Probably worth noting the quality of the sides both players played under. Messi's Barca are arguably the greatest club side ever with WC players all over, Maradona on the other hand in Europe played predominately for Napoli who were good but that was primarily based on them having Maradona. Also Serie A at the time had some very tight defences, the 2 titles Maradona won with Napoli they only managed to score 41 and 57 goals.
Not really as simple as comparing stats.
comment by °°° Say My Name °°° (U18558)
posted 8 minutes ago
What's your point?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wasn't really making one. Just relaying the numbers.
But... Messi is so statistically dominant that it's hard to make a case for Maradona over him.
Such a shame he's lost two finals for his country back to back. None of these comparison happen otherwise. He's better than Maradona was. These stats just further prove it. Plus with countless records broken
The stats don't tell the whole story. Van Nistlerooy stats probably outperform Maradona's stats but I don't think anyone would suggest he was anywhere near being a better player.
Stats really don't tell the whole story, it was a different game back then. Saying that, I've started to come round to the idea that Messi might be better. Maradona was outstanding, but Messi is impossibly good in every department.
Football isn't a totally stats based game and the who's "better" is always subjective, especially when comparing players from different eras. Also, being part of a trophy winning team doesn't make someone a good player, or make one player better than another, I see this argument being put forward quite a bit.
Neither Messi or Ronaldo have a WC winners medal but Podolski does.
The most important piece of context is that Maradona played at a time when money in football was far more evenly distributed and club football wasn't anywhere near as imbalanced between the stronger and weaker sides.
Secondly, Serie A when he played there was going through a golden age of defending and was characterised by relatively cagey football.
I've just glanced at the league tables for the late 80s / early 90s and the only league champions that averaged as much as two goals a game were the great Milan side of 91-92. Compare that to the way Madrid and Real regularly slaughter the cannon fodder in La Liga.
These statistics may reflect some genuine differences between the players, e.g. that Messi is more of a forward than the classic number 10 that Maradona was. But I don't think you could drop Messi into Italian football 25 years ago and expect he'd be anywhere near as prolific.
Neither Messi or Ronaldo have a WC winners medal but Podolski does.
--------------------------------------
Indeed, but Podolski was a peripheral player in a superb all-round team, whereas Maradona dragged a workmanlike Argentina to two World Cup finals with an array of outstanding goals and assists.
"But... Messi is so statistically dominant that it's hard to make a case for Maradona over him."
----
The sport Maradona played and the sport Messi currently plays are vastly different.
No one has any idea how many goals Maradona would get if he was playing at his prime in todays game.
Stats are quite useful to help compare players of a particular era, but not so much over two eras. As has been stated... Defence, goalkeepers... Even the rules of the game have changed.
I don't think there is much in it between the two... Maradona is perhaps my personal favourite as he introduced me to a level of football that I didn't think was possible.... But Messi (and Ronaldo) continue to amaze too.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 26 minutes ago
The most important piece of context is that Maradona played at a time when money in football was far more evenly distributed and club football wasn't anywhere near as imbalanced between the stronger and weaker sides.
Secondly, Serie A when he played there was going through a golden age of defending and was characterised by relatively cagey football.
I've just glanced at the league tables for the late 80s / early 90s and the only league champions that averaged as much as two goals a game were the great Milan side of 91-92. Compare that to the way Madrid and Real regularly slaughter the cannon fodder in La Liga.
These statistics may reflect some genuine differences between the players, e.g. that Messi is more of a forward than the classic number 10 that Maradona was. But I don't think you could drop Messi into Italian football 25 years ago and expect he'd be anywhere near as prolific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nail on head, superb comment
Some people on here are too young to remember decent defending and how hard it was to score goals back then. Most won't remember the backpass rule not being around and how easy it was to time waste.
Exactly Robb
It was also 2 points for a win and a point for a draw so a lot of teams set up not to lose.
I remember how good the defending was/ how boring Italian Football was on Channel 4.
Wouldn't be now as I appreciate defending more, but as a kid it was toss, and to make it worse, it was on a Sunday - a typically boring day.
Loved Italia football on C4 when growing up,I did fall asleep a few times though.
Anyone who really wants to engage in this sort of debate with anything resembling a meaningful opinion needs to have watched Maradona in his day and context.
I would start by recommending they watch at least half a dozen randomly chosen games (as opposed to hand-picked standout performances) to compare the role he played to Messi's. One of the things that will immediately stand out is how deep Maradona used to drop to start attacking plays. Once they've taken note of these issues they will understand that statistical comparisons between the two are absolutely meaningless.
The Only Stat that matters.
Hand Of God
Maradona 1 Messi 0
If Messi had to take the kind of tackles dished out in that era he'd be sliced in two, bless him.
Search for Cannigia v Cameroon . Brutal. Three bites at him before they get him
I think Maradona would score an insane amount of goals in this day and age. Perhaps not as many as Messi, but give him the Barca teams Messi has had and the dual factor of referees protection and his natural strength on the ball and he'd be a force of nature
If Messi had to take the kind of tackles dished out in that era he'd be sliced in two, bless him.
----------------
True.
And if Maradona had to go through some of the tests that Messi has to face ..........
He'd be banned the druggie
Always thought Messi was more similar to Cruyff than Maradona in playing style. Maradona was an old fashion no.10 and played more in a David Silva type role.
I have seen both play, and for me Maradona was the better player.
He could drag a team of ordinary players kicking and screaming to a win against any opponent. On the pitch, he sometimes seemed like a god-like giant among dwarfs, commanding his troops like a general. All the player's and fan's attention was on him. And still he couldn't be stopped by the opponent.
Messi doesn't have the same influence on the game and the other players. And he, unlike Maradona, has always had great players around him. Both Barca and Argentina are star-studded, great teams even without Messi.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Messi vs Maradona
Page 1 of 1
posted on 8/7/15
Probably worth noting the quality of the sides both players played under. Messi's Barca are arguably the greatest club side ever with WC players all over, Maradona on the other hand in Europe played predominately for Napoli who were good but that was primarily based on them having Maradona. Also Serie A at the time had some very tight defences, the 2 titles Maradona won with Napoli they only managed to score 41 and 57 goals.
Not really as simple as comparing stats.
posted on 8/7/15
What's your point?
posted on 8/7/15
comment by °°° Say My Name °°° (U18558)
posted 8 minutes ago
What's your point?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wasn't really making one. Just relaying the numbers.
But... Messi is so statistically dominant that it's hard to make a case for Maradona over him.
posted on 8/7/15
Such a shame he's lost two finals for his country back to back. None of these comparison happen otherwise. He's better than Maradona was. These stats just further prove it. Plus with countless records broken
posted on 8/7/15
The stats don't tell the whole story. Van Nistlerooy stats probably outperform Maradona's stats but I don't think anyone would suggest he was anywhere near being a better player.
posted on 8/7/15
Stats really don't tell the whole story, it was a different game back then. Saying that, I've started to come round to the idea that Messi might be better. Maradona was outstanding, but Messi is impossibly good in every department.
posted on 8/7/15
Football isn't a totally stats based game and the who's "better" is always subjective, especially when comparing players from different eras. Also, being part of a trophy winning team doesn't make someone a good player, or make one player better than another, I see this argument being put forward quite a bit.
Neither Messi or Ronaldo have a WC winners medal but Podolski does.
posted on 8/7/15
The most important piece of context is that Maradona played at a time when money in football was far more evenly distributed and club football wasn't anywhere near as imbalanced between the stronger and weaker sides.
Secondly, Serie A when he played there was going through a golden age of defending and was characterised by relatively cagey football.
I've just glanced at the league tables for the late 80s / early 90s and the only league champions that averaged as much as two goals a game were the great Milan side of 91-92. Compare that to the way Madrid and Real regularly slaughter the cannon fodder in La Liga.
These statistics may reflect some genuine differences between the players, e.g. that Messi is more of a forward than the classic number 10 that Maradona was. But I don't think you could drop Messi into Italian football 25 years ago and expect he'd be anywhere near as prolific.
posted on 8/7/15
Neither Messi or Ronaldo have a WC winners medal but Podolski does.
--------------------------------------
Indeed, but Podolski was a peripheral player in a superb all-round team, whereas Maradona dragged a workmanlike Argentina to two World Cup finals with an array of outstanding goals and assists.
posted on 8/7/15
"But... Messi is so statistically dominant that it's hard to make a case for Maradona over him."
----
The sport Maradona played and the sport Messi currently plays are vastly different.
No one has any idea how many goals Maradona would get if he was playing at his prime in todays game.
posted on 8/7/15
Stats are quite useful to help compare players of a particular era, but not so much over two eras. As has been stated... Defence, goalkeepers... Even the rules of the game have changed.
I don't think there is much in it between the two... Maradona is perhaps my personal favourite as he introduced me to a level of football that I didn't think was possible.... But Messi (and Ronaldo) continue to amaze too.
posted on 8/7/15
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 26 minutes ago
The most important piece of context is that Maradona played at a time when money in football was far more evenly distributed and club football wasn't anywhere near as imbalanced between the stronger and weaker sides.
Secondly, Serie A when he played there was going through a golden age of defending and was characterised by relatively cagey football.
I've just glanced at the league tables for the late 80s / early 90s and the only league champions that averaged as much as two goals a game were the great Milan side of 91-92. Compare that to the way Madrid and Real regularly slaughter the cannon fodder in La Liga.
These statistics may reflect some genuine differences between the players, e.g. that Messi is more of a forward than the classic number 10 that Maradona was. But I don't think you could drop Messi into Italian football 25 years ago and expect he'd be anywhere near as prolific.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nail on head, superb comment
posted on 8/7/15
Some people on here are too young to remember decent defending and how hard it was to score goals back then. Most won't remember the backpass rule not being around and how easy it was to time waste.
posted on 8/7/15
Exactly Robb
It was also 2 points for a win and a point for a draw so a lot of teams set up not to lose.
posted on 8/7/15
I remember how good the defending was/ how boring Italian Football was on Channel 4.
Wouldn't be now as I appreciate defending more, but as a kid it was toss, and to make it worse, it was on a Sunday - a typically boring day.
posted on 8/7/15
Loved Italia football on C4 when growing up,I did fall asleep a few times though.
posted on 8/7/15
Anyone who really wants to engage in this sort of debate with anything resembling a meaningful opinion needs to have watched Maradona in his day and context.
I would start by recommending they watch at least half a dozen randomly chosen games (as opposed to hand-picked standout performances) to compare the role he played to Messi's. One of the things that will immediately stand out is how deep Maradona used to drop to start attacking plays. Once they've taken note of these issues they will understand that statistical comparisons between the two are absolutely meaningless.
posted on 8/7/15
The Only Stat that matters.
Hand Of God
Maradona 1 Messi 0
posted on 8/7/15
If Messi had to take the kind of tackles dished out in that era he'd be sliced in two, bless him.
Search for Cannigia v Cameroon . Brutal. Three bites at him before they get him
posted on 8/7/15
I think Maradona would score an insane amount of goals in this day and age. Perhaps not as many as Messi, but give him the Barca teams Messi has had and the dual factor of referees protection and his natural strength on the ball and he'd be a force of nature
posted on 8/7/15
If Messi had to take the kind of tackles dished out in that era he'd be sliced in two, bless him.
----------------
True.
And if Maradona had to go through some of the tests that Messi has to face ..........
He'd be banned the druggie
posted on 9/7/15
Always thought Messi was more similar to Cruyff than Maradona in playing style. Maradona was an old fashion no.10 and played more in a David Silva type role.
posted on 9/7/15
I have seen both play, and for me Maradona was the better player.
He could drag a team of ordinary players kicking and screaming to a win against any opponent. On the pitch, he sometimes seemed like a god-like giant among dwarfs, commanding his troops like a general. All the player's and fan's attention was on him. And still he couldn't be stopped by the opponent.
Messi doesn't have the same influence on the game and the other players. And he, unlike Maradona, has always had great players around him. Both Barca and Argentina are star-studded, great teams even without Messi.
Page 1 of 1