One day in the future you will be asked ''How good was Lionel Messi?''. Maybe you will be wearing a velvet jacket when you are asked the question by a grandchild. If so, you'll be in good company.
The more I consider that question - in the present tense - the more I am convinced that not only are we in the presence of genius but, more than that, we may very well be watching the finest player ever to play the game.
Pub debates will rage over whether he truly is better than Maradona or Pele or Cruyff. There is no doubt that each is a wonderful player but there is little doubt that we are increasingly debating the merit of those four players when we decide who is the finest to kick a ball. Increasingly, Best, di Stefano, Beckenbauer, Puskas and so forth are considered just a little further back.
On a technical level, there is very little between that magic four. Some may argue that Pele had better touch than Maradona or that Cruyff understood the game better than Messi but, in reality, the differences are minute.
That said, I cannot see a weakness in Messi's game. With many great players, there is an arrogance that comes with the job. That is lacking in Messi. With many great players, there is a selfishness and, again, that seems to have avoided Messi entirely. It is his all-round game that bewilders.
We know him to have unparalleled ball control and dribbling abilities. We know him to be able to score almost every type of goal imaginable. We know that some of the goals he scores - with frightening regularity and disproportionately in big games - defy belief. We do not always acknowledge that he is one of the finest passers of the ball in the modern game. Indeed, I can only think of Xavi - and possibly Cesc Fabregas - as being ahead of him when it comes to an entire range of passing.
If Messi wasn't a forward, we would be drooling over the passes. As it happens we generally ignore this facet of his game.
As I've eluded to above what sets Lionel Messi apart for me is something not related to the magic in his boots. Messi takes us all back to childhood because his play is child-like. He reminds us of the boy in the playground who couldn't be tackled, couldn't be hacked. But Messi is not doing this in the playground. He is doing it against some of the best defenders in the game marshalled by superb coaches.
I admire Cristiano Ronaldo. I do not like him. I do not gain joy from the way he scores goals or dominates games. I admire it, I can appreciate his genius and, in any other era, we would lavish him with awards but it does not give me the joy that watching Messi does. That may be because Messi is so obviously unselfish. It may be because he takes such obvious joy from playing and also from assisting his team-mates. It may be because he looks like he is having a hell of a time of it.
And that should matter. We can talk about passing completion rates until the Sam Allardyce explodes in sexual frenzy but we rarely talk about how players make us feel or how they play the game. As Cruyff said ''There is no better medal than being acclaimed for your style''. And boy, Messi has style.
There seems to be only one charge against him. That he doesn't cut it at international level.
Firstly, Messi is 24 years old. He is still some years from his peak. Maradona was at his finest at the 1986 World Cup when he was 26. Cruyff, at his only World Cup, in 1974 was 27 years old. Messi has time on his side. Zidane was 26 at France '98 (a tournament he really only shone at in the final). He has time on his side.
It is telling that at such a young age we are already considering him against the greats of the game. Barcelona have built one of the greatest teams in history around him. He may be the best player in the world but he is part of the team not separate too it.
Secondly, do we really believe that only players that have won the World Cup count? No. Clearly because we consider Cruyff as one of the greats and he didn't - sadly - win the World Cup. We consider di Stefano, Best and Weah who never played at the World Cup. We are saying that a player can only be considered the greatest in history if he happened to be born in a small handful of countries.
Thirdly, the idea that the World Cup is the be-all and end-all is dying away. The European Champions League is the highest level the game has to offer these days and Messi has totally and utterly dominated that tournament over the past five years. Maradona never really did anything in the European Cup - a European Cup which was easier to win and, when he was at his peak, deprived of English teams. The European Cup has got harder to win (if easier to qualify for) since Maradona's day and no player has shone as brightly or as often in it as Messi. That should be an enormous tick in his favour.
It is odd to base whether or not a player is the greatest in history because he shone for a handful of games one summer in his entire career rather than considering what he achieves over the course of that career. If Messi retired tomorrow there would be a legitimate case to argue he is the finest. If he continues at this pace for a few years there will be no debate.
This third point is particularly important when comparing with Maradona. Maradona, so the story goes, won the World Cup on his own in 1986. Messi didn't win the World Cup in 2010. Therefore, Maradona is better. We shouldn't rush to judgement. I would contend that the general standard of teams at the 2010 World Cup was higher than at the 1986 version. Maradona, for example, never had to deal with a team as elegant as the 2010 Germany team (let alone the 2010 Spain team).
The 1986 draw was kind for Maradona and Argentina in 1986. After the group stage, Uruguay, England (which was only achieved through an astonishing goal and an equally astonishing piece of cheating), Belgium and West Germany were dispatched. A team can only beat who is put in front of them but Argentina were fortunate to avoid Brazil, France and Denmark. England, Belgium and West Germany were decent teams but they will not resonate down the years.
Moreover, Maradona didn't ever have a manager who was quite so wired to the moon as, well, Maradona. Maradona's manager, Bilardo, in 1986 built a team to get the very best out of El Diego. Messi's manager in 2010 played a left-winger at right-back and setting up unbalanced teams. That Argentina were ruthlessly cast aside by Germany is barely Messi's fault and, let's not forget, Messi shone prior to that game. Rarely will we have a case of one of the contenders for greatest player so clearly undermining one of his rivals.
Those who insist on the importance of a player ''owning'' a tournament are curiously Euro-centric. The only tournaments that we consider are the World Cup (Cruyff - 1974; Maradona 1986) we consider the European Championships (Platini - 1984; van Basten - 1988). We do not speak of the Copa America because we do not know enough about it. We do not consider it an equal of the European Championships. We do not know, for instance, that Messi shone at the 2007 Copa America (aged only 20) but Robinho, of all people, shone a little more brightly.
Messi has time on his side. He also has a velvet jacket. He will be the greatest. Lionel Messi is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. Let us enjoy that at least.
RCM

7 comments:
Yes, yes, yes. As was mentioned on Twitter, it is the glee one feels when watching him play that matters. His child-like enthusiasm is infectious; it is almost impossible not to sit with a chocolate-eating grin when watching him do his stuff.
I always rated Cruyff just above Pele and Maradona, for talent and intelligence in the game, and awe-inspiring moves; Messi has all that, and the ability to inspire the joy as well. His humility is extraordinary too, given his status and achievements, something which I think is helped by Pep's management style at Barça. Will he be the greatest ever? I have no doubt. The only question is whether he is that already.
A very nice article. Thanks!
A very good read mate although I disagree that Messi is better than Pele. Pele scored over a 1,000 goals I believe he was also part of a team in the 1970 world cup the likes of which we have never seen since or before. The fact that Pele did shine in such a great team that didn't play together anywhere near as much as Messi with Barcelona is testament to his greatness, Messi hasn't produced it at World Cup level it is ok to argue that the manager didn't do this or that but greatness always shines through, everything is set up around him at Barca and because it isn't at Argentina shows that he isn't as great as you think. Pele is still the best of all time, he could do things that others cannot in an era not conducive in terms of equipment to expect such genius.
It's just the frequency with which he delivers his marvels! And against good sides - Best was a joy, but a lot of his stuff was against the thud-and-blunder English defences of his day. As for Pele - a firm dunno.
Anyway, credit where credit is due - the long campaign to restrict the kick-'em-up-in-the-air school of football has let this wonderful wee chap flourish. Of course, the "analysts" on the Beeb are still complaining that the two-footed lunge shouldn't be banned. Arseholes.
Thanks, all for the comments, most kind.
That Pele scored 1,000 goals is impressive but not the debate winning point. So has, for instance, Romario.
I think the 1970 World Cup team was a fine team but I'm not sure where we would rank it in the pantheon.
In 1970 did Pele shine so much brighter than Tostao? Or Jairzinho? Or Gerson? Probably but not enormously. The myth of Pele at that stage was so great that it is difficult to say. He was certainly a huge, huge factor.
I'm not sure, for what it is worth, Pele had he been able to play for Argentina in 2010 would have been able to haul that team through any further than they got.
RCM
in Portugal i still have discussions with my friends about who's best Lionel Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo. Honestly i think is the a good example of a global alucination. Congratulations for the article.
Cheers!
Post a Comment