so I have 82 goals to my name.

sodhat wrote:Diego never won a European Cup. That's playing devil's advocate, but all the same, he never "did it" at that level, supposedly the highest in all of European football.

It was much harder to win european trophies in those days, it was knockout football rather than this pathetic group stage nonsense. And he didn't have the best club team in history playing with him.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:

sodhat wrote:Diego never won a European Cup. That's playing devil's advocate, but all the same, he never "did it" at that level, supposedly the highest in all of European football.

It was much harder to win european trophies in those days, it was knockout football rather than this pathetic group stage nonsense. And he didn't have the best club team in history playing with him.

But you said this...

"As for single-handedly, it's what separates the wheat from the chaff. There are plenty of good players in football history - but the true greats win big games by themselves."

If Diego was capable of winning a World Cup - the "pinnacle" of football with his sheer brilliance, why could he not lead a team to win a weaker tournament?

Interestingly ESPN (the American sports broadcaster) is also doing a GOAT athlete competition.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sportsnation/feature/index?page=greatestofalltime#top

This is their shortlisted 16 (in no particular order):

1) Michael Jordan
2) Tiger Woods
3) Michael Phelps
4) Anderson Silva
5) Muhammed Ali
6) Mark Allen
7) Bo Jackson
8) Roger Federer
9) Willie Mays
10) Jackie Robinson
11) Pele
12) Tony Hawk
13) Carl Lewis
14) Wayne Gretzky
15) Jim Brown
16) Dale Earnhardt Sr.

TBH there's a whole bunch of people on that list that I've never heard or only vaguely heard of.



emancipator

Not sure it was harder in the sixties/seventies to win the European Cup? I can recall Liverpool playing some right old crap during their day.

Olly wrote:Messi hasn't exactly been too shabby in Champions League finals

In 2011 United were dreadful, hardly difficult to have a good game really. In 2009 his header was one of the best headers I've ever seen. But club football isn't the biggest stage of them all, international football is. I bet if you ask any player what they'd rather win - the Champions League or a World Cup - they'd all choose the World Cup. Even Messi.

sodhat wrote:If Diego was capable of winning a World Cup - the "pinnacle" of football with his sheer brilliance, why could he not lead a team to win a weaker tournament?

It's the fact that he's done it at all that makes him one of the GOATS. He's done what very few players have ever had the ability to do. And Messi hasn't done it.

Who's the supposedly better opposition that Crouch has scored his goals against? A quick check on the FA webiste shows that Crouch has scored goals against France, Mexico, Egypt, Bulgaria, Andorra, Ukraine, Croatia, Austria, Estonia, Macedonia, Greece, Trinidad & Tobago, Jamiaca, Uruguay and Hungary.

There's 3/4decent teams in that list, France, Croatia, Urugay and Mexico. I don't have a list of who Messi's international goals have been against but I know he's scored against Brazil, Spain, Germany and Uruguay.

Yep, they're weaker opposition alright. Nonsensical argument.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:

sodhat wrote:If Diego was capable of winning a World Cup - the "pinnacle" of football with his sheer brilliance, why could he not lead a team to win a weaker tournament?

It's the fact that he's done it at all that makes him one of the GOATS. He's done what very few players have ever had the ability to do. And Messi hasn't done it.

Not yet but he has two good world cups left in him.

Azzy Mahmood wrote:

Olly wrote:Messi hasn't exactly been too shabby in Champions League finals

In 2011 United were dreadful, hardly difficult to have a good game really. In 2009 his header was one of the best headers I've ever seen. But club football isn't the biggest stage of them all, international football is. I bet if you ask any player what they'd rather win - the Champions League or a World Cup - they'd all choose the World Cup. Even Messi.

I bet the teams Maradona played were never "dreadful" eh