Greatest player of all time?

[Peevemor]

And how did I manage to mention David Farrell on a greatest player of all time thread?

[calumhibee1]

In the 70s/80s (for example) did players play with injuries that would keep them out now?

Ist team squads were far smaller, only 2 substitutes were permitted per match and starting line-ups, from what I remember, seemed far more regular from week to week.

I read David Farrell's autobiography and he played through pain the majority of his career. Does that happen now?

Professional footballers play with pain killing injections all the time nowadays. Some players take them near enough every single game.

At one of the recent international tournaments their was an article came out that reckoned more than half of the players playing at the tournament were playing through knocks/injuries and were ‘abusing’ painkilling drugs just to be able to play. So I don’t think it’s a case of players nowadays sitting out at the slightest niggle.

With players nowadays putting more and more strain on their bodies from the amount of games and the intensity they’re played at I’d suggest players more than ever will be having to push through the pain barrier to play as often as they do. And it’ll only keep getting worse in that regard.

There’s a decent article here which explains the extent of it:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/inews.co.uk/sport/football/football-indepth/playing-pain-injuries-depression-chronic-premier-league-football-painkiller-addiction-214278/amp

[MWHIBBIES]

Why does it not surprise me that you can’t actually come up with something to explain a concept that really is totally illogical?

‘Players of old took some beating, players nowadays can only imagine it.’

‘Why did these players not got injured every other week? I mean they played on a cabbage patch of a pitch apparently and got assaulted with leg breaking challenges numerous times a game?’

‘Ah cause they were real men eh, they kent how to ride a challenge’.

Absolute nonsense. They really never took half the ‘beating’ people like to make out they did or they would never have played anywhere near the amount of games they did.

I don't really get it. The quality of defenders these days is so much higher. Same with the quality of goalkeepers. Yet, some bad tackles and pitches are seen as a leveler to this? Couldn't disagree more. The game is harder now, and Messi and Ronaldo are ahead in every way.

I cant think of a situation ever, where a guy with 400 goals less than another guy, from the same position, would be seen as the better player. Mental.

Some players who scored less than 400 career goals

Shevchenko
Drogba
Rooney
Van Persie
Inzaghi


All of their goals wouldn't close the gap between Messi/Ronaldo and Maradona.

[easty]

Defenders now are far fitter, stronger, and better tactically trained than they were back in the day.

The attacking players maybe don’t have so many hatchet men style defenders to deal with, but it certainly doesn’t mean they have an easier time of it.

[Since90+2]

Defenders now are far fitter, stronger, and better tactically trained than they were back in the day.

The attacking players maybe don’t have so many hatchet men style defenders to deal with, but it certainly doesn’t mean they have an easier time of it.

Not having that. The defenders of yesteryear were "real men" and the players of the current generation would never last a minute in their world.

Or some old nostalgic rubbish like that....

[Gordy M]

I don't really get it. The quality of defenders these days is so much higher. Same with the quality of goalkeepers. Yet, some bad tackles and pitches are seen as a leveler to this? Couldn't disagree more. The game is harder now, and Messi and Ronaldo are ahead in every way.

I cant think of a situation ever, where a guy with 400 goals less than another guy, from the same position, would be seen as the better player. Mental.

Some players who scored less than 400 career goals

Shevchenko
Drogba
Rooney
Van Persie
Inzaghi


All of their goals wouldn't close the gap between Messi/Ronaldo and Maradona.

I cant believe that someone who has never won the WC is compared to DM?? See its easy to make comparisons to suit the argument.

[MWHIBBIES]

I cant believe that someone who has never won the WC is compared to DM?? See its easy to make comparisons to suit the argument.

What else does he have over Messi?

I'm not doing anything to suit my argument. I've using all the stats available. The world cup is literally all Diego has over Messi. A brilliant achievement, but 4 Champions leagues, 800 odd goals, 10 league titles, a copa america etc, is easily more impressive.

[BILLYHIBS]

What else does he have over Messi?

I'm not doing anything to suit my argument. I've using all the stats available. The world cup is literally all Diego has over Messi. A brilliant achievement, but 4 Champions leagues, 800 odd goals, 10 league titles, a copa america etc, is easily more impressive.
I raise you 3 World Cups

:cb

[MWHIBBIES]

I raise you 3 World Cups

:cb

If he was a real man, he would've stopped England winning it in 1966.

[BILLYHIBS]

If he was a real man, he would've stopped England winning it in 1966.

Could hardly walk but then again tackles and defenders were sh#te back then. :greengrin

[MWHIBBIES]

Could hardly walk but then again tackles and defenders were sh#te back then. :greengrin

A real man would ride those challenges, surely? :wink:

[660]

Newton was **** at physics because he didn’t solve problems anywhere near as complicated as the ones hawking did.

[Keith_M]

Has anybody else noticed that this thread is basically just the same people repeating the same points over and over?


It's incredible how much insight some of our younger posters have into the what the game was like, and the standard of quality of the players, before they were even born.

Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final.


:not worth

[calumhibee1]

Has anybody else noticed that this thread is basically just the same people repeating the same points over and over?


It's incredible how much insight some of our younger posters have into the what the game was like, and the standard of quality of the players, before they were even born.

Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final.


:not worth

Ah I suppose everyone should just believe that Pele could float in the air, run 100m in 9 seconds and jump 12 feet in the air (yes, that’s actually claimed on this thread, a 5ft8 man can jump to 12 feet, or to put that into perspective, 2 feet higher than the crossbar :faf:) all because the older folk told us so. I mean they were alive at the time so it must be true.

[Andy74]

Has anybody else noticed that this thread is basically just the same people repeating the same points over and over?


It's incredible how much insight some of our younger posters have into the what the game was like, and the standard of quality of the players, before they were even born.

Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final.


:not worth

Our ancient ancestors used to stalk prey over hours in days but it’s only now that Kalvin Phillips can cover 15k in a game of football that we can truly appreciate what fitness and stamina is.

[Andy74]

Ah I suppose everyone should just believe that Pele could float in the air, run 100m in 9 seconds and jump 12 feet in the air (yes, that’s actually claimed on this thread :faf:) all because the older folk told us so. I mean they were alive at the time so it must be true.

It’s only you that claimed those things which are of course an exaggeration of the study that was done on Pele’s physical attributes.

[MWHIBBIES]

Has anybody else noticed that this thread is basically just the same people repeating the same points over and over?


It's incredible how much insight some of our younger posters have into the what the game was like, and the standard of quality of the players, before they were even born.

Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final.


:not worth

No one said you should bow to our wisdom, just give us a half decent argument that isn't 95% nostalgia and we'll believe you.

[calumhibee1]

No one said you should bow to our wisdom, just give us a half decent argument that isn't 95% nostalgia and we'll believe you.

But they were proper ‘ard. Is that not enough?

Their bones were unbreakable, their ligaments and muscles untearable. That’s why they didn’t get injured very often despite the fact that they were on the end of the most horrendous challenges any sport has ever seen. Real men.

Oh, and football hasn’t moved on athletically whatsoever despite having all the technology and better methods of training you could think of to allow them to do so. I’m actually surprised football clubs have allowed so much money to have been spent on such stuff when there’s quite clearly been no improvement and just ****ed off back to murder hill at Gullan.

[hibsbollah]

No one said you should bow to our wisdom, just give us a half decent argument that isn't 95% nostalgia and we'll believe you.

Personally I’ll bow to the opinion of anyone who played in the Lowland league on this one :agree: The fact that I actually watched Cruyff and Socrates and Zidane pay without the aid of a belly wheel and a pack of Capstans is irrelevant.

[easty]

Has anybody else noticed that this thread is basically just the same people repeating the same points over and over?


It's incredible how much insight some of our younger posters have into the what the game was like, and the standard of quality of the players, before they were even born.

Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final.


:not worth

Sports records of all kinds are beaten all the time throughout the years, is it just football where the best nowadays aren’t better than the best from 50 years ago?

[calumhibee1]

Personally I’ll bow to the opinion of anyone who played in the Lowland league on this one :agree: The fact that I actually watched Cruyff and Socrates and Zidane pay without the aid of a belly wheel and a pack of Capstans is irrelevant.

Again, it’s telling that you can’t actually put forward an argument and you resort to embarrassing personal digs.

[Andy74]

No one said you should bow to our wisdom, just give us a half decent argument that isn't 95% nostalgia and we'll believe you.

The argument that we weren’t able to have humans with exceptional athletic and fitness levels 60 years ago is ridiculous.

Some quotes about the study on Pele:


Medical tests have revealed that Pelé's heart when he is training, beats 56 to 58 times a minute. The heart of an average athlete in training beats 90 to 95 times a minute. Pelé's aerobic capacity is such that he can repeat a great effort within 45 to 60 seconds. His peripheral vision is 30 per cent greater than that of the average athlete.

Pelé's feet are parallel and the bone in his heel is exceptionally strong and developed, which forces him to bend forward as he runs and serves as a shock absorber after a jump or a high kick. It also helps his quickness.

A few years ago medical experts examined Pelé's slim, athletic figure for weeks in a university laboratory. They prodded him, wired his head for readings, measured his muscles and his mind and when they finished they announced: “Whatever this man might have decided to do in any physical or mental endeavor, he would have been a genius.

About Pelé's physical condition and his body, Breil said: “If nature wanted to be generous, it certainly exaggerated with Pelé.

Pele can run 100 meters in 11 seconds and jump almost 6 feet high. He jumps earlier than other players to head the ball because he has the ability to hover longer in the air. That split‐second advantage is tremendous in soccer.

“If properly trained, Pele could still be one of the world's 10 best in the decathlon,”

[ekhibee]

I don’t disagree at all with your first statement. But they didn’t have it and as such they weren’t as good as the guys that do.

Saying Pele or Maradona were better because they could have been better had they had more modern training techniques etc is a bit like saying the 100m world record holder from the 50s is actually faster than Usain Bolt based on some weird handicap system.

I disagree massively with your last point though. Pele especially would be woefully out of his depth physically against players now imo. It’s just progress.

I don't think I could disagree more with anything in this last statement.

[calumhibee1]

Sports records of all kinds are beaten all the time throughout the years, is it just football where the best nowadays aren’t better than the best from 50 years ago?

Don’t be so sensible.

Football has been better placed to improve than any other sport because of the money it. It’s all just been blown though and no improvements have been made since the days of running up and down the sand dunes and guys thinking a warm up was a waste of time so they never bothered with one.

[660]

But they were proper ‘ard. Is that not enough?

Their bones were unbreakable, their ligaments and muscles untearable. That’s why they didn’t get injured very often despite the fact that they were on the end of the most horrendous challenges any sport has ever seen. Real men.

Oh, and football hasn’t moved on athletically whatsoever despite having all the technology and better methods of training you could think of to allow them to do so. I’m actually surprised football clubs have allowed so much money to have been spent on such stuff when there’s quite clearly been no improvement and just ****ed off back to murder hill at Gullan.

What difference does sports science make. Surely all players relatively uniformly benefit from any scientific or nutritional advancements. The only thing that’s relevant is rule changes and it’s indisputable that it was easier to get away with fouling a player than it is now.

[ekhibee]

Has anybody else noticed that this thread is basically just the same people repeating the same points over and over?


It's incredible how much insight some of our younger posters have into the what the game was like, and the standard of quality of the players, before they were even born.

Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final.


:not worth

This.

[Andy74]

Don’t be so sensible.

Football has been better placed to improve than any other sport because of the money it. It’s all just been blown though and no improvements have been made since the days of running up and down the sand dunes and guys thinking a warm up was a waste of time so they never bothered with one.

Over exaggerating other people’s arguments doesn’t help yours.

No one is saying any of those things.

[MWHIBBIES]

The argument that we weren’t able to have humans with exceptional athletic and fitness levels 60 years ago is ridiculous.

Some quotes about the study on Pele:


Medical tests have revealed that Pelé's heart when he is training, beats 56 to 58 times a minute. The heart of an average athlete in training beats 90 to 95 times a minute. Pelé's aerobic capacity is such that he can repeat a great effort within 45 to 60 seconds. His peripheral vision is 30 per cent greater than that of the average athlete.

Pelé's feet are parallel and the bone in his heel is exceptionally strong and developed, which forces him to bend forward as he runs and serves as a shock absorber after a jump or a high kick. It also helps his quickness.

A few years ago medical experts examined Pelé's slim, athletic figure for weeks in a university laboratory. They prodded him, wired his head for readings, measured his muscles and his mind and when they finished they announced: “Whatever this man might have decided to do in any physical or mental endeavor, he would have been a genius.

About Pelé's physical condition and his body, Breil said: “If nature wanted to be generous, it certainly exaggerated with Pelé.

Pele can run 100 meters in 11 seconds and jump almost 6 feet high. He jumps earlier than other players to head the ball because he has the ability to hover longer in the air. That split‐second advantage is tremendous in soccer.

“If properly trained, Pele could still be one of the world's 10 best in the decathlon,”

I actually think Pele could compete and at least be a world class striker today. I also Maradona would be a top player. Both behind Messi and Ronaldo though. Those 2 are well infront of everyone else ever.

[hibsbollah]

Again, it’s telling that you can’t actually put forward an argument and you resort to embarrassing personal digs.

I actually agree with some of what you say, but you always put it across in such an insufferably arrogant and generally dickish way, all that’s left to do is make fun of you a bit.

[calumhibee1]

I actually agree with some of what you say, but you always put it across in such an insufferably arrogant and generally dickish way, all that’s left to do is make fun of you a bit.

And again, all you can do is resort to name calling and personal digs.

The irony of the guy who has posted numerous times with name calling and personal digs on this thread saying that someone’s post come across as arrogant and dickish. :rolleyes:

[Since90+2]

I actually agree with some of what you say, but you always put it across in such an insufferably arrogant and generally dickish way, all that’s left to do is make fun of you a bit.

There is a distinct lack of self awareness in this post.

[hibsbollah]

And again, all you can do is resort to name calling and personal digs.

The irony of the guy who has posted numerous times with name calling and personal digs on this thread saying that someone’s post come across as arrogant and dickish.

I think the main thing is just make sure you always get the last word in. Even if you’ve got nothing to say.
Then you 100% know you’ve definitely won the argument :agree:

[Andy74]

I actually think Pele could compete and at least be a world class striker today. I also Maradona would be a top player. Both behind Messi and Ronaldo though. Those 2 are well infront of everyone else ever.

Which is really the point.

Pele was evidently an exceptional athlete for his time or any time. You also can’t measure his football brain or ability.

Yes, on average, advances have been made in fitness and diet etc but the argument that in human history we can’t have had individuals that can still match that is crazy.

Those are advantages that can help current players but many are born with the attributes to be exceptional. Pele frequently played at extreme altitudes for example. Local diet was probably already good without thinking about it etc.

As I’ve said before we can measure things now and we can help replicate the best conditions nature intended but even our ancient ancestors would have been exceptionally fit. Give them some decent trainers and they’d be fine.

[DH1875]

Right, if you lot can't play nice and can have digs at each other then I'm going back to the Italian stuff from earlier. Well, not quite but in the debate of greatest of all time and if your looking at what the guy achieved then I'm throwing Gaetano Scirea into the mix. Guy might have been a defender but what a player;

Serie A winner 7 TIMES.
Italian cup winner twice.
Not only did he win the European cup but he also won the UEFA cup and the Cup winners Cup (let that sink in for a minute). He also won the European super cup.
Last but not least he also won that all important World cup as well.

Guy is a God in Italian football. Juve have a stand named after him (think it's the one where the Ultras go). He was only 36 when he died and still at Juve at the time. Died in a car crash. Proper Legend and without doubt one of the greatest of all time despite most of you having never heard of him.

[AugustaHibs]

I don’t understand why people find it so hard to believe players now are better than back then?

It’s like any industry, with time and experience, training, techniques etc will all get better.

[BILLYHIBS]

Right, if you lot can't play nice and can have digs at each other then I'm going back to the Italian stuff from earlier. Well, not quite but in the debate of greatest of all time and if your looking at what the guy achieved then I'm throwing Gaetano Scirea into the mix. Guy might have been a defender but what a player;

Serie A winner 7 TIMES.
Italian cup winner twice.
Not only did he win the European cup but he also won the UEFA cup and the Cup winners Cup (let that sink in for a minute). He also won the European super cup.
Last but not least he also won that all important World cup as well.

Guy is a God in Italian football. Juve have a stand named after him (think it's the one where the Ultras go). He was only 36 when he died and still at Juve at the time. Died in a car crash. Proper Legend and without doubt one of the greatest of all time despite most of you having never heard of him.
Saw him play against us for Juve in 1974 at Easter Road

Good player in a formidable team

[Lancs Harp]

Saw him play against us for Juve in 1974 at Easter Road

Good player in a formidable team

Scirea was a very class act, coolness personified, at a time was Italian football was well known for its tough tackling rugged defenders such as Claudio Gentile, Scirea was technically gifted and was the sort of defender who always seemed to be in the right place. Never received a red card in his career, which is pretty amazing for an Italian defender from the 70s/80s.

[jacomo]

Has anybody else noticed that this thread is basically just the same people repeating the same points over and over?


It's incredible how much insight some of our younger posters have into the what the game was like, and the standard of quality of the players, before they were even born.

Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final.


:not worth


The whole message board is becoming like this. It’s not just the younger posters either - some folk their opinions deserve an airing over and over and over again.

[calumhibee1]

I think the main thing is just make sure you always get the last word in. Even if you’ve got nothing to say.
Then you 100% know you’ve definitely won the argument :agree:

Again, the irony is exceptional. You’ve stopped even discussing the point in hand because you’ve nothing worth adding and just resorted to calling me a dick etc because you can’t let it go.

Giving abuse to someone on the internet from behind a faceless account because they don’t think your idols are as good as you do. I could have sworn that sort of thing was a hot topic just now as well, one that you’ve probably denounced elsewhere on the forum.

Anyway, I’ll not say anymore on the matter.

[DH1875]

Scirea was a very class act, coolness personified, at a time was Italian football was well known for its tough tackling rugged defenders such as Claudio Gentile, Scirea was technically gifted and was the sort of defender who always seemed to be in the right place. Never received a red card in his career, which is pretty amazing for an Italian defender from the 70s/80s.

Would never make it in today's game 🤣

[BILLYHIBS]

Scirea was a very class act, coolness personified, at a time was Italian football was well known for its tough tackling rugged defenders such as Claudio Gentile, Scirea was technically gifted and was the sort of defender who always seemed to be in the right place. Never received a red card in his career, which is pretty amazing for an Italian defender from the 70s/80s.

The player that stands out by a country mile from that game was second half substitute 36 year old Jose Altafini

Juve brought him on at 1-2 down had pace to burn scoring a brace and setting up the other

HIBS could not cope

[Keith_M]

Ah I suppose everyone should just believe that Pele could float in the air, run 100m in 9 seconds and jump 12 feet in the air (yes, that’s actually claimed on this thread, a 5ft8 man can jump to 12 feet, or to put that into perspective, 2 feet higher than the crossbar :faf:) all because the older folk told us so. I mean they were alive at the time so it must be true.


And there he is...



You seem to have appointed yourself the ultimate judge of every footballer that's ever played, without having seen most of them.

Posting obsessively about it and refusing to take other people's opinions seriously is not a good look.

[calumhibee1]

And there he is...



You seem to have appointed yourself the ultimate judge of every footballer that's ever played, without having seen most of them.

Posting obsessively about it and refusing to take other people's opinions seriously is not a good look.

This is also incredibly ironic given your post that I replied to.

“ Being born into the internet age makes the young so wise that we should all bow to their wisdom and knowledge and accept their judgement as final”

I’ve not appointed myself the judge of anything. I’ve repeatedly asked for folk to provide a logical explanation as to why football hasn’t improved and why despite all the advantages there’s been but nobody seems to be forthcoming with an answer.

[Pretty Boy]

Over exaggerating other people’s arguments doesn’t help yours.

No one is saying any of those things.

From what I can see most people are saying almost exactly the opposite. The basis of the arguments seem to be that footballers have improved largely because of the technology, science and methodology available to them and that's why comparing the likes of Messi to Cryuff by talking about distance covered or even trophies won is largely a flawed argument.

[A Hi-Bee]

Opinions we all know about them eh! non of this pisch is comparing apples wi apples, so I will also go with Pele, Maradona who I seen win games on his own was 2nd and I will throw in another fine physical specimen in the form of Ference Puskas, another one for the young team to argue over. From wiki, so dont know just how accurate but good enough for this discussion-

He scored 84 goals in 85 international matches for Hungary, played four international matches for Spain and scored 514 goals in 529 matches in the Hungarian and Spanish leagues. He became an Olympic champion in 1952 and led his nation to the final of the 1954 World Cup. He won three European Cups (1959, 1960, 1966), 10 national championships (five Hungarian and five Spanish Primera División) and eight top individual scoring honours. In 1995, he was recognized as the greatest top division scorer of the 20th century by the IFFHS. With 808 goals in 794 official games scored during his career, he is the third top goalscorer of all time.

He was the son of former footballer Ferenc Puskás Senior. Puskás started his career in Hungary playing for Kispest and Budapest Honvéd. He was the top scorer in the Hungarian League on four occasions and in 1948 he was the top goal scorer in Europe. During the 1950s, he was both a prominent member and captain of the Hungarian national team, known as the Mighty Magyars. In 1958, two years after the Hungarian Revolution, he emigrated to Spain where he played for Real Madrid. While playing with Real Madrid, Puskás won four Pichichis and scored seven goals in two European Champions Cup finals.
:thumbsup:

[J-C]

All the pro modern footballers posters, what's your opinion on Mohammed Ali, Joe Frasier, Robert Duran etc, do you think the modern boxers like AJ, Fury etc would beat them as it's a modern era with sports technology. Tennis? What about Borg, McEnroe, Agassi? Put Jim Clarke or Jackie Stewart in modern cars and they'd still win world championships today because of modern technology.

All this bickering is absolute nonsense because you can never ever compare different era's due to the development in training, diet etc. If all those world class players of yesteryear had what players have now, they'd still be top players due to pure talent and natural ability.

[BILLYHIBS]

Opinions we all know about them eh! non of this pisch is comparing apples wi apples, so I will also go with Pele, Maradona who I seen win games on his own was 2nd and I will throw in another fine physical specimen in the form of Ference Puskas, another one for the young team to argue over. From wiki, so dont know just how accurate but good enough for this discussion-

He scored 84 goals in 85 international matches for Hungary, played four international matches for Spain and scored 514 goals in 529 matches in the Hungarian and Spanish leagues. He became an Olympic champion in 1952 and led his nation to the final of the 1954 World Cup. He won three European Cups (1959, 1960, 1966), 10 national championships (five Hungarian and five Spanish Primera División) and eight top individual scoring honours. In 1995, he was recognized as the greatest top division scorer of the 20th century by the IFFHS. With 808 goals in 794 official games scored during his career, he is the third top goalscorer of all time.

He was the son of former footballer Ferenc Puskás Senior. Puskás started his career in Hungary playing for Kispest and Budapest Honvéd. He was the top scorer in the Hungarian League on four occasions and in 1948 he was the top goal scorer in Europe. During the 1950s, he was both a prominent member and captain of the Hungarian national team, known as the Mighty Magyars. In 1958, two years after the Hungarian Revolution, he emigrated to Spain where he played for Real Madrid. While playing with Real Madrid, Puskás won four Pichichis and scored seven goals in two European Champions Cup finals.
:thumbsup:
:top marks

[Wakeyhibee]

Ah I suppose everyone should just believe that Pele could float in the air, run 100m in 9 seconds and jump 12 feet in the air (yes, that’s actually claimed on this thread, a 5ft8 man can jump to 12 feet, or to put that into perspective, 2 feet higher than the crossbar :faf:) all because the older folk told us so. I mean they were alive at the time so it must be true.


How high is the crossbar? Is it 10ft?

[Andy74]

How high is the crossbar? Is it 10ft?

The article I quoted actually misquoted the height.

From the original study his vertical leap was 48 inches which is the same as Michael Jordan.

[ekhibee]

[QUOTE=J-C;6622130]All the pro modern footballers posters, what's your opinion on Mohammed Ali, Joe Frasier, Robert Duran etc, do you think the modern boxers like AJ, Fury etc would beat them as it's a modern era with sports technology. Tennis? What about Borg, McEnroe, Agassi? Put Jim Clarke or Jackie Stewart in modern cars and they'd still win world championships today because of modern technology.

All this bickering is absolute nonsense because you can never ever compare different era's due to the development in training, diet etc. If all those world class players of yesteryear had what players have now, they'd still be top players due to pure talent and natural ability.[/QUOTE

Totally agree.

[winnipeg jets]

All the pro modern footballers posters, what's your opinion on Mohammed Ali, Joe Frasier, Robert Duran etc, do you think the modern boxers like AJ, Fury etc would beat them as it's a modern era with sports technology. Tennis? What about Borg, McEnroe, Agassi? Put Jim Clarke or Jackie Stewart in modern cars and they'd still win world championships today because of modern technology.

All this bickering is absolute nonsense because you can never ever compare different era's due to the development in training, diet etc. If all those world class players of yesteryear had what players have now, they'd still be top players due to pure talent and natural ability.

Far to sensible

[calumhibee1]

All the pro modern footballers posters, what's your opinion on Mohammed Ali, Joe Frasier, Robert Duran etc, do you think the modern boxers like AJ, Fury etc would beat them as it's a modern era with sports technology. Tennis? What about Borg, McEnroe, Agassi? Put Jim Clarke or Jackie Stewart in modern cars and they'd still win world championships today because of modern technology.

All this bickering is absolute nonsense because you can never ever compare different era's due to the development in training, diet etc. If all those world class players of yesteryear had what players have now, they'd still be top players due to pure talent and natural ability.

I think the heavyweights now would make light of the heavyweights back then. They’re far bigger, more powerful and heavier now.

Tennis wise I think the big 3 now are the best ever. I don’t follow tennis religiously but as far as I’m aware it’s a fairly commonly held view, especially Djokovic and Federer.

As for your last paragraph, I completely agree with it. The thing for me is the ‘if they had what players had now’ train of thought. Whilst it’s not in any way a fair comparison between old and new, these players didn’t have what these players have now. If we start talking about how they could have been then you’re starting to talk about a player that never even existed, it’s no longer Pele that’s being compared, it’s ‘Pele but able to run faster and more powerful than actual Pele’ that is being compared.

[Bangkok Hibby]

Opinions we all know about them eh! non of this pisch is comparing apples wi apples, so I will also go with Pele, Maradona who I seen win games on his own was 2nd and I will throw in another fine physical specimen in the form of Ference Puskas, another one for the young team to argue over. From wiki, so dont know just how accurate but good enough for this discussion-

He scored 84 goals in 85 international matches for Hungary, played four international matches for Spain and scored 514 goals in 529 matches in the Hungarian and Spanish leagues. He became an Olympic champion in 1952 and led his nation to the final of the 1954 World Cup. He won three European Cups (1959, 1960, 1966), 10 national championships (five Hungarian and five Spanish Primera División) and eight top individual scoring honours. In 1995, he was recognized as the greatest top division scorer of the 20th century by the IFFHS. With 808 goals in 794 official games scored during his career, he is the third top goalscorer of all time.

He was the son of former footballer Ferenc Puskás Senior. Puskás started his career in Hungary playing for Kispest and Budapest Honvéd. He was the top scorer in the Hungarian League on four occasions and in 1948 he was the top goal scorer in Europe. During the 1950s, he was both a prominent member and captain of the Hungarian national team, known as the Mighty Magyars. In 1958, two years after the Hungarian Revolution, he emigrated to Spain where he played for Real Madrid. While playing with Real Madrid, Puskás won four Pichichis and scored seven goals in two European Champions Cup finals.
:thumbsup:

Aye but did he smoke though? 😄

[Andy74]

I think the heavyweights now would make light of the heavyweights back then. They’re far bigger, more powerful and heavier now.

As for your last paragraph, I completely agree with it. The thing for me is the ‘if they had what players had now’ train of thought. Whilst it’s not in any way a fair comparison between old and new, these players didn’t have what these players have now. If we start talking about how they could have been then you’re starting to talk about a player that never even existed, it’s no longer Pele that’s being compared, it’s ‘Pele but able to run faster and more powerful than actual Pele’ that is being compared.

No it is not what I’m comparing.

Where Pele is concerned he was exceptionally quick and fit.

I’m suggesting the Pele of then would be a top player now.

Apart from the fact fitness and speed aren’t everything he did have both.

On average players may be quicker, running further etc but some players were exceptional for a reason and I believe he still would be.

[calumhibee1]

No it is not what I’m comparing.

Where Pele is concerned he was exceptionally quick and fit.

I’m suggesting the Pele of then would be a top player now.

Apart from the fact fitness and speed aren’t everything he did have both.

On average players may be quicker, running further etc but some players were exceptional for a reason and I believe he still would be.

J-C did mention it. Hence why I replied to J-C and I said it in reply to their post.

[hibsbollah]

If this thread were a Hibs manager it’d be Terry Butcher.

[DH1875]

If this thread were a Hibs manager it’d be Terry Butcher.

Speak for yourself.

[hibsbollah]

Speak for yourself.

You keep quiet. You’d be Ryan McGivern in this scenario.

[Since90+2]

I'll take Alan Stubbs. None of the managers from 1902 onwards managed to win the Scottish so he's clearly better than all that came before (if I could insert a smiley here on the phone I would).

[DH1875]

You keep quiet. You’d be Ryan McGivern in this scenario.

Too far. Reported 😃.

[DH1875]

If this thread were a Hibs manager i'd be Terry Butcher.

Sorted that for you 👍

[ekhibee]

I think the heavyweights now would make light of the heavyweights back then. They’re far bigger, more powerful and heavier now.

Tennis wise I think the big 3 now are the best ever. I don’t follow tennis religiously but as far as I’m aware it’s a fairly commonly held view, especially Djokovic and Federer.

As for your last paragraph, I completely agree with it. The thing for me is the ‘if they had what players had now’ train of thought. Whilst it’s not in any way a fair comparison between old and new, these players didn’t have what these players have now. If we start talking about how they could have been then you’re starting to talk about a player that never even existed, it’s no longer Pele that’s being compared, it’s ‘Pele but able to run faster and more powerful than actual Pele’ that is being compared.

Rod Laver was, for me the best male tennis player ever. Margaret Court was the best female, just my opinion though, I must just be an old fogey.

[Keith_M]

Rod Laver was, for me the best male tennis player ever. Margaret Court was the best female, just my opinion though, I must just be an old fogey.


Fred Perry wins that by having the longest lasting brand of T-Shirts.

A similar argument applies to Michael Jordan and his brand of merchandise, making him the greatest ever basketball player.

[Since90+2]

Rod Laver was, for me the best male tennis player ever. Margaret Court was the best female, just my opinion though, I must just be an old fogey.

Roger Federer is the best ever.

[3pm]

Seems a bit of a waste of 500 posts when everyone knows it's George Best.

[Andy74]

Seems a bit of a waste of 500 posts when everyone knows it's George Best.

I don’t care how much sports science has moved on. George Best in his prime would still Man U’s best player today.

[winnipeg jets]

Seems a bit of a waste of 500 posts when everyone knows it's George Best.

👍

[Since90+2]

I don’t care how much sports science has moved on. George Best in his prime would still Man U’s best player today.

So would Dennis Law. That doesn’t bring him into the best player ever chat though.

[Andy74]

So would Dennis Law. That doesn’t bring him into the best player ever chat though.

No but it does tell us that lots of things might have moved on but some great players would still have enough about them to be great players now. Football hasn’t really been taken over by super humans.

[Since90+2]

No but it does tell us that lots of things might have moved on but some great players would still have enough about them to be great players now. Football hasn’t really been taken over by super humans.

I’m still waiting on a poster claiming modern day footballers are super human. Infact, the only posters I’ve seen use those words are from dads army. Perhaps when you’ve lost a debate you make claims about the other side that are unfounded :wink:.

[Andy74]

I’m still waiting on a poster claiming modern day footballers are super human. Infact, the only posters I’ve seen use those words are from dads army. Perhaps when you’ve lost a debate you make claims about the other side that are unfounded :wink:.

You get the gist though eh?

The suggestion that sports science has meant that footballers have evolved into something players 50 years ago couldn’t cope with.

I’ve yet to see anyone explain why someone like Pele who was physically more capable then than 99% of footballers now wouldn’t be able to play at the current level, so no, I don’t think any debate has been lost.

[calumhibee1]

You get the gist though eh?

The suggestion that sports science has meant that footballers have evolved into something players 50 years ago couldn’t cope with.

I’ve yet to see anyone explain why someone like Pele who was physically more capable then than 99% of footballers now wouldn’t be able to play at the current level, so no, I don’t think any debate has been lost.

You seem desperate to suggest that sports science has done pretty much nothing for the advancement of athletes.

Sport science has seen footballers go from covering 7.5km a game in the 70s to covering up to 15km a game now. Referees are even covering 10.5km. Maybe sports science and the fact players no longer just get run into the ground at the sand dunes all pre season has played a part in that?

Sport science has seen the Olympic qualifying time for the 100m become quicker than one of the gold medal times from one of the 1970s olympics. That means that the very best from that era wouldn’t even get to compete anymore. Maybe sports science has played a part in that as well?

In a measurable sport like the 100m we’ve literally seen athletes advance to a level that their predecessors couldn’t cope with. They wouldn’t even get to be part of the event. Football doesn’t have the same sort of easily measurable statistics but it’s pretty unrealistic to think the richest sport in the world hasn’t managed to make the same sort of use of sports science.

[Lancs Harp]

You seem desperate to suggest that sports science has done pretty much nothing for the advancement of athletes.

Sport science has seen footballers go from covering 7.5km a game in the 70s to covering up to 15km a game now. Referees are even covering 10.5km. Maybe sports science and the fact players no longer just get run into the ground at the sand dunes all pre season has played a part in that?

Sport science has seen the Olympic qualifying time for the 100m become quicker than one of the gold medal times from one of the 1970s olympics. That means that the very best from that era wouldn’t even get to compete anymore. Maybe sports science has played a part in that as well?

In a measurable sport like the 100m we’ve literally seen athletes advance to a level that their predecessors couldn’t cope with. They wouldn’t even get to be part of the event. Football doesn’t have the same sort of easily measurable statistics but it’s pretty unrealistic to think the richest sport in the world hasn’t managed to make the same sort of use of sports science.

In years gone by you hardly ever saw a 9 dart finish in Darts, now they are common place.

Its only a matter of time before we see an 8 dart finish.

[Iggy Pope]

In years gone by you hardly ever saw a 9 dart finish in Darts, now they are common place.

Its only a matter of time before we see an 8 dart finish.

:greengrin

[Peevemor]

In years gone by you hardly ever saw a 9 dart finish in Darts, now they are common place.

Its only a matter of time before we see an 8 dart finish.Joking aside, it's a very good point. The same goes for maximum breaks in snooker.

Outwith technological & scientific advances, the general level of certain disciplines has improved - of that there's no doubt.

[Andy74]

You seem desperate to suggest that sports science has done pretty much nothing for the advancement of athletes.

Sport science has seen footballers go from covering 7.5km a game in the 70s to covering up to 15km a game now. Referees are even covering 10.5km. Maybe sports science and the fact players no longer just get run into the ground at the sand dunes all pre season has played a part in that?

Sport science has seen the Olympic qualifying time for the 100m become quicker than one of the gold medal times from one of the 1970s olympics. That means that the very best from that era wouldn’t even get to compete anymore. Maybe sports science has played a part in that as well?

In a measurable sport like the 100m we’ve literally seen athletes advance to a level that their predecessors couldn’t cope with. They wouldn’t even get to be part of the event. Football doesn’t have the same sort of easily measurable statistics but it’s pretty unrealistic to think the richest sport in the world hasn’t managed to make the same sort of use of sports science.

I’m sure it has made excellent use of it.

Your argument though is that it has enabled humans to evolve so that footballers from the 60s wouldn’t cope.

The 100m record has reduced by about half a second in 60 years.

That’s a sport which is purely about the pace. Footwear and tracks play a part on that as well as the conditioning of the athletes.

That is minuscule if you want to translate that to football. Pele ran 100m in 11 seconds. That’s quicker than the likes of Gareth Bale today.

Distance covered is a tactical style thing. Pele’s playing heart rate would suggest he’d be pretty capable of adapting to that.

There’s been advancements but not as big as you are making out for football. Which is also played by footballers not sprinters and long distance runners but players who can bring all that together with their ability.

[LeithMike]

You seem desperate to suggest that sports science has done pretty much nothing for the advancement of athletes.

Sport science has seen footballers go from covering 7.5km a game in the 70s to covering up to 15km a game now. Referees are even covering 10.5km. Maybe sports science and the fact players no longer just get run into the ground at the sand dunes all pre season has played a part in that?

Sport science has seen the Olympic qualifying time for the 100m become quicker than one of the gold medal times from one of the 1970s olympics. That means that the very best from that era wouldn’t even get to compete anymore. Maybe sports science has played a part in that as well?

In a measurable sport like the 100m we’ve literally seen athletes advance to a level that their predecessors couldn’t cope with. They wouldn’t even get to be part of the event. Football doesn’t have the same sort of easily measurable statistics but it’s pretty unrealistic to think the richest sport in the world hasn’t managed to make the same sort of use of sports science.Have you forgotten that football is not a purely physical sport? There is also skill! There is little doubt that players of yesteryear spent far more time in theor younger years actually playing football rather than spensing time on other modern day distractions. Can you name a Scottish footballer that is better than Kenny D in the time that has past despite this physical advancement?

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[Block]

Just cause footballers can run faster doesn't make them better footballers. Its the ones like Pele, Maradona, Latapy, Best, Sauzee, that find that extra yard of room because of their skill and brain prove their footballing superiority. Unfortunately, because todays footballers have so much extra protection from hardened defenders and tackles that were prevalent in the 60s 70s and 80s we cant compare. It was much more of a mans game back then. No doubt about that shirley.

[660]

The only thing I’ve learnt from this thread is calumhibee1 doesn’t understand what irony is

[calumhibee1]

I’m sure it has made excellent use of it.

Your argument though is that it has enabled humans to evolve so that footballers from the 60s wouldn’t cope.

The 100m record has reduced by about half a second in 60 years.

That’s a sport which is purely about the pace. Footwear and tracks play a part on that as well as the conditioning of the athletes.

That is minuscule if you want to translate that to football. Pele ran 100m in 11 seconds. That’s quicker than the likes of Gareth Bale today.

Distance covered is a tactical style thing. Pele’s playing heart rate would suggest he’d be pretty capable of adapting to that.

There’s been advancements but not as big as you are making out for football. Which is also played by footballers not sprinters and long distance runners but players who can bring all that together with their ability.

I’m not quite sure where you’re getting your stats on Bales 100m time because I can’t find that anywhere other than a website which said he ran it in 11.4 seconds when he was 14. It’s information that is generally not available for footballers because they don’t measure it.

Of course it’s a case of bringing everything together. But these measurable statistics have improved greatly. It would be extremely odd if the rest of football where the statistics aren’t measurable- skill, height players can jump, power etc hasn’t improved greatly as well.

As Peevmore pointed out above, the general level of sports with measurable skill levels has also improved significantly. Darts for example is a sport that relies on skill more than physical prowess probably more than any other sport. That’s improved significantly as well. Before 2006 only 10 pro players had a 9 dart finish to their name. Now there’s over 200. Again, it would be pretty odd if football with all its advantages, money etc hadn’t managed to do the same and improved the level of technique of its players dramatically. It’s just that it’s impossible to measure in football.

Whilst it remains impossible to measure in football though it’ll all remain just opinions as to who’s the greatest.

[MWHIBBIES]

I’m sure it has made excellent use of it.

Your argument though is that it has enabled humans to evolve so that footballers from the 60s wouldn’t cope.

The 100m record has reduced by about half a second in 60 years.

That’s a sport which is purely about the pace. Footwear and tracks play a part on that as well as the conditioning of the athletes.

That is minuscule if you want to translate that to football. Pele ran 100m in 11 seconds. That’s quicker than the likes of Gareth Bale today.

Distance covered is a tactical style thing. Pele’s playing heart rate would suggest he’d be pretty capable of adapting to that.

There’s been advancements but not as big as you are making out for football. Which is also played by footballers not sprinters and long distance runners but players who can bring all that together with their ability.

Half a second in the 100m is massive. May as well be 10 minutes for how difficult that gap would be to close.

[Keith_M]

Has the standard of OCD improved greatly in the last few years or would you say us oldies could still compete?

I for one think I'm reasonably talented in that area but I think the discipline has moved on quite a bit since the olden days, when I were a lad.







:greengrin

[J-C]

I’m not quite sure where you’re getting your stats on Bales 100m time because I can’t find that anywhere other than a website which said he ran it in 11.4 seconds when he was 14. It’s information that is generally not available for footballers because they don’t measure it.

Of course it’s a case of bringing everything together. But these measurable statistics have improved greatly. It would be extremely odd if the rest of football where the statistics aren’t measurable- skill, height players can jump, power etc hasn’t improved greatly as well.

As Peevmore pointed out above, the general level of sports with measurable skill levels has also improved significantly. Darts for example is a sport that relies on skill more than physical prowess probably more than any other sport. That’s improved significantly as well. Before 2006 only 10 pro players had a 9 dart finish to their name. Now there’s over 200. Again, it would be pretty odd if football with all its advantages, money etc hadn’t managed to do the same and improved the level of technique of its players dramatically. It’s just that it’s impossible to measure in football.

Whilst it remains impossible to measure in football though it’ll all remain just opinions as to who’s the greatest.

Callum you keep harping on about science, diet technology etc in the modern game and that in your opinion makes modern players so much better than the ones from 60's 70's etc. You seem to forget that if the players from decades ago played now they'd have access to that same technology and alternatively if modern players played back then they wouldn't.

All the greats from back in the day stood out because they were the most talented or dedicated, or both. Pele was a great physical specimen and was a full internationalist at 17, Best had footballing skills rarely seen. Yes we all agree it was a different era but it is impossible to just make a statement that one era is better than another because they have better science and training etc.

You mentioned that heavyweight boxers are bigger nowadays, Ali was 17 stones, same weight as Klitschko and only a few pound lighter that Joshua, Ali actually beat Foreman who was 18.5 stones.

[easty]

Callum you keep harping on about science, diet technology etc in the modern game and that in your opinion makes modern players so much better than the ones from 60's 70's etc. You seem to forget that if the players from decades ago played now they'd have access to that same technology and alternatively if modern players played back then they wouldn't.

All the greats from back in the day stood out because they were the most talented or dedicated, or both. Pele was a great physical specimen and was a full internationalist at 17, Best had footballing skills rarely seen. Yes we all agree it was a different era but it is impossible to just make a statement that one era is better than another because they have better science and training etc.

You mentioned that heavyweight boxers are bigger nowadays, Ali was 17 stones, same weight as Klitschko and only a few pound lighter that Joshua, Ali actually beat Foreman who was 18.5 stones.

You can’t judge players from back in the day on how they’d have done if they’d had access to the advances in the sport today, that doesn’t work at all.

It’s not impossible to say one era is better than another either, it’s clear that’s the case. We improve all the time. When the elite sportsmen stop improving, it’ll be a sad day.

[calumhibee1]

Callum you keep harping on about science, diet technology etc in the modern game and that in your opinion makes modern players so much better than the ones from 60's 70's etc. You seem to forget that if the players from decades ago played now they'd have access to that same technology and alternatively if modern players played back then they wouldn't.

All the greats from back in the day stood out because they were the most talented or dedicated, or both. Pele was a great physical specimen and was a full internationalist at 17, Best had footballing skills rarely seen. Yes we all agree it was a different era but it is impossible to just make a statement that one era is better than another because they have better science and training etc.

You mentioned that heavyweight boxers are bigger nowadays, Ali was 17 stones, same weight as Klitschko and only a few pound lighter that Joshua, Ali actually beat Foreman who was 18.5 stones.

I’m not sure how much clearer I can be in shown I haven’t forgotten about the fact players would have access to modern technology now but I’ll have a go at explaining why I don’t think it makes any sense whatsoever to give it any consideration.

If they played now, they would have had access to all the modern advancements that players do now. But they don’t play now and they didn’t have access to them. Therefore they’re not relevant to the older players. Comparing Pele with modern advancements isn’t comparing Pele. It’s comparing a totally fictional football player. Yes, it’s not particularly fair, but it’s the way it is. Pele didn’t have them, Messi and Ronaldo do and have made use of them. These advancements have made Messi and Ronaldo the player that they were and the lack of these advancements stopped Pele from potentially being the player he could have been had he been playing today. But that’s just hard luck for Pele really, much like it’ll be hard luck for Messi and Ronaldo in 30 years when there’s inevitably much better players than them around who can run faster, jump higher, are powerful and have even more incredible level of skill.

[J-C]

I’m not sure how much clearer I can be in shown I haven’t forgotten about the fact players would have access to modern technology now but I’ll have a go at explaining why I don’t think it makes any sense whatsoever to give it any consideration.

If they played now, they would have had access to all the modern advancements that players do now. But they don’t play now and they didn’t have access to them. Therefore they’re not relevant to the older players. Comparing Pele with modern advancements isn’t comparing Pele. It’s comparing a totally fictional football player. Yes, it’s not particularly fair, but it’s the way it is. Pele didn’t have them, Messi and Ronaldo do and have made use of them. These advancements have made Messi and Ronaldo the player that they were and the lack of these advancements stopped Pele from potentially being the player he could have been had he been playing today. But that’s just hard luck for Pele really, much like it’ll be hard luck for Messi and Ronaldo in 30 years when there’s inevitably much better players than them around who can run faster, jump higher, are powerful and have even more incredible level of skill.

But you were quick to say modern defenders would gobble up players from another era because of the improved technologies, again you cannot make a statement like that as it cannot happen unless those great players from the past had access to the technology.

Just accept there have been wonderful players from all sports from different eras and stop trying to justify that todays are better because it's impossible to prove that.

[calumhibee1]

But you were quick to say modern defenders would gobble up players from another era because of the improved technologies, again you cannot make a statement like that as it cannot happen unless those great players from the past had access to the technology.

Just accept there have been wonderful players from all sports from different eras and stop trying to justify that todays are better because it's impossible to prove that.

Of course it can’t happen, I don’t think anyone on this thread is expecting to see peak Pele or Maradona appear one day soon to settle the debate. You don’t need to have seen Pele or Maradona with modern technology to have an opinion though.

I’ve never said they weren’t wonderful players in their era. Look at how much the older posters are pining over them, they must have been very special indeed.

[BILLYHIBS]

I’m not quite sure where you’re getting your stats on Bales 100m time because I can’t find that anywhere other than a website which said he ran it in 11.4 seconds when he was 14. It’s information that is generally not available for footballers because they don’t measure it.

Of course it’s a case of bringing everything together. But these measurable statistics have improved greatly. It would be extremely odd if the rest of football where the statistics aren’t measurable- skill, height players can jump, power etc hasn’t improved greatly as well.

As Peevmore pointed out above, the general level of sports with measurable skill levels has also improved significantly. Darts for example is a sport that relies on skill more than physical prowess probably more than any other sport. That’s improved significantly as well. Before 2006 only 10 pro players had a 9 dart finish to their name. Now there’s over 200. Again, it would be pretty odd if football with all its advantages, money etc hadn’t managed to do the same and improved the level of technique of its players dramatically. It’s just that it’s impossible to measure in football.

Whilst it remains impossible to measure in football though it’ll all remain just opinions as to who’s the greatest.

Nail on the head with that last sentence Calum

Well done !

In my eyes after watching football for sixty plus years Pelé is the most complete football player I have ever seen

Respect to Messrs Messi Maradona and Ronaldo alll brilliant and special mention to the equally brilliant Puskas Di Stefano Cruyff Best and Eusebio

All of the above is of course imho

[ekhibee]

I’m not sure how much clearer I can be in shown I haven’t forgotten about the fact players would have access to modern technology now but I’ll have a go at explaining why I don’t think it makes any sense whatsoever to give it any consideration.

If they played now, they would have had access to all the modern advancements that players do now. But they don’t play now and they didn’t have access to them. Therefore they’re not relevant to the older players. Comparing Pele with modern advancements isn’t comparing Pele. It’s comparing a totally fictional football player. Yes, it’s not particularly fair, but it’s the way it is. Pele didn’t have them, Messi and Ronaldo do and have made use of them. These advancements have made Messi and Ronaldo the player that they were and the lack of these advancements stopped Pele from potentially being the player he could have been had he been playing today. But that’s just hard luck for Pele really, much like it’ll be hard luck for Messi and Ronaldo in 30 years when there’s inevitably much better players than them around who can run faster, jump higher, are powerful and have even more incredible level of skill.

But you can't say they couldn't cope if they didn't have access to any of these improvements in the first place, that's just nonsense which you have no way of backing up. You started off by saying people from the 60's etc 'COULDN'T COPE', but then you tweeked it slightly by saying 'but they don't play now and they didn't have access to them. Therefore they're not relevant to the older players.' So I guess what you're saying is there have never been any players anywhere near as good as the players of today and it's pointless suggesting the players from earlier era's might of been if they'd had the facilities, etc as they didn't so end of story. Each to his own, I guess.

[Bangkok Hibby]

Of course it can’t happen, I don’t think anyone on this thread is expecting to see peak Pele or Maradona appear one day soon to settle the debate.

I’ve never said they weren’t wonderful players in their era. Look at how much the older posters are pining over them, they must have been very special indeed.

Thats the best thing you've said Calum. They were indeed very special. Pele, Puskas, Best, Di Stefano, Yashin and many more. Real men, uncomplaining, skillful, massively contributed to "the beautiful game" I have no respect for the modern cheats and whiners and thats why I will always say the cream of the older generation were "better" footballers.

[Is It On....]

In years gone by you hardly ever saw a 9 dart finish in Darts, now they are common place.

Its only a matter of time before we see an 8 dart finish.

Off topic, but did you see The Viking died this week? Only 59yrs old ffs 😥

[calumhibee1]

Thats the best thing you've said Calum. They were indeed very special. Pele, Puskas, Best, Di Stefano, Yashin and many more. Real men, uncomplaining, skillful, massively contributed to "the beautiful game" I have no respect for the modern cheats and whiners and thats why I will always say the cream of the older generation were "better" footballers.

Just to be clear (although I do notice you’ve omitted him from your list above and this may be the reason why :greengrin) you have no respect for the cheats… is this the reason you have omitted Maradona? :greengrin

[calumhibee1]

But you can't say they couldn't cope if they didn't have access to any of these improvements in the first place, that's just nonsense which you have no way of backing up. You started off by saying people from the 60's etc 'COULDN'T COPE', but then you tweeked it slightly by saying 'but they don't play now and they didn't have access to them. Therefore they're not relevant to the older players.' So I guess what you're saying is there have never been any players anywhere near as good as the players of today and it's pointless suggesting the players from earlier era's might of been if they'd had the facilities, etc as they didn't so end of story. Each to his own, I guess.

Your second last sentence is pretty much what I’m saying, yes. They have been bettered due to advancements in training methods, sports science, nutrition and imo a huge step up in skill. Much the same as will happen to Messi and Ronaldo 30 years down the line. It’s the way of the world.

Usain Bolt is the fastest man to ever live. That fact doesn’t change because his predecessors didn’t have access to what he had. It’s just tough luck for his predecessors and it’ll be tough luck for Usain bolt when folk are closing in on a 9 second 100m.

[Bangkok Hibby]

Just to be clear (although I do notice you’ve omitted him from your list above and this may be the reason why :greengrin) you have no respect for the cheats… is this the reason you have omitted Maradona? :greengrin

Haha, didn't think of that. For me Maradona was a superb player and I'd rank him very highly. I go a bit further back though 😄

[Baader]

It's all hypothetical until someone builds that time travelling machine. Comparing players from different eras makes no sense. You can't say a genius of the game such as Pele with 3 World Cup wins would struggle today, its completely hypothetical.

Not every record gets smashed. The women's 100 and 200m WR have stood since 1988 (FloJo, albeit under some controversy) the long jump record has stood since 1991 and has only been broken four times in the past 100 years, the high jump WR was set in 1993, Bradman's batting average in cricket looks unsurpassable and he retired 70 years ago. Tennis has just had a golden era where we've seen 3 men win 20 slams each - it's questionable we'll ever see that happen again. Just to add a bit context... A great player is a great player no matter the era.

[Andy74]

Half a second in the 100m is massive. May as well be 10 minutes for how difficult that gap would be to close.

In a 100m sprint it is, yes. That does include footwear and track advancements.

It is hardly though the type of gap in a football environment that would make a 1960s player bewildered and unable to cope as has been suggested.

Some humans have also been quick and had good stamina before modern advancements. Something some people seem to be denying.

[MWHIBBIES]

In a 100m sprint it is, yes. That does include footwear and track advancements.

It is hardly though the type of gap in a football environment that would make a 1960s player bewildered and unable to cope as has been suggested.

Some humans have also been quick and had good stamina before modern advancements. Something some people seem to be denying.

While I don't think they'd be unable to cope, they'd need to work and train a hell of a lot harder than they did. Pace of the game is totally different now.

[Since90+2]

While I don't think they'd be unable to cope, they'd need to work and train a hell of a lot harder than they did. Pace of the game is totally different now.

The standard is also far higher. I seen the highlights of the 1966 World Cup final on BBC recently and the standard looked abysmal. Bearing in mind that was a world cup final and between the two best teams on the planet at the time.

[Wakeyhibee]

You seem desperate to suggest that sports science has done pretty much nothing for the advancement of athletes.

Sport science has seen footballers go from covering 7.5km a game in the 70s to covering up to 15km a game now. Referees are even covering 10.5km. Maybe sports science and the fact players no longer just get run into the ground at the sand dunes all pre season has played a part in that?

Sport science has seen the Olympic qualifying time for the 100m become quicker than one of the gold medal times from one of the 1970s olympics. That means that the very best from that era wouldn’t even get to compete anymore. Maybe sports science has played a part in that as well?

In a measurable sport like the 100m we’ve literally seen athletes advance to a level that their predecessors couldn’t cope with. They wouldn’t even get to be part of the event. Football doesn’t have the same sort of easily measurable statistics but it’s pretty unrealistic to think the richest sport in the world hasn’t managed to make the same sort of use of sports science.

The qualifying times have changed in 2020 for a reason other than why you claim. If the 2016 one was still in force it would be totally untrue what you claim. The standard has not grown in 4 years, if anything without Usain Bolt it's gone backwards.

Try running on an old blaze track compared to a modern day synthetic one with the latest footwear.

There have been 2 exceptional athletes whose times are way out in front of the pack. There has been an overall improvement in the last 50 years. Some will be down to sports science, some track,

Evolution is not that quick.

[calumhibee1]

The qualifying times have changed in 2020 for a reason other than why you claim. If the 2016 one was still in force it would be totally untrue what you claim. The standard has not grown in 4 years, if anything without Usain Bolt it's gone backwards.

Try running on an old blaze track compared to a modern day synthetic one with the latest footwear.

There have been 2 exceptional athletes whose times are way out in front of the pack. There has been an overall improvement in the last 50 years. Some will be down to sports science, some track,

Evolution is not that quick.

Regardless of why the qualifying times have changed, they still need to be met. These guys wouldn’t have hit that qualifying time. They wouldn’t have got to compete.

[Wakeyhibee]

Regardless of why the qualifying times have changed, they still need to be met. These guys wouldn’t have hit that qualifying time. They wouldn’t have got to compete.

Wrong I'm afraid. In 2016 51 achieved the new qualifying time, in 2021 only 40 have. The reason they upped the qualifying time wasnt because the standard has improved.

Had they still had the old qualifying time of 10.16 all the medal winners from 1968 onwards bar 1980 would have qualified. It was a bad example to use.

Equally some of the ones that have recently qualified would not have done on an old blaze running track.

[Wakeyhibee]

I’m sure it has made excellent use of it.

Your argument though is that it has enabled humans to evolve so that footballers from the 60s wouldn’t cope.

The 100m record has reduced by about half a second in 60 years.

That’s a sport which is purely about the pace. Footwear and tracks play a part on that as well as the conditioning of the athletes.

That is minuscule if you want to translate that to football. Pele ran 100m in 11 seconds. That’s quicker than the likes of Gareth Bale today.

Distance covered is a tactical style thing. Pele’s playing heart rate would suggest he’d be pretty capable of adapting to that.

There’s been advancements but not as big as you are making out for football. Which is also played by footballers not sprinters and long distance runners but players who can bring all that together with their ability.

Also a modern day player may not survive the game of yesteryear. They are pushing the limits with the benefits of squad rotation, referee & law protection, substitutions and superior playing conditions.

If they took a knock they would have to stay on the pitch in most circumstances. The defenders I mentioned all had the stamina to play 500+ games at the full 90 minutes on what would be regarded as dangerous pitches these days.

A modern day player would essentially be training for the wrong game and more than likely get injured. That's not to say they couldn't survive they would adapt. I am sure the same would be of Pele at al in today's game.

It's down to ability.

[ekhibee]

Regardless of why the qualifying times have changed, they still need to be met. These guys wouldn’t have hit that qualifying time. They wouldn’t have got to compete.

I get what you're saying, but in relation to this you would need to compare how a modern day athlete would do if he or she was working full time AND training for, say 100 metres, because most of the athletes in the 60's and 70's were amateur, not sponsored. And that's probably also why you're argument isn't really valid, because just as sports people in the 60's and 70's didn't have access to state of the art technology, sports science and better coaching and practice facilities, nowadays modern athletes are full time athletes, not amateur, so they have an overwhelming advantage, surely you have to accept that, it's not got anything to do with them just being better, because Usain Bolt WAS a full time athlete on a lucrative contract with access to all of that, Allan Wells was a civil engineer who worked for Brown Brothers and still managed to win the gold at the Olympics. That's not Bolt's fault at all, he was a fantastic athlete who thoroughly deserved all the acolades he got, but he still had a lot of advantages that earlier athletes didn't have.

[Crunchie]

Callum you keep harping on about science, diet technology etc in the modern game and that in your opinion makes modern players so much better than the ones from 60's 70's etc. You seem to forget that if the players from decades ago played now they'd have access to that same technology and alternatively if modern players played back then they wouldn't.

All the greats from back in the day stood out because they were the most talented or dedicated, or both. Pele was a great physical specimen and was a full internationalist at 17, Best had footballing skills rarely seen. Yes we all agree it was a different era but it is impossible to just make a statement that one era is better than another because they have better science and training etc.

You mentioned that heavyweight boxers are bigger nowadays, Ali was 17 stones, same weight as Klitschko and only a few pound lighter that Joshua, Ali actually beat Foreman who was 18.5 stones.
:top marks

[Andy74]

I get what you're saying, but in relation to this you would need to compare how a modern day athlete would do if he or she was working full time AND training for, say 100 metres, because most of the athletes in the 60's and 70's were amateur, not sponsored. And that's probably also why you're argument isn't really valid, because just as sports people in the 60's and 70's didn't have access to state of the art technology, sports science and better coaching and practice facilities, nowadays modern athletes are full time athletes, not amateur, so they have an overwhelming advantage, surely you have to accept that, it's not got anything to do with them just being better, because Usain Bolt WAS a full time athlete on a lucrative contract with access to all of that, Allan Wells was a civil engineer who worked for Brown Brothers and still managed to win the gold at the Olympics. That's not Bolt's fault at all, he was a fantastic athlete who thoroughly deserved all the acolades he got, but he still had a lot of advantages that earlier athletes didn't have.

This is where the differences start to become minute.

The 100m in 60 years has improved by half a second. Those athletes were probably amateur, didn’t have access to the science and were on poor quality tracks with poor running equipment.

So professional athletes trying purely to run fast over 100m have only taken half a second out of that time in 60 years. Quite a bit in terms of the 100m but not a huge amount at all if you apply the use of pace for a football player. You’d expect much less of an improvement in something that’s just a part of the game, on average.

Stamina, again I’m not buying that there have been huge leaps. We are from a race that stalked wild prey over huge distances.

The main factor I have sympathy with is the pace overall the game is played at. Intensity is something that a player from 60 years ago would need to get used to, but they would be physically capable of it in the main.

[BILLYHIBS]

Just noticed that the FIFA player of the 20th Century was shared by Pelé and Maradona ( Wiki)

Probably still doesn’t resolve anything :greengrin

[DH1875]

Just noticed that the FIFA player of the 20th Century was shared by Pelé and Maradona ( Wiki)

Probably still doesn’t resolve anything :greengrin

Not really. Messi and Ronaldo are 21st century. Wonder what the debate will be like in 50 years.

[Pretty Boy]

Usain Bolt recently said he could have broken 9.5 seconds wearing the new super spikes that Nike sponsored athletes will be wearing at the Olympics. He certainly seems to place some weight behind the idea technology is as big a factor as talent in improved performance.

I suppose there is a reason why shoes are such a contentious topic in running with some athletes calling certain models tantamount to cheating (until they get their feet in a pair of course). It stands to reason the same things applies when it comes to all the adaptations that have been made to football equipment over the years.

It's all hypothetical of course but when Usain Bolt talks it's probably worth listening.

[Is It On....]

All the pro modern footballers posters, what's your opinion on Mohammed Ali, Joe Frasier, Robert Duran etc, do you think the modern boxers like AJ, Fury etc would beat them as it's a modern era with sports technology. Tennis? What about Borg, McEnroe, Agassi? Put Jim Clarke or Jackie Stewart in modern cars and they'd still win world championships today because of modern technology.

All this bickering is absolute nonsense because you can never ever compare different era's due to the development in training, diet etc. If all those world class players of yesteryear had what players have now, they'd still be top players due to pure talent and natural ability.

Ali would be interesting because he wasn't a naturally big guy...but given his skill it's not difficult to imagine that he would still be "The Greatest" heavyweight of all time. His social media would be the stuff of legends 🙂

[FilipinoHibs]

Ali would be interesting because he wasn't a naturally big guy...but given his skill it's not difficult to imagine that he would still be "The Greatest" heavyweight of all time. His social media would be the stuff of legends 🙂
Borg with modern rackets and gym and fitness work would be unbeatable. He invented the modern game.

[Wakeyhibee]

Usain Bolt recently said he could have broken 9.5 seconds wearing the new super spikes that Nike sponsored athletes will be wearing at the Olympics. He certainly seems to place some weight behind the idea technology is as big a factor as talent in improved performance.

I suppose there is a reason why shoes are such a contentious topic in running with some athletes calling certain models tantamount to cheating (until they get their feet in a pair of course). It stands to reason the same things applies when it comes to all the adaptations that have been made to football equipment over the years.

It's all hypothetical of course but when Usain Bolt talks it's probably worth listening.

The triple jump combines speed and technique. How come Jonathan Edward's World Record still stands 26 years later with all this sports science? I expect Usain Bolts will stand for a long time too.