Pele vs Maradona

Discuss and compare your favorite players
Juicygriot17
Junior Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 00:08

Post by Juicygriot17 » 04 Jun 2010, 21:33

yea but I think pele could've had maradona's touch, but maradona is smaller and therefore naturally quicker. I also agree bout the footage issue with pele

klc123
Veteran Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 16:26

Post by klc123 » 04 Jun 2010, 22:00

As far as I know, Pele was faster than Maradona?...He's black.

Also being short has nothing to do with speed, Usain bolt please?

Lack of footage is a problem, but world cups were widely watched events even in Pele's day, and Pele as far as I know played more world cups than Maradona. Maradona is remembered eternally for his world cup wonder goal, no such goal comes to mind with Pele.

soccer11
Admin
Posts: 4870
Joined: 24 Feb 2005, 23:40
Location: Michigan, USA

Post by soccer11 » 04 Jun 2010, 22:34

klc123 wrote: I'm not disagreeing with you because I do feel the same that Maradona was severely one footed, but that wasn't a flaw in my opinion, he could strike the ball perfectly with both feet, it just so happened 99% of the time he felt comfortable using his strongest foot to destroy people.
how do you know he could strike the ball perfectly with both feet?


i put a lot of stock into whether someone is one-footed or two-footed. It makes someone more of a complete player if they are able to play with both feet equally, which Pele could do better than anyone. If i was making a team and I had to choose between Pele and Maradona I'd pick Pele because of his versatility. Pele even played in the midfield for a little bit in the later part of his career and still did good.

And in terms of world cup goals, Pele has more than Maradona. I think it's 11-6, but Pele didn't even play that many more games than Maradona because Pele was injured through stretches in the 62 and 66 world cups.

Go find some Pele highlights. Notice his quickness and the way he slides away from tacklers as they are trying to break his legs with their tackles.
Image

Ward9310
Senior Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 08 Apr 2010, 22:51

Post by Ward9310 » 04 Jun 2010, 22:36

klc123 wrote:As far as I know, Pele was faster than Maradona?...He's black.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

In my opinion, Maradona was the better player, because of the way he played, and what he achieved (although I'm not for one second saying that Pele didn't achieve a lot).

As a person though, Pele is by far the superior. He's generally a clean, nice character, whilst Maradona . . . Well, we all know about his little phase with the drugs.

styale18
Senior Member
Posts: 140
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 23:51

Post by styale18 » 04 Jun 2010, 22:43

klc123 wrote:As far as I know, Pele was faster than Maradona?...He's black.

Also being short has nothing to do with speed, Usain bolt please?

Lack of footage is a problem, but world cups were widely watched events even in Pele's day, and Pele as far as I know played more world cups than Maradona. Maradona is remembered eternally for his world cup wonder goal, no such goal comes to mind with Pele.
Thats bc there was more footage available for maradona like what romeleader said so you dont really know if pele has scored goals like that

klc123
Veteran Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 16:26

Post by klc123 » 04 Jun 2010, 22:54

Yes...But my point was that Maradona scored a wondergoal against what was one of the biggest countries at the time, in the biggest tournament, which everyone was watching.

Pele never done anything like that in a world cup, and there is no shortage of Pele playing in world cups to my knowledge.

Ward9310
Senior Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 08 Apr 2010, 22:51

Post by Ward9310 » 04 Jun 2010, 22:57

klc123 wrote:Yes...But my point was that Maradona scored a wondergoal against what was one of the biggest countries at the time, in the biggest tournament, which everyone was watching.

Pele never done anything like that in a world cup, and there is no shortage of Pele playing in world cups to my knowledge.
To be fair though, Pele was more of a clinical striker, whereas Maradona was a midfielder who went on mazy dribbles, played passes, had a good long shot, etc. So he was more likely to score a wonder goal.

panchester07
Veteran Member
Posts: 3849
Joined: 27 Aug 2007, 04:25

Post by panchester07 » 04 Jun 2010, 23:06

"Pele played more world cups than Maradona" ... FALSE

Maradona played in 82, 86, 90, and 94

Pele played in 58, 62, 66, and 70.

They played the same amount of world cups :wink:

Maradona barely got cut out of the 78 Argentina national team, but in 82 he was already captain and "10".

Pele was a midfielder. Not a striker.

Maradona was quicker, Pele was faster.

Imo just the fact that Brazil won 3/4 world cups back then, and that Pele scored 1000+ goals, just takes away all the credibility from the man.

Messi blows minds right now, he's the best we've seen in 20 years IMO, and he can't repeat a champions league? Was pele, and Brazil that good, that no one else could win a world cup, that they just won it all, everytime? Or was football back then, disorganized as hell.

Pele isn't black, he's a mixture of things, like most brazilians, native american, bit african, bit a mixture of native american with white, good athlete stil.
to know Him is to want to know Him more"


"i don't know where the limit is, but I know where it is not"

Tocar y moverse y tratarla siempre muy muy bien..'

Juicygriot17
Junior Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 00:08

Post by Juicygriot17 » 04 Jun 2010, 23:58

word to panchester ^
klc, being black doesnt make u fast, im black and im not fast at all. there are many black dudes who are slow as hell, so that label isnt always right
Maradona's quicker as in cuts, while pele's faster just in sprinting even tho pele is still quick as hell.

soccer11
Admin
Posts: 4870
Joined: 24 Feb 2005, 23:40
Location: Michigan, USA

Post by soccer11 » 05 Jun 2010, 00:17

panchester07 wrote:"Pele played more world cups than Maradona" ... FALSE

Maradona played in 82, 86, 90, and 94

Pele played in 58, 62, 66, and 70.

They played the same amount of world cups :wink:


Maradona barely got cut out of the 78 Argentina national team, but in 82 he was already captain and "10".

Pele was a midfielder. Not a striker.

Maradona was quicker, Pele was faster.

Imo just the fact that Brazil won 3/4 world cups back then, and that Pele scored 1000+ goals, just takes away all the credibility from the man.

Messi blows minds right now, he's the best we've seen in 20 years IMO, and he can't repeat a champions league? Was pele, and Brazil that good, that no one else could win a world cup, that they just won it all, everytime? Or was football back then, disorganized as hell.

Pele isn't black, he's a mixture of things, like most brazilians, native american, bit african, bit a mixture of native american with white, good athlete stil.
I don't know if that was to me but I didn't mean world cup tournaments. I meant actual matches at the world cup.

And Pele was not a midfielder. He was an inside forward.
Image

styale18
Senior Member
Posts: 140
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 23:51

Post by styale18 » 05 Jun 2010, 00:52

Juicygriot17 wrote:word to panchester ^
klc, being black doesnt make u fast, im black and im not fast at all. there are many black dudes who are slow as hell, so that label isnt always right
Maradona's quicker as in cuts, while pele's faster just in sprinting even tho pele is still quick as hell.
lmao..... its true .... there are some black sloths out there

panchester07
Veteran Member
Posts: 3849
Joined: 27 Aug 2007, 04:25

Post by panchester07 » 05 Jun 2010, 03:14

[quote="Juicygriot17"]word to panchester ^
/quote]

What? Did I post something you consider wrong? If so please explain!

Both reasons from both parts are really lacking.

You honestly can't come up with a logic answer to is.

How the hell is someone gonna score 1000 goals? are you serious? its just unreliable, its just bulls**t, who does that? The best players nowadays struggle to score 300, and few do so, are you honestly telling me this guy scored more than 1000? [b]Yes he did, but the fact that he does tells you a lot about the competition and the level of football that was played back then[/b]

You just can't compare, and its unfair to me to call him the best ever, so for me he isn't. We owe him a lot, he's a pioneer in the sport, and he has inmense passion and he revolutionized the sport. But 1000+ goals? Realize that Messi that is a beast, score 47 per season, even if he had 10 seasons at this level, that'd be 470 goals, pele scored 3 times this, football just wasnt as competitve back then. Really? So pele is really 3 times better than Messi? :?:

To me after you can't compare him, to anyone really, you could say he's the best player prior to 1980, but football has evolved so much for the better, players are much more complete, much faster, much stronger, much more technical bla bla bla... IMO, IMO, IMO its like comparing a car in the 1960's, to a car in the 21st century, Pele was good back then, now he would fail. He would be outrunned, muscled out, his feints in which he dribbled 8 players in the small box, and the ball would bounce and he'd still score, non of that would be goals today.

Pele was the best in his time, and props to him for that, but the title the best ever is really unfair.

This is my opinion, so I'd appreciate if you would respond with neutrality, and avoid the sarcastic comments.

Maradona was also ridiculous, and he was also the best in his time, and he also changed the game.

none was better none was best, they where diffeerent, and they where both excellent.
to know Him is to want to know Him more"


"i don't know where the limit is, but I know where it is not"

Tocar y moverse y tratarla siempre muy muy bien..'

klc123
Veteran Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 16:26

Post by klc123 » 05 Jun 2010, 13:31

Sorry I thought the sarcasm when I said he was fastest because he is black was obvious :lol:

Obviously not all black people are fast.

Thanks Panch, I didn't know they played the same number, but my point was supporting Maradona :lol:

Juicygriot17
Junior Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 00:08

Post by Juicygriot17 » 05 Jun 2010, 15:39

its all good klc :)
yo panch, when i say word i agree with u lmao, im not attacking u
when u say word it means like i agree

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post by 2brown347 » 05 Jun 2010, 16:48

panchester07 wrote:
To me after you can't compare him, to anyone really, you could say he's the best player prior to 1980, but football has evolved so much for the better, players are much more complete, much faster, much stronger, much more technical bla bla bla... IMO, IMO, IMO its like comparing a car in the 1960's, to a car in the 21st century, Pele was good back then, now he would fail. He would be outrunned, muscled out, his feints in which he dribbled 8 players in the small box, and the ball would bounce and he'd still score, non of that would be goals today.

Pele was the best in his time, and props to him for that, but the title the best ever is really unfair.

This is my opinion, so I'd appreciate if you would respond with neutrality, and avoid the sarcastic comments.

Maradona was also ridiculous, and he was also the best in his time, and he also changed the game.

none was better none was best, they where diffeerent, and they where both excellent.
Saying you can't call him the best ever because you can't compare him to later players is a fine opinion but by that logic you shouldn't declare any player the best player ever because soccer is constantly evolving and most players from the generation before would be out of place in the game of the time.

Post Reply