Reply With Quote
of course you truly do, iīll never expect you to relate greatness with winning, that would just complicate things.I truly believe dude is mentally challenged
maradona
of course you truly do, iīll never expect you to relate greatness with winning, that would just complicate things.
what ?
who the are you ?
im nobody
i just would like to know what kind of information do you have to make impossible to think that Manu is greater than Messi, unless you tell me that for French people, prizes given by France Football are more important than World Cups.
The confusion here centers around which is the "greater Argentinian Athlete" and not which is greater in Argentina.
"Athlete" is the operative word here IMHO.
And most people will agree that basketball players are the greatest athletes in the world.
So in that regard it would have to be Manu.
Yet as far as being the "greatest" "player" in "Argentina, then it would be Messi, he is far more famous.
Does any of this make sense now?
i donīt think the word athlete just refers to athletical capabilities, if thatīs case iīm pretty sure neither Manu or Messi can be considered the greatest argentinian athlete. And also I donīt think is just what are they capable of doing in their sport, but when are they capable of doing it, and that is where Manu has proved a lot more than Messi so far.
Hum lets start with Messi is since several years the best player of the most popular sport in the world. Plus He is carrying a rather average team to a semi final of a World Cup and maybe more.
manu has never been the best bb player of a popular sport like bb. Manu greater than Messi It's like saying Parker is greater than Platini
im not sure what you are debating here.
If Parker would had won an olympic gold against a Dream team, added to his FMVP, i think itīs a much stronger case against Platini than Manu against Messi.
Probably not in terms of popularity tough.
You have a point, tho is not so straightforward as you put it IMO, but I'm not joining the debate anyway, who's better. This sentence, still, is just wrong, I don't know if you follow football and how much, but it's simply not true:
Messi has done it againt the best defenses in the world. And so has Ronaldo, for that matter.
I not only think its unfair to compare Manu and Messi, I also think the comparison between Messi and Maradona is unfair, and even the comparison between Pele and Maradona. The three of them played in different eras, meaning the strategies defenses use to stop this opposition best players have greatly evolved. There's a lot more pressing now, much less space to play, much more physical players, and without space, Messi has shown he is the best. And that doesn't mean Maradona or Pele or Garrincha or whoever were bleufs (blefs? bluefs? don't know how to spell it), or worse than Messi, it means they played in different contexts, that's it. Decades ago you didn't have what you see today, 11-men defenses with a well oiled pressing system that beggins when the team with possession of the ball reaches the half of the field.
And they played in different positions as well, Maradona contributed much more to the midefield, tho Messi is no striker either. Anyway, different.
And accolades don't tell the whole story for one player, much less in football, where the are another 10 players in the team. You can't talk about Football or even BB players like you would about Tennis or Golf players and their trophies.
It is like trying to compare apples with oranges IMHO.
Does not make sense at all buddy
Messi is in discussion with pele maradona cruyf Garrincha etc...in the most popular sport on earth. Manu is nowhere close to be in discussion with MJ, Russel, Magic, Duncan....
Again your logic is pretty ed up
Lots of people confusing popularity with athleticism.
Please donīt dare usDoes not make sense at all buddy
Messi is in discussion with pele maradona cruyf Garrincha etc...in the most popular sport on earth. Manu is nowhere close to be in discussion with MJ, Russel, Magic, Duncan....
Again your logic is pretty ed up
Please donīt dare us
And lots of people can't read beyond the literal meaning. I don't really think the thread's creator meant to ask who's more athletic, but who's better at his own sport.
Neither of which has anything to do with the popularity of soccer.
Come on man, poll says better argentinian athlete and thats it, this is no code davinci, any other meaning is pure speculation.
Thats like putting some Jordan vs Kobe debate and someone saying WELL KOBE IS A RAPIST SO HE CANT BE BETTER THAN MJ IF SOME PEOPLE CANT READ BEYOND THE LITERAL MEANING OF BETTER IS NOT MY FAULT.
Bottom line for people like you is that the entire world needs to be laid out in black and white as a result of your inability to think beyond the obvious.
As the sentence is constructed, "greater" and "Argentinian" are adjectives of the noun "athlete".
What's to be confused about that?
According to the Merriam-Webster, Athlete: a person who is trained in or good at sports, games, or exercises that require physical skill and strength
So I think I was wrong about the literal meaning. I understand it's indeed the better player rather than the more athletic one.
By the way, somebody was saying there were no good teams at this World Championship...
Okay, if the sentence wasn't constructed as you intended then I agree with you.
Brazil without Neymar was dead and then the second best player got bad news his grandpa died the whole team was a mess it happened to Argentina when they kicked Maradroga out for doping they lost to Romania.
Of course Germany is not Romania, but they won Algeria 2-1 and then France 1-0 so your Ļcompe iveĻ statement is not so accurate.
A muscular big man beating with a baseball bat some dude laying on the floor with one leg is not what I call compe ive, they knew Brazil without Neymar was cake.
In most WCs, the champion gets the le winning most elimination games for just one goal. Since there are QFs:
- 2010: Spain wins with a quadruple 1-0.
- 2006: Italy only wins clearly against Ukraine (3-0), could only score once against Australia, went to the overtime against Germany and won the final in the penalties.
- 2002: Brazil won 2-0 over Belgium and Germany in the final, by one goal against England and Turkey.
- 1998: France only wins clearly in the final against Brazil (3-0); overtime against Paraguay, penalties against Italy and just by one goal against Croatia.
- 1994: Brazil wins by one goal against USA, Netherlands, Sweden and over Italy in the penalties.
- 1990: Germany beat by one goal Netherlands, Czechoslovakia and Argentina in the final, went to the penalties against England.
- 1986: Argentina won by one goal over Uruguay, England and Germany in the final, improving to 2-0 against Belgium.
I know Brazil was severely decimated, but it's a country deep enough in football talent to have managed better. And still, it really doesn't matter, it's never easy to get the le.
I agree. I hadn't been back in this thread since early on when I voted. At that point Messi was sensibly ahead. The results now are ridiculous. I love Manu, but come on!
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
