The Genius of Messi
Posted: June 29th, 2010 | Filed under: Other Sports | 116 Comments »
CAPE TOWN, South Africa — So, while watching Lionel Messi and Argentina play Mexico in a Round of 16 match, I got to thinking a bit about Peyton Manning. Here’s what I was thinking: If you knew only a little bit about pro football, you would still know that Peyton Manning is great. You would appreciate that he is accurate with his passes, that he has a knack for finding open receivers, that he stands in against fierce pressure. You would see him connect with a receiver 50 yards downfield and you would understand at a gut level that he is good at this quarterback thing.
But you probably would not understand JUST how good Peyton Manning is at being a quarterback, not until you watched more football. It would only be after watching other quarterbacks — good ones, mediocre ones, bad ones, JaMarcus Russell — that you would begin to see what makes Manning special. Because then you hard it is to be that good. You would see how often other quarterbacks miss open receivers, how often they make imprecise decisions, how often they unnerve in a collapsing pocket, how they can’t consistently see what Manning sees.
This, I think, is true of all sports. The more you study golf, you more you appreciate how difficult it is to hit an approach shot close to the hole in the wind. The more you are around baseball, you more you understand how hard it is to hit a good curveball. The more you live football, the more you get that what Peyton Manning does (or Tom Brady or Drew Brees), week after week, is something like a miracle, something that is beyond the human capabilities of almost anyone else.
There’s that old line about how certain athletes make it “look easy.” Well, it seems to me that, by definition, greatness in anything looks easy. Stand-up comedy looks easy. Driving a race car looks easy. Playing great guitar looks easy. It’s only our experience with the mundane that helps us understand just how difficult greatness really is.
I was thinking about all this because, as you know, I’m following and writing and learning soccer here at the World Cup. I have a light background in the sport — my father played semi-professionally in Poland and taught me the game when I was young — but I know that my knowledge of the game is superficial. I like the game. I understand the rules. I know some of the names. I will watch on television from time to time. I have a casual feel for the pace and rhythms and passion. But that’s about it. When I watch highlights on television of Lionel Messi playing, see him dribble in traffic, see him twist defenders into the ground, see him unload great shots toward the corner of the net … well, I can see that he’s great.
But being here, immersed in the games and the fans passion, talking with people who live this sport, soaking in everything I can, well, it becomes clearer what Messi’s genius really means.
* * *
Lionel Messi, you probably know, is having a remarkable World Cup. I don’t know how hard core soccer people feel about statistics, but they had a table of unofficial statistics here in one of the papers Tuesday morning, and it listed Messi as having more shots than any player here, more shots on goal, more solo runs and most assists. That’s pretty much everything they offered on the offensive side. The official FIFA statistics are different and do not give Messi the most assists — they only credit him with one — but you learn pretty quickly at the World Cup not to trust FIFA too much. This is an organization that, so far anyway, thinks the best way to deal with the rash of awful referee decisions is to stop showing replays in the stadiums.*
*Which, come to think of it, is how the NCAA and Major League Baseball handles officiating too. Hmmm.
In any case, Messi leads the tournament in just about every meaningful offensive statistic except what you expect is the most meaningful one: He has yet to score a goal. He has been the perpetual victim of brilliant goalkeeping. This has been one of the themes of the tournament — against Mexico, Argentina coach/legend/crazy person Diego Maradona left Messi in until the end of an easy victory in an apparent effort to get him his first goal. Messi responded with a brilliant shot near the end of the game that was turned away by yet another brilliant save.
“When,” the announcers here in South Africa say in wonder on a daily basis, “will the best player in the world get his first goal?”
This is how most people refer to Lionel Messi, by the way … not so much by name (though they will call him Leo) but by his title: The Best Player In The World. There is something official about the title — Messi was named the FIFA World Player of the Year for the first time in 2009. But it seems that it is the unofficial, informal, lower cased title of “best player in the world” that means more to people. There are a handful of players — among them Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo, Brazil’s Kaka, Spain’s Xavi or Fernando Torres, one of England’s stars like John Terry, Wayne Rooney or Steve Gerrard, Cameroon’s Samuel Eto’o, perhaps the young German Thomas Mueller — who are in the typical bar and work conversation for best player in the world. But it is Messi who, at the moment, seems to be the consensus choice, the way Albert Pujols is in baseball. It isn’t something people seem to be arguing about.
You may know the Messi story already, but if not here’s the quick version: He was born in Argentina and was already showing soccer skills when he was 5 years old. That’s pretty common, I think, for great soccer players. What is not so common is that Messi showed so much promise that when he was 13 years old, he caught the eye of Barcelona soccer guru Carlos Rexach. At the time, as the story goes, Messi had been diagnosed with a growth hormone deficiency and his family was struggling with the cost of treatment. After a tryout, Rexach and Barcelona offered to pay his medical expenses if the family would just move to Spain. The family moved to Spain. The growth hormone deficiency may have stunted his growth (Messi is listed at 5-foot-7, and if you ever get to stand close to him you suspect that’s there’s no way he’s that tall) but it did not slow his brilliance. At 16, Messi played his first game for Barcelona. At 17, he scored his first league goal.
And it proceeded from there. At 19, he scored in the World Cup. At 21, he was being talked about as the best player in the world. At 22, as mentioned, he was named FIFA’s World Player of the Year. He only turned 23 last week.
And the experts who watch him play never tire of comparing him to Maradona, who many (Maradona included) consider the best ever. They’re both short, both left-footed, both preposterously skilled, both spectacularly fast, both ferocious attackers. For a while, some have even called him “Messi-donna.” And just as there have been generations of young American players who drowned in the “next Magic Johnson” or “next Willie Mays” or “next Bobby Orr” tidal wave of hype, it’s no bargain being called the “next Maradona.” But Messi is so good, that Maradona himself has made the comparison.
* * *
I knew most of this Lionel Messi stuff before I got here. I read stories about him. I watched some highlights of him playing. I understood, on that surface level, just how good a player he is.
But then … I saw him play. Not highlights. Not a few of his greatest shots. Full games. And I saw him in context, with the World Cup buzzing, with vuvuzelas blowing, against the background of other players, excellent players, good players, OK players, who are trying to do the very same things he is doing.
Only they cannot. Messi simply does things — little things and big things — that other players here cannot do. He gets a ball in traffic, is surrounded by two or three defenders, and he somehow keeps the ball close even as they jostle him and kick at the ball. He takes long and hard passes up around his eyes and somehow makes the ball drop softly to his feet, like Keanu Reeves making the bullets fall in “The Matrix.” He cuts in and out of traffic — Barry Sanders only with a soccer ball moving with him — sprints through openings that seem only theoretical, races around and between defenders who really are running even if it only looks like they are standing still. He really does seem to make the ball disappear and reappear, like it’s a Vegas act.
I measure soccer against the sports I have grown up loving, and it seems to me that that soccer — a bit like baseball — is defined by failure. Most corner kicks don’t find a teammate’s head. Most crosses into the box are too long or too short or turned away. Most shots are not aimed for the upper right-hand corner. Most runs end up being stuffed a long way from the goal. Most goals are the result of a staggering blunder — either by the defenders or the goalkeeper or the linesman who missed offside or awarded a shaky penalty kick or gave a free kick in a dangerous place. One somewhat cynical soccer commentator told me that what I need to understand is that every single goal, even the most brilliant of them, is the result of an error somewhere along the way. I suppose there are pitching coaches who would say the same thing about home runs.
And it is in this context of failure that the genius of Messi comes to life. He thrives. He breaks through. He succeeds where the seems no chance of success. And he stays on his feet. One of the big talks in soccer is about how often Cristiano Ronaldo dives — there is a classic YouTube video of girls soccer coach teaching his 6- and 7-year-old players to dive like Ronaldo. Messi certainly has taken his dives too — it’s sadly just a big part of the sport* — but it’s rare with him. “Messi never dive” is a popular Internet search.
*The other day, I heard a fascinating discussion among international journalists about a player hurting his team because he DID NOT dive. Apparently, he was in the box, and he was illegally hit, and if he had just dived to the ground he almost certainly would have gotten the penalty. Instead he stayed on his feet and tried to score and was turned away by the goalkeeper. We talk a lot about how diving is one of the big turn-offs of soccer for Americans, but the truth from what I can tell is that nobody likes it, and everybody wishes diving could be eliminated from the sport. Nobody knows how to do it.
Here’s one more sport comparison for Messi: Some years ago, I was at the Nebraska-Florida Fiesta Bowl, and Tommie Frazier made that remarkable run where he broke six tackles and raced 75 yards for a touchdown. And what I remember most about it is that about eight or nine yards into the run, when four people had Frazier stopped, I looked down at my notebook to write something down. And it was only when I heard the crowd scream that I looked back up and realized Frazier was still going.
That’s what it is to watch Messi throughout a game. He will be surrounded, completely blocked off, the play will seem ordinary, the action stopped, and your body reflexively relaxes. Nothing to see here. Only then suddenly, you realize that Messi is still going, still has the ball in control, is still heading toward the goal, and then he will get off a pass to someone open or get off a shot off that must have gone under someone’s legs or under their elbow or something. He does this absurd kind of thing multiple times in the game. And nobody else really does, not quite like him.
Loading ...
Maradona apparently wears an Argentina jersey underneath his suit. I’m perpetually expecting him to sub himself in for someone at the end of each match Argentina plays. I’m thinking it’ll happen in the 90th minute of the final, and a Maradona assist will get Messi his first goal.
That, or Maradona will just knock it in himself with his hand.
I love you, Joe Posnanski.
I am definitely a casual soccer fan. Like a casual church goer who only attends Christmas or Easter services. But, I like to see if the US will do anything at the World Cup every four years. I was impressed with the way they acquitted themselves until I watched Argentina play Mexico. Watching those two teams play, especially Messi and the Argentinian who had two goals, I can begin to understand why people around the world are passionate about this sport. I am actually planning on going to my first Wizards game soon.
@1
Won’t it be a little bit his hand, a little bit the hand of God?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by royalsfeed, Peyton Manning Fans. Peyton Manning Fans said: Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » The Genius of Messi: But you probably would not understand JUST how good … http://bit.ly/bfg0Vh @TweetMeMe [...]
“There are a handful of players — among them Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo, Brazil’s Kaka, Spain’s Xavi or Fernando Torres, one of England’s stars like John Terry, Wayne Rooney or Steve Gerrard, Cameroon’s Samuel Eto’o, perhaps the young German Thomas Mueller — who are in the typical bar and work conversation for best player in the world. ”
John Terry or Steven Gerrard (or even Wayne Rooney) in the conversation as the best player in the world? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s a good one.
Circle me Geoff Thomas and Carlton Palmer.
“Well, it seems to me that, by definition, greatness in anything looks easy.”
Example: Fred Astaire. He makes complex, difficult dancing look easy and graceful and natural.
Counter-example: Gene Kelly. He does the impossible with surprising grace, but it doesn’t look easy.
This is exactly what people said about Gretzky in his prime. He’d see openings no one else could see. Players talked about finding the puck on their stick in a perfect position to score and not being sure how it got there. He didn’t look that impressive at first, but after a while you’d notice how scared his opposition was whenever he had the puck.
“There are a handful of players — among them Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo, Brazil’s Kaka, Spain’s Xavi or Fernando Torres, one of England’s stars like John Terry, Wayne Rooney or Steve Gerrard, Cameroon’s Samuel Eto’o, perhaps the young German Thomas Mueller . . .”
One Portuguese, one Brazilian, one Spaniard, a Cameroonian, a German and three Englishmen . . . THREE!
Joe’s been mixing with too many Pommies in South Africa by the look of it.
Ok… apart from the mention of John Terry, Steven Gerrard, and Thomas Muller where they should not be mentioned… this was a brilliant description. Messi is… magical. I’ve watched him quite a lot and… he still surprises. Several times in this World Cup, I thought he had run into a dead end. Except he popped out on the other side of the dead end. At different points in the game, I saw the Mexican defense marking him with at least three men… whether intentionally or out of pure fear.
Most great athletes are defined by their maniacal drive to be great. Messi’s drive is not maniacal. His drive is defined by delight. He just loves, loves, loves to play, create, dribble, score… win. He’s incredible.
Hi Joe, Uruguayan reader here. I was hoping for the U.S. team to advance to the quarterfinal against us so that I´d get to read your take on that game, but no such luck.
Guillermo, we wanted that too. I am glad La Celeste has made it to the quarters, and think they have a great shot of making it through. The resurgance of Uruguayan football the last five or ten years is good for the game! Good luck against Ghana.
Terry is a good center back, one of the best in the world, and man the US could have used him something fierce. But a center back is never going to be considered the best player for much the same reason a nose tackle will never be considered the greatest American football player – the range of skills you are called on to have is just more limited. You can only affect games in particular ways. No, the glory boys will always be strikers and attacking midfielders, quarterbacks and running backs.
How to stop diving and fake injuries:
1. Each week after games, put together a squad of three refs who review game clips of diving submitted by the other team. Each team can submit a set number of clips of their opponent (3 or 5 per game) and each clip costs them a set amount per league (MLS team pays $2,500 per clip, EPL team pays $5,000 or whatever so sending in clips isn’t cost prohibitive, but you don’t submit clips that have no chance of being ruled diving. If a clip is ruled to be a dive, the diving player/team pays the fee).
2. Any player that 2 of 3 ref deems to have dived, or blatantly embellishing an injury (grabbed his face when hit in the chest or rolling around grabbing the wrong ankle) gets a retroactive yellow card counted toward their running FIFA total. If they already had a yellow card in the game, they miss the next game. It doesn’t change the outcome of the game played, but hits the team for the next game. And if an player is given a card because of an opponent’s dive, that card is immediately rescinded from the players total.
3. During game play, the ref doesn’t stop the game for a player who goes down, unless the player is fouled (except goalies hurt while making a play on the ball or a save). If the player is seriously hurt, his team or the opponents can kick the ball out of bounds or he can be treated at the next stoppage of play (another exception being major bleeding since that’s hard to fake). If a player is fouled they get whatever time they need to recover as they currently do. If a team is to take a free kick of throw-in, and a player is down without a foul, set a time limit to put the ball in play. Either the player gets up in 30 seconds, his team calls on the stretcher, they put the ball in play or, after the minute, the other team gets the ball at that spot.
4. If a player is taken off on a stretcher or otherwise helped from the field, they can’t come back onto the pitch for either two or three stoppages of play. He can be subbed for at the first stoppage, but he can’t return himself immediately at the next whistle.
These changes don’t affect the outcome of any game played, and, yes, you can still gain an advantage by diving for that game, but then you pay a price the next game. And since teams will target the “stars” of the other team for diving to get them cards, it takes the diving out from the top down. If the best players don’t dive, younger players watching them learn not stay on their feet.
@6, @9, @10
Joe’s not saying all those Englishmen are the best player in the world, or even legitimately in the discussion. He’s just saying when he talks to people, their names come up. And with the way the English talk about their own, with the fact they speak our language, with the ubiquity and therefore apparent superiority of the Premiership, this really shouldn’t surprise you the way it has.
Terry WAS a one of the best center backs in the world, but he’s past his prime. He lacks the mobility to be a world class player anymore. The fact that he had to start for England was just one of the signs that they didn’t have the talent level needed to win the WC this year.
Gerard could have been that conversation (one of the best, not the best) a couple of years ago, but not anymore. Kaka doesn’t belong in that coversation either, though he’s still young enough to get back to that level. He’s not the player he used to be, though. E’to probably doesn’t belong anymore, either.
I’d probably add Drogba and Essien to that list.
Messi’s clearly the best right now. But you can shut him down, as Inter proved in the Champions League.
Darren, Joe has lots of English and English speaking readers, maybe he was just throwing out a bone to distract them from their misery!
English or not, though, Wayne Rooney IS deserving of being in the “best player in the world” conversation.
Great piece, Joe — here’s my favorite Messi goal (so far), vs. Getafe in the 2007 Spanish Cup (Copa del Rey).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSOmOVeBj1s
I don’t think it is the diving so much as the fake injuries that grind the game down.
First, most people who complain about “diving” have never tried run hard for 90 straight minutes while people desperately hack at your ankles and shoulder charge the ball from your feet. “Diving” occurs to get the attention of the referee and happens in every sport. Basketball players flop when they think they are set defensively. Catchers frame pitches on the corners, and batters flinch out of the way of pitches that are over the inside corner. Receivers sell pass interference even though they were the ones initiating contact. Referees are required to make that judgment call, and soccer is one of the few sports that punishes those who deliberately try to deceive the ref in this manner.
However, it’s the “I’ve been shot, blow the whistle” theatrics that need to be curbed. If a player goes down and play has to be stopped, 2-3 minutes before reentry. There would be a lot less acting and more guys peeling themselves up and following the play.
In describing this blog to my friends, I’ve often said that “Joe could write about grass growing or paint drying and make it interesting, exciting, funny, and something that you honestly care about.”
I can now add soccer to that list. The Tommie Frazier analogy (“How many tackles can one man break?”) brought it home nicely.
Actually here’s a better version, with English commentary instead of cheesy music. Dude was 19 years old when he did this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=334syIMZAX0&feature=related
I’ve been a football (soccer) fan and historian for 55 years. I love the game. Joe, this is one of the best articles on the sport I have ever read. I grew up watching the greats like Stanley Mathews, de Stefano, Puskas and later Pele, Cruyff and Maradona. Messi is right up there with the best who ever played. I think what sets him apart is his amazing balance, he seems to have the ability to always be in control, no matter what the oposition are doing. Truly a gifted athlete.
Great article.
As for funny films about diving in soccer, nothing comes even close to this one about Italy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ4vJ0BDhZU
Brilliant Joe.
I know the WC doesn’t have to improved, being the World’s most popular sporting event and all, but given the 16 teams in the second round, wouldn’t it have been more interesting if the teams could have been squared off by natural historical rivalry:
Japan v. S. Korea (WWII)
Brazil v. Portugual (colony vs. colonists)
Mexico v. USA (more than a few disputes including one official war over the years)
Spain v. The Netherlands (See the 16th century)
Argentina v. Chile (neighbors, dispute over Patagonia)
Paraguay v. Uruguay (neighbors, War of the Triple Alliance (thanks Wikipedia))
England v. Ghana (colony v. colonists)
Germany v. Slovakia (They share a dubious history together from WWII, probably something both countries would like to forget)
Great post. I did not expect to be rooting for Argentina in this Cup but I am. They really are a joy to watch.
Diego Maradona = Ozzie Guillen
My only complaint is that my WC fantasy league values goals highly and Messi is kind of killing me even though he’s playing spectacular football.
[...] THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE REPLAY. Posnanski’s otherwise choice piece on Lionel Messi briefly mentions that FIFA’s abhorrent policy on in-stadium replay is similar to the [...]
A link from kottke! Your traffic may boost a bit today…
You need to do yourself a favor and find some tapes of Barcelona games over the past couple years.
Of course, if you start watching Barcelona games, you may come to agree with me that Xavi is the best player in the world.
Loved the post, Joe.
I, too, have become a huge Messi fan. In fact, Argentina is the team I’m rooting for, only so I can have more chances to watch him.
Diego Maradona = Ozzie Guillen the coach + Willie Mays the player.
My girlfriend probably could count the number of soccer games she had seen prior to this World Cup on one hand. But we’ve been watching the Cup together and she wanted to adopt a national side that had a credible chance of winning.
After watching just one half of Argentina, she had already started to support them, almost entirely because of the genius of Messi. His greatness was just that obvious, even to someone who knew next to nothing about the sport. You just can’t take your eyes off of him. His greatness is palpable.
Unrelated side note – the best thing about this World Cup has been the English announcers. English soccer announcers are hard wired to be unrepentant homers, which is far more entertaining than the standard American neutral announcer. The ESPN announcers sounded ready to kill themselves after a day watching hated Argentina win and England get steamrolled. It truly added to my enjoyment of the games.
My husband just started a new job that (in part) requires him to watch all the World Cup games. We both played soccer when we were younger, but he became captain of his high school team, whereas my highlight was ‘most improved’ when I was 11…. So, I thought I had an appreciation of the game watching some of the last two World Cups, but being able to talk through the games with him, especially the Argentina-Mexico match, has given me the awed respect Joe expresses here. Maybe having played a little, and not all that well, makes me realize just how difficult it is to do what Messi does –exactly how Joe describes it. Or maybe it’s just basking in the reflected glow of my husband’s better international soccer knowledge. I’m not sure. But in many ways, it feels good to feel humbled watching another country’s star athlete, especially knowing the dominant role soccer plays in the hearts of so many worldwide. It makes me look forward to watching more of these amazing athletes play like the ‘beautiful’ artists so many already see them to be.
Deacon beat me to it. I am only casually into soccer in the i-find-the-world-cup-entertaining kind of way, but to hear an American talk about they would like it if it weren’t for all that diving….it just makes me think of watching the NBA (which I do like).
Messi reminds me of the early-years Michael Jordan: he gets the ball, and you can sense that he has almost limitless possibilities. You MUST watch.
I’ve seen a couple youth players in my 8 years of coaching who had a bit of that Messi-style magic. One in particular was/is a head or more shorter than his opponents, but the challenge only seems to energize him more. These rare players mind/body coordination is just better and faster than the rest of ours.
Yes, all of that, Joe. But Messi is clearly pressing. He desperately wants that first goal, and sometimes that has led him to try to do too much when he would be better off trying to connect with one of the best finishers in the world in Gonzalez Higuain, playing up front. Messi is the best passer among the three forwards Maradona is playing, and he shouldn’t worry sweat that he hasn’t scored, since he can assist with the best of them (assist are grudgingly recorded but he is still one of the top assist man in La Liga the last few seasons). This Argentina team simply does not have the tools to allow him to score at his Barcelona pace, so he shouldn’t try. He should accept that this Argentina team needs something different from him, and to an extent he has accepted this, but in many ways he is trying to do what Argentina needs from him to what he does in Barcelona, and it won’t work. Argentina does not have Barcelona’s midfield. It has no one to take the ball across the midfield area to the forwards. Messi is filling that role with the Argentina squad, but the problem is he has to go get the ball too high and then try to bring it to the front. Its just too much territory for him to transverse, whereas in Barcelona he just has to sit at the wing and wait for the midfielders and the wingbacks to get him the ball. Argentina’s midfield options are limited. Mascherano may be a good sweeper, but he has no forward projection whatsoever. Veron is too old and slow. He and Messi connect well, but around the center line, Veron just can’t bring the ball up front anymore. The one player that could have helped bridge this gap–moving the ball from around the back of the middle third to the front of the middle third, allowing Veron closer to the front and Messi to play lower down–was inexplicably left off the squad by Maradona, Inter Milan’s Esteban Cambiasso. So Messi HAS to play higher, which means he won’t score as much.
Thank you, Perry @21. That highlight made my day.
It’s funny that you make a comparison to Barry Sanders. I recently got into a conversation with some of my foreign friends about whether football is just about running into people, and so I pulled out a Barry Sanders highlight video to show that it isn’t. They said “oh, he’s kind of like Lionel Messi, except he carries the ball.”
Following up on Deacon’s point at 19…there are two types of diving. One type is when you’re fouled but want to make sure the ref notices it. The more problematic type is the flop when there is no fould but only incidental contact (or even no contact at all).
I have no problem with the former. The ref can’t see everything (I’m of the opinion that soccer games should have another ref, with each being responsible for one half of the field) and calling his attention to a legit foul seems just to me. It’s the second type that is really odious and that should be got rid of. Some version of Bill’s plan @ 13 might be a good idea.
I do not know how you can refer to Messi as the best platyer in the world, or even the best player in the World Cup so far, when he does not even have a goal yet. I have watched him play, and his ball-handling skills are very good, but what Messi lacks is finishing capbility, or killer instinct. Argentina has managed to win despite lack of significant contributions from Messi during this cup.
@39 Jeff, you have got to be kidding me. Oliver Kahn was, deservedly, the World Cup MVP in 2002. He did not score a single goal.
Messi definitely has a killer instinct, he’s just not surrounded by as good a team now as he usually is with Barça.
@ 39
That’s like saying Peyton Manning can’t be the best player in the NFL because he didn’t score any touchdowns. Most of the time, goals are scored by a team effort, not just one player’s effort. And often the player scoring the goal has less to do with the goal than other players on the team.
Messi scored 42 goals for Barca last season in 41 games. Either you don’t watch football much or you’re just trying to stir things up.
The only thing lacking in his finishing is his size. He’s never going to be the classic target man in the box.
While we’re trying to eliminate diving from soccer, can we do the same in basketball? I mean, really, do you need to flop in order to get the charge called? Oh….yeah, I suppose you do.
“One somewhat cynical soccer commentator told me that what I need to understand is that every single goal, even the most brilliant of them, is the result of an error somewhere along the way.”
Joe, I’m curious, was it Roy Hodgson who said this to you? I know I’ve read about him saying the same previously.
I played soccer as a young American whose father was stationed in Germany. I grew to love the sport but turned away once I got back to the U.S. and the holy trinity of football, basketball and baseball.
This year, thanks to a plucky U.S. squad and Messi, I’ve reunited with the sport. Thanks for the post, Joe.
P.S. Get rid of the diving and institute instant replay and I’d wager more Americans would tune in.
Nonsense, Jeff.
Messi:
- was the top scorer in La Liga this past season
- fourth highest scorer the previous season
- top scorer in the Champion’s league the past two seasons
- scored in the champions league final against ManU the year before last
- scored in the Club World Cup final
At 23, he already has 88 league goals (not counting Cup, Champions League or anything else). The all-time leading La Liga goal scorer finished with 252 goals. If Messi averages just 23 goals (not unreasonable considering he had 34 this year) over the next 5 years, he’ll have over 200 and he’ll be among the top 8 of all time at 28. He’ll only need to average 10 goals over the next five years, taking him through year 33, to become La Liga’s all-time leading scorer.
The reason there is so much diving in soccer is because there is so much reward for your team if you can trick the ref.
A penalty kick in most games is about the equivalent of maybe 40 free throws in a basketball game. If in basketball, a shooter got to take 40 FTs if he were fouled on a three-point attempt, then every basketball player would flop to the floor on every jumper, whether anyone came near him or not.
To cut down on diving, make it less rewarding. Move the penalty spot back to the edge of the area, so that penalties go from 90% likely scores to 50% likely scores. This also lets the goalkeeper have much more impact on PKs, which seems fair.
But most soccer fans wouldn’t want that change, most are purists of the highest level and have no interest in rule changes, especially ANY suggested by Americans.
For example, there’s no reason that the time of the match can’t be kept on a stadium clock, with the ref signaling starts and stops, so that everyone can easily know exactly how much time is left, but soccer doesn’t do it that way, never has and never will. Too much like American football, so no way.
So the referee will continue to have too much impact on the game, and the end of close games will continue to seem kind of shady and arbitrary and up to the whims of the ref.
Bill Sitton @ #13:
Completely agree. Your proposed solution is to common sensical and elegant that it will never be adopted. I’ve been arguing for some variation of it for the NHL whenever someone argues that you need to keep fighting to cut down on players taking liberties on the ice. Post facto review/penalties would take care of this. If players got hurt financially/games played for spearing/slashing/taking excessive liberties before turtling after the fact, you would considerably cut own on these activities and further reduce the “need” to fight.
[...] -While the best player in U.S. soccer history may be hitting paydirt, scored three goals in the World Cup and is heading home early, the best player in the world has yet to score a goal in South Africa. Still, as Joe Posnanski tells us, you can’t let that take away from the genius of Messi. [...]
@39- You need to watch more than the World Cup to make the determination of who’s the best player in the world. Watch him for Barca. “Lack of finish ability” is not one of his flaws. He scored more goals than is reasonable for normal humans. And you need to watch more than goal scoring to determine who is the best at the World Cup. He influences the game like no other player. He may not be having the best individual performance of the tournament. But he IS the best player at the tournament.
@12- Terry used to be the player you’re describing. Even now, though, he’d walk into the US team without even a practice session. That’s how insufficient our back line is. But in the world game… no. He’s not good enough anymore. He ships alot of goals and it would be even more noticeable if he didn’t play for Chelsea with a lot of good players cleaning up for him. Too many mistakes. Too slow. He’s not what he once was.
Agree with @39. Messi needs a little more Jeter in him — a little more of that look in his eye which tells you “no one’s stopping me.” You can have all the physical talent you want; without that Jeter/Pedroia desire, you’re just another player.
Come back to me after he’s willed Argentina to victory. With his eyes.
Re: “But it seems that it is the unofficial, informal, lower cased title of “best player in the world” that means more to people. There are a handful of players — among them Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo, Brazil’s Kaka, Spain’s Xavi or Fernando Torres, one of England’s stars like John Terry, Wayne Rooney or Steve Gerrard, Cameroon’s Samuel Eto’o, perhaps the young German Thomas Mueller — who are in the typical bar and work conversation for best player in the world. But it is Messi who, at the moment, seems to be the consensus choice, the way Albert Pujols is in baseball.”
Only if you were sitting in a bar with the friends and family of those England internationals would you hear them discussed as best in the world.
I’m a Liverpool supporter and our best player is not Gerrard but Fernando Torres…who is roughly the fourth best Spanish player. Villa, Xavi, Iniesta all vital players on a ESP squad so good that Fabregas has to play from the bench.
But your main point rings true – Messi is defo number one in my mind.
Keep up the great posts!
@32 writes “My husband just started a new job that (in part) requires him to watch all the World Cup games.”
Good gig!
What else does this job require your husband to do? Eat pizza and drink beer?
England’s Brave and Loyal John Terry = Derek Jeter, if Jeter got busted for sleeping with Posada’s wife.
Ignoring John Terry, another great article Joe. Much better than the usual “I’m not really that into soccer, but here’s my thoughts” column we’ve seen recently from American sports columnists.
You should pay close attention to the next Netherland’s match, Joe. Arjen Robben is similarily stunning to watch when he’s got the ball at this feat. And his left-footed strikes when he cuts in off the wing are a thing of beauty.
Such as this gem from the last Champions League…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-8G62eZIgo
He may be the best player in the world, but that doesn’t mean it’s a penalty for brushing up against him. The officiating was preposterous the other day. Protecting Messi is the referee’s first priority apparently. So, you’re taking the best player in the world, and you’re making him better because physical soccer isn’t allowed when it comes to defending him. Not fair. Just like it’s not fair that Steven Strasburg is getting the biggest strike zone I’ve ever seen.
I do not think it would be that hard to eliminate diving in soccer – at least it should be easy to get the worst and the bulk of it.
There are many approaches that could change it without interfering with the game’s flow.
First, FIFA should use the record of the game after it is gone to reverse cards given for a dive and to hand out cards for diving that wasn’t caught initially.
For example, the day after the match, get rid of kaka’s red card and give it to the diver who earned it for him. If Kaka deserved some response for the initial hit, change it from red to yellow but still give the red to the diver.
Also this could be used to call penalties that should have been called. Even with the simple proviso that there is no recourse to the game’s score, divers can be identified and handed cards outside the game.
Second, add another official whose task is not to be a 2nd ref per se, but to watch for dives. Once upon a time, they added helpers who watched for offsides; now they can add one with Oscar experience to watch for acting.
Third, add to the current penalty for diving:
For players – any deliberate attempt to draw a penalty falsely merits a red card. No yellow, just red.
For coaches, some accumulation of diving penalties gets them suspensions too (also without pay). After all, if the coach was not tolerating the behavior (and often even encouraging it), it would be reduced.
@55 Chris. I have not seen all of strasburg’s games but I feel confident that he is not getting the biggest strike zone ever. That was Greg Maddux, thank you very much.
Of course he had 2 things going for him – he was extremely accurate and he was a Brave, whose pitchers all got ridiculous strike zones back in the day. Well at least until the playoffs
But he routinely got 6+ inches off the corner.
Joe -
I, like you, am an American who is passably conversant in soccer appreciation. I like the sport. I follow the World Cup, but some of the subtlety clearly escapes me. That’s OK. I’m comfortable with that.
But your riff on “Messi never dive” got me thinking. There is one thing us Americans have right. We do not use the word “dive” to describe the action of trying to buy a call.
It’s not a dive. The word “dive” denotes skill and grace. Greg Louganis dives. Swans dive.
Cristiano Ronaldo? He flops.
Having no idea who Lionel Messi was, I did a little Google search.
Here’s what I found about him.
From FIFA.com:
“There has been no shortage of players billed as Diego Maradona’s successor, yet few, if any, have borne that burden with the aplomb of Lionel Messi. Blessed with a wondrous left foot, outstanding vision, near-unstoppable dribbling skills and sublime technique, Messi is a sight to behold.”
And from Barcelona’s web page:
“Messi is an excellent, sensational, unique player. He is astoundingly creative, has amazing individual skill and is able to constantly put his rivals at unease. A natural left footer, he is stunningly versatile, and can play either in the middle or on whichever of the wings required, although it is out on the right that he feels most comfortable.”
The Barcelona web page also calls him the “best player in the world” and states that in part because of his “cold blood” he is “simply the best footballer on the planet.”
Whew.
@57 – Livan Hernandez, 1997 NLCS? I hate the Braves and somehow I think that zone was a makeup for all the years Maddux and (especially) Glavine had a strike zone that started three inches outside… but it’s still the biggest travesty of a (pro-pitcher) zone I’ve seen.
As for Joe’s post, Messi is incredible, although I was a little disappointed when I saw him dive in one of Argentina’s group play games. One of the true flaws of soccer, as much as I enjoy the game, is the diving – there was a play in the 2006 World Cup where Messi bulled through two defenders in the box and a finally a third dispossessed him, and the announcer’s take was “when he gets a little more experience he’ll know to go down there, it would’ve drawn a penalty”. That points to a fundamental flaw in the way the game is played.
I like the ideas for post-match card reassessment for diving and fouls, tho. I think that’d go a long way toward rooting the practice out of the sport.
[...] game and trying to understand. I am here to looking for excellence after reading a story about Lionel Messi. As many football games as I have watched in this world cup (about half) I haven’t (yet) seen [...]
@56 Cardinal Mike: The problem with making diving an automatic red card is that then the ref would be less likely to call it unless he was absolutely completely 100% sure.
@59 Mark Daniel: Yeah, the Barcelona webpage isn’t much for modesty.
Well done, Brilliant Readers. A great discussion of diving/flopping on the day that Portugual got a no-touch red card today b/c of a dive by Spain. It was in the 89th minute, so doubtful it affected the final outcome, but geez, if you get red carded when you don’t touch anyone, then something should be done about it.
@ 63
I really can’t feel bad if CR9 goes home, in part, because of a dive. That’s just karma.
Though, as you said, it had no effect on the outcome.
I was living in Barcelona when Messi joined the first team, and it was a joy to watch him grow as a player. After watching the first game, my friends and I knew he would be great, though none of us could have imagined how great he has become, all at 23 years of age. He is such a joy to watch. I find myself laughing at how ridiculous some of his moves are. Yes, there is the occassional dive, but he often is running through 2 or more defenders at a time, and absorbs a very large number of tackles each game without going down. I hope he continues to mature and grow as a player for many years to come, and that one day we all can tell our children and grandchildren that we saw Messi play.
Another nickname for Messi is “La Pulga” or “the flea” due to his size and speed.
I would put Zlatan Ibrahimovic in the best player in the world conversation too.
@60 Jon – that was certainly an example of the worst strike zone ever but that was all eric gregg all the time – he was always awful behind the plate to any pitcher.
Livan never got the K zone maddux did – or glavine, you are certainly correct about adding him
@62 Josh, note that I was suggesting that most calls for diving should come after the game when the replays are in and it is generally obvious. I didn’t say it specifically but it does seem clear that punishing flops after the fact with the replay running is far superior.
And would result in far fewer flops after being implemented.
You guys need to simplify it for me, if Pele is a 10, Messi is a…..
By the way, I’m not joking…if Pele is a 10, does that make Messi a 9.5? I know alot about sports but this is the list of all the soccer players I’ve ever heard of:
Alexi Lalas
Cobi Jones
Tony Meola
Brandi Chastain
Mia Hamm
Clint Dempsey
Landon Donovan
Tim Howard
Diego Maradona
Ronaldinho(bonus points for knowing him and the Ronaldo(s) aren’t the same person?)
Ronaldo part 1 (without hair)
Ronaldo part 2(with hair)
Freddy Adu
Wayne Rooney
Zidane(had to google soccer headbutt for that)
Pele
The guy who had the orange afro
David Beckham
Uh, and Messi.
@ Mike in Hawaii
If Pele is a 10, Messi is a number rapidly aproaching 10…and one that might not stop there.
Tom Glavine got the widest strike zone ever.
The reason Maddox’s appeared big was the same reason that Strassburg’s does…with those pitchers, there is so much movement on the ball, that the umpire has to almost guess where it winds up.
But with Glavine, it was just plain sickening.
As for soccer, what is the most famous moment in the sport’s history? The Maradona “Hand of God” thing. A total cheat.
Take away the unbelievable ridiculousness of the flopping, the diving, and Donaghy-type refs, and you might have a real sport.
I am: An American. A baseball nut. A football fan. Anti-NBA/BCS-Basketball. A passionate non-soccer fan.
I watched about 15 minutes of the US/Ghana game, off and on.
My favorite 5 minutes?
- 60 seconds of US desperation
- A ref approaches a dying Ghana player
- Ref allows him a minute to get up, 30 seconds for a stretcher, 30 more for a safe place to take him, a minute for him to run back on the field and another minute for him to meander, to the opposite sideline for a sub.
That was the last 5 minutes I watched. It will be the last 5 minutes of soccer I watch until the final 5 minutes of whatever year the US is ahead by two in the final.
@72 Garrett Hawk, I was going to type the same thing. I’m not sure how hard Maddux ever threw, but I watched a few games in the late 90s and early 00s where he was barely cracking 90, but had tremendous lateral movement on his fastball and pin pint control. When a pitcher is moving fast, the catcher doesn’t move his glove, and the ump isn’t totally sure due to sharp movement, that hand is coming up. It’s human instinct. I’m not saying Glavine didn’t have great control or movement, but in my limited opinion, I don’t think he had what Maddux had, but he knew how to work the umps. When the strike zone shrunk on the edges, Glavine’s success shrunk with it much more than Maddux – and Maddux was a righty while Glavine was a lefty.
@39 Jeff, you’re either trying to start a stupid argument or you don’t possess even moderate intelligence. Argentina has played 4 total games. So what Messi doesn’t have a goal. It happens. Soccer isn’t a high scoring game and it’s a very team oriented. In such a small sample size and in such a low scoring sport, it’s not surprising that even the best players wouldn’t score. And it’s not like Argentina is suffering due to Messi’s nonexistent goals. They lead the World Cup in team goals with 10 (Brazil is 2nd with 8).
@50 Dave E, brilliant sarcasm. I almost didn’t pick it up.
You know, we Americans like to bash soccer players for the histrionics and dives. BUT… I vividly remember an incident at a basketball practice in the opening months of 2005 when I was a HS Senior playing for a 500-win coach. I was standing in the lane as our small freshman point guard drove down the middle. I stepped up to take a charge and allowed the young man to run into me. I could not fall because he was neither big enough nor moving fast enough for me to tip over in that situation. My coach got very upset and told me that if I’d just fallen down and “sold it” it would have been a charge. I’m hardly the only former basketball player whose gotten this same speech, at least I think.
So my point is this… yes, of course soccer players overdo it and make fools of themselves half the time. But every single basketball player who has taken 1 or more charges has probably at some point taken a dive.
Oh, and Lionel Messi is a force of nature. What an astonishing player.
@77 – surprisingly enough, most of us despise Duke basketball, Vlade Divac, and all the other NBA floppers just as much as we do divers in soccer.
The difference is that floppers on the basketball court are still the anomaly rather than the norm.
“There are a handful of players — among them … one of England’s stars like John Terry … or Steve Gerrard — who are in the typical bar and work conversation for best player in the world”
Joe, I love your writing but you still have a lot to learn about football
@73- Well done. You watched 15 minutes and found what you were looking for. The football/soccer community is grieved that you won’t be joining our number. Really… what a loss.
[...] Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » The Genius of Messi [...]
I once watched 3 minutes of what American’s call “football”. The ref let the team that was ahead stand around in a circle for 40 seconds and then one of their players just dropped to one knee without trying to score. During this “action” the ref did not allow any of the opposing teams players to even try and take possession of the ball. They just had to stand and watch the clock while the cowards on the team that was leading refused to even run a play. The cowards pulled this stunt three times and then with 30 seconds left they all started celebrating the victory.
That will be the last American football I watch…at least until the Cowboys training camp starts up in 24 days.
I’ve been trying to watch some World Cup, and yeah I didn’t even know there was a word for it but the diving is ludicrous. Almost as ludicrous as the general level of officiating. Do those refs have an incredibly powerful union or something? Or is the sport just impossible to officiate?
re diving: it’s the B-movie grade acting that gets to me. I can understand guys falling down. I can even understand a guy taking advantage of contact with his ankle. But for chrissake, you haven’t been shot. Go down, bounce back up, play the damn game.
re football as a game of failure: Yeah, that’s true. American football is a game of success; the average rush gains enough yards that if all you did was rush, you’d usually get a first down (except that if all you did was rush, you wouldn’t gain those yards because the defense would be expecting it). Most quarterbacks complete over half their passes. And that’s why you don’t see too many 14-7 football games.
Here’s something I came up with to explain the thing most people hate about soccer (after diving, of course):
Imagine a baseball game between two teams that can’t hit their way out of a wet paper sack, in which two guys who are barely fifth starters manage to pitch into the ninth in a scoreless tie, but nobody cares because they’ve all switched over to an NCIS rerun.
That’s a nil-nil football match.
On the other hand, imagine a baseball game with two HOF-caliber pitchers on the mound. They give up a few hits here and there, but nobody comes around to score. Maybe there’s an awesome play at the plate to save a run, a couple of nice catches at the warning track, a handful of web gems in the infield contributing to an inning-ending double play or two… and it’s 0-0 going into the ninth, and there’s not a single person falling asleep.
That’s another nil-nil football match. They aren’t all created equal.
A number of people have said a post match review of flopping and an appropriate handing out of yellow and red cards (and pulling back cards wrongly handed out). I think this is excellent. But I think it could also be done at half time as well so the affect is more immediate.
And Jeff @39. you having a joke, right?
@78 – If you can find me even ONE basketball game in the last 20 years – NCAA or NBA – in which there are not multiple flops for a charge, I will eat my shoe.
I have observed these comments, ranging from very meticulate opionions expressed, either for or against “flopping” in soccer, and shooting me down for my comments aboutr Messi. You say that am I being misleading because Messi has not scored yet in the Cup, and goal scoring is overrated? Well, you compare Messi to the best soccer players in the World?: Messi so far in this Cup: zero goals scored; Gerd Muller – 14 total goals: Pele – 12 total goals:Roberto Baggio – 9 total goals:Hristo Stiochvok – 6 goals:Gabriel Batitusta – 10 total goals:Ronaldo – 8 total goals.
Messi the best soccer player in this World Cup? I think not. He is a good player, but, like Barry Sanders, he appears to be alot of style and not much substance (so far) . Yeah, yeah, I know it is not all about goal scoring, but if JoePo wanted to write about the best soccer player in the world in this cup, he could have done better writing about someone else (who has actually produced to help his team win).
Oh, and I understand the best players aren’t always about goal scoring, but Messi is an offensive player, is he not? Again, I am not trying to denigrate Messi, but let’s stop all this “best player in the world” nonesense, until Argentina actually gets to the Finals (with Messi leading the charge, eh?), ok? Then I’ll be the first to eat my words…
Thank you, Joe. Outstanding post. Are you going to have any youtube videos of you haggling with sellers in a South African marketplace?
@ Jeff. The problem is that your arguement seems to start and stop with goal scoring – He CAN’T be the best because he hasn’t scored. There’s somewhat more to it that that.
And now in point 88 I think you are also unwilling to bestow greatness unless his team also gets to the final. So the best player in the world must belong to the best team in a particular tornament? Ignoring his other body of work? And ignoring how his 10 team mates measure up?
If you don’t think hes the best that’s perfectly fine. But your reasoning is “simple”.
Frog, it’s not that I don’t think Messi is one of the best current players in soccer – it’s just that i think he is overrated. Joe Po started this all when he waxed poetically about how awesome Messi is, JoePo even admittedly stated how little he knows about soccer players, and I was just trying to inject a little reality check into the conversation. You say Messi cannot be held accontable that Argentina has only played 4 games thus far, and Argentina has not made it to the final in this cup, because the games are not over yet. Fair enough, but Maradona’s Argentina teams, and Pele’s Brazil teams, and Zinedane’s French teams DID make it to the finals with those players scoring multiple goals and assists; so I just think it is folly to compare Messi to those great players – so far.
It IS about how well you do in the WC – for example, Landon Donavan has more goals and assists than Messi, but nobody would really argue that Donovan has necesasrily had a better cup than Messi – the U.S. is out of it while Argentina moves on.
Messi is a good player, but something tells me that Argentina would be in the position it is in now – with or without Messi. I will continue to watch the Argentina team play, and maybe Messi will break through yet.
Jeff, you’ve managed to hit on the exact reason why you’re misguided:
“…something tells me that Argentina would be in the position it is in now – with or without Messi.”
This exhibits a complete lack of understanding as to what Messi has done for his team, even though he hasn’t scored a goal himself. In baseball terms, in this WC Messi has been the guy who moves runners from first to third or drives them in, but hasn’t crossed the plate himself. In American football terms, he’s the receiver who’s getting double- and triple-teamed, allowing the other receivers to run wild. He’s created an insane number of chances for his teammates simply by being there, and has contributed a great deal to Argentina’s success.
We’re not talking “grit” or “chemistry” or “productive outs” here: we’re talking about actual production.
And it should also probably be noted that this is most likely part of Maradona’s gameplan.
Tim Lincecum doesn’t look easy.
@91 You understand these aren’t the only 4 games ever played. Twenty minutes on youtube will show you exactly why Messi is the best player in the world and why at just 23 people see the potential he has to one day have accomplished nearly everything the greats did.
And yes, you are being misleading saying that Messi can’t be great because he hasn’t scored yet. He commands attention of the defense at all times, and has happily taken up a role much further midfield than he usually plays so that his movement and ball skills can wreak havoc on defenses and open up all kinds of other things for his teammates. And his leading the tournament in shots on goal is like Pujols going through the NLDS 0-12 with 2 robbed home runs and a few more line drives crushed right to outfielders.
There probably have been better players at this World Cup…what Diego Forlan has done for Uruguay’s attack certainly comes to mind. But Messi has been the driving force behind the most lethal offense in the tournament even in the midst of some bad luck and phenomenal keeper play.
I think you know that the argument of which team is still playing is a pretty weak one also. Put Messi on the US and our defense is still in shambles, North Korea and he’s still back in a coal mine today…any of a hundred other countries and those teams would have never made it to South Africa. You think Argentina would be fine without Messi, yet you give credit to Pele for freaking Brazil winning with him? Brazil in those days would have won almost as many games with their 3rd team. Netherlands from any year could dump their best player and make a semifinal or better.
Thomas @ #14
I said Joe’s been talking to too many Pommies (Englishmen). From that, it should be an easy deduction that the English are the ones putting up the Larry, Curly and Mo names.
@ #46: Buchholz Surfer
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no . . . a thousand times no on that stadium clock idea.
All that ridiculous time management that goes on in American sport is one of the prime reasons they do not resemble sports . . . more like chess without chairs.
Best thing for soccer is to keep Americans out of the rule-making process. Let the Yanks have a say and teams will be turning up with 50 players; every time the ball is turned over the game will be stopped so that a completely different team can take the field; every decision of the ref will be questioned; time-outs will be called . . . the list is endless.
Sepp Blatter may very well be a silly old bugger living in the past, but he’s probably caught a glimpse of the NFL and thought, “No way do I want that nonsense in my sport.”
I’d say stick a camera along the goalline for incidents such as screwed England v Germany but leave technology out of the rest of it while the match is being played.
Diving and a lot of foul play could be rubbed out by post-match video analysis. No need to issue retrospective cards, though. Just send a note to the offenders’ teams telling them that such-and-such a player’s actions in the game have been detected and noted and that the referee for his next game has been notified. Referees would be issued with a list of divers and hackers involved in their game. If a player knows he’s on the referee’s list and is liable to not be believed when he goes down (or, worse, be sent off for a deliberate dive) there’s a good chance he’ll just put his head down and play the game.
Jeff
When you dig yourself into a hole it’s usually a bad policy to continue digging – the hole just gets deeper and you get covered in crap.
As an Englishman just thought I would weigh in with comments regarding Terry, Gerrard and Rooney as “best player in the world”
John Terry is definately not the best player in the world, nor is he even in the conversation. I might argue he would be in the conversation for best defender, although I feel that might still be a bit of a stretch. A few years a go he was very good but over the past couple of years his lack of mobility has really started to affect him, especially at the international level. Best English defender is Rio Ferdinand (wish he hadn’t got injured before the World Cup)
Steven Gerrard is a very good player and would have been in the best player in the world conversation a couple of years ago but his form has dipped over the last season or so. I put this down partly to getting older and partly to playing in a very poor Liverpool team.
Wayne Rooney most definately is in the conversation for best player in the world. His form this past season has been fantastic. Obviously he had a very poor World Cup and sometimes his temper will get the better of him but his talent is undeniable.
On a different point, I love how you are trying to look into all the stats to help give you a better understanding of the game. Only problem is that some of the stats you have looked at are meaningless:
“it listed Messi as having more shots than any player here”
This is a prime example of a meaningless stat in football – any player can have a lot of shots, shooting accuracy and goal to chance ratio are far better for judging talent.
I’ve had a look at the FIFA site and the stats provided there aren’t great. A couple of the better ones to look at (beyond obvious stats like goals and assits) are:
PassCompletionRate – remember to look at how many passes a player has made when looking at this. Notice how many Spaniards rank highly here? Pass Accuracy (and indeed ball possesion) is a foundation of their success
CrossCompletionRate – again remember to look at how many crosses they have made. Normally above 30% would be considered pretty good although beware small sample sizes when looking here! Landon Donovan was excellent for USA at 38%
Goal/ShotRate – useful for looking at how efficient players have been at converting chances. Its best to look at this for the top goalscores. Robert Vittek (4goals, 36%GSR) and Gonzalo Higuain (4goals, 31% GSR) look good. I’d say Higuain was better because one of Vittek’s goals was a penalty (in theory players should always score penalties)
Hope this helps you to understand the game a bit better Joe
[...] ? ????????Joe Posnanski Blog?????????????Messi?????????C???????????????????????????????????????? [...]
[...] Posnanski (Senior Writer of Sports Illustrated) beschreibt in seinem Blog den Genius of Messi. Sehr [...]
[...] the original here: Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » The Genius of Messi This entry was posted in the world cup and tagged argentina, cape, lionel, little-bit, [...]
[...] An ode to Lionel Messi, the best footballer in the world. Messi simply does things — little things and big things — that other players here cannot do. He gets a ball in traffic, is surrounded by two or three defenders, and he somehow keeps the ball close even as they jostle him and kick at the ball. He takes long and hard passes up around his eyes and somehow makes the ball drop softly to his feet, like Keanu Reeves making the bullets fall in “The Matrix.” He cuts in and out of traffic — Barry Sanders only with a soccer ball moving with him [joshpremuda: amazing metaphor] — sprints through openings that seem only theoretical, races around and between defenders who really are running even if it only looks like they are standing still. He really does seem to make the ball disappear and reappear, like it’s a Vegas act. [...]
@39, 87, 88, 91 (Jeff) – As was typed earlier, the more you dig your rhetorical hole, the deeper you get. You may not think Messi is the best. Honestly, I’m not in position to disagree. I don’t watch close to enough soccer to know whether he is or isn’t. He appears to be in the conversation, that’s for sure. But you’re logic as to why he is not is stupid. I’m not throwing that word “stupid” around lightly. Your logic meets its definition as it is pointless, dull, annoying, bothersome, senseless, etc… yet I can’t help but to waste my time attempting to correct it.
At this point I have to believe you’re just f—ing around and don’t really believe your argument as it is bafflingly dumb to use four games to judge who is the best player in the world. And it’s even more bafflingly dumb to use four soccer games to judge who is the best player in the world where the player in question is an offensive player who hasn’t scored, but his team has won all four and leads the World Cup in scoring largely due to his presence and play. But even if you want to use those games, under your further logic of defining a player’s greatness with his ability to produce to help his team win, the goal scorer is not the only player who produces. The other players often contribute to each goal (unless you see a play like the Messi made on the link at comment #21). Argentina leads the World Cup in team goals scored with 10, 2 more than Brazil. He is responsible for helping create many of those goals.
Hell, look at most goals in this World Cup. They’re scored by one player, but a chain of events helped make it happen. The first goal Germany scored against England was mainly caused by a tremendous kick from Germany’s goalie and the player that scored only had to touch/deflect the ball once. The US’s winning goal against Algeria was a four man break started by the Howard, to Donovan, to Altidore, and followed by Donovan off the rebound.
You mention you will eat your words if Argentina gets to the finals. First of all, you’re eating them now simply because how illogical they are, but whether or not Argentina makes it to the final means very little in terms of determining the greatness of one of their players. Again, soccer is a very low scoring team game. When Argentina plays Germany and possibly Spain, the final outcome of each game could very easily be determined by one or two players on the losing team making a key mistake that costs a goal or a ref making an atrocious call or noncall. This often happens and since it does, simply saying if the team of Argentina goes to the finals then you will eat your words and Messi may then be the best is post hoc ergo propter hoc nonsense.
This is ridiculous. I have a better chance of teaching a bag of hammers something.
@96, as I wrote above, “but soccer doesn’t do it that way, never has and never will. Too much like American football, so no way. So the referee will continue to have too much impact on the game, and the end of close games will continue to seem kind of shady and arbitrary and up to the whims of the ref.”
I prefer reality and fairness to Fergie Time, but as I wrote above, I realize that others are much less concerned with transparency and accuracy and instead prioritize avoiding anything similar American football. (or basketball– that would be a great sport if there were no scoreboard clock and the referee just kept the time on his watch, wouldn’t it?)
I don’t see how making the actual end time of the game clear and transparent to everyone involved would lead to 50 players in the game, time outs and two platoons of substitutes, but you’re apparently not American, so you must be right.
But at least the current system of arbitrarily ending the game whenever the ref feels like it, after numerous faked injuries, leisurely substitutions and running to the corner flag and tapping the ball around isn’t “ridiculous time management.” No, it’s pure and sporting.
@73 St. Cloud Gopher:
You do realize that the ball is in play in a football (soccer) game for roughly 90 minutes, whereas the ball is in play in a typical NFL game for around 12-13 minutes (in fact, less time than it is in baseball). Yeah, there ain’t much that’s as exciting as watching two teams stand around for 60 seconds or so discussing the last play. What? They’re discussing the NEXT play? Well, then, I apologize — THAT’s exciting.
And for those of you bitching and moaning about Tom Glavine (and, to a lesser exent, Greg Maddux), you need to get over it. First of all, they are both retired. Are you equally as upset — still — about the “Jordan Rules”?
Second, do you really think and/or believe that ALL the umpires in MLB conspired to give Glavine alone (or the entire Braves staff alone, if you prefer) a strike zone that was significantly wider than that they gave EVERY other pitcher? Really? Why? What possible motive would any single umpire, much less all of them, have for giving preferential treatment to Glavine?
As we all know, strike zones are somewhat fungible. They were particularly so prior to the umpire reorganization (though I notice we seem to be drifting back to a strike zone that ends somewhere south of the belt buckle), which is when Glavine pitched. Did it ever occur to you that Glavine pitched to the strike zone he was given? That maybe that is what made him such an outstanding pitcher?
Over 50 years ago, when I first started my serious commitment to baseball, I remember reading a story in “Sport” magazine about Warren Spahn. In it, more than one player/coach/manager talked about how Spahn would throw a pitch 1″ outside the strike zone in the 1st inning. If he got a strike, he would then throw a pitch 2″ outside the zone. If that was a strike… well, you can figure out the rest. Again, maybe that’s why Spahn has the most wins of any lefty and is in the HoF.
The idea that Glavine was getting some special treatment by all of the umps in MLB is conspiracy theory of the highest order — meaning it has the most far-fetched conclusion and the least amount of real evidence.
And @Jon #60 — thanks for pointing out the Livan Hernandez “gem”. Without a doubt, the worst officiating (by Eric Cartman — I mean, Gregg. I was confused because they are both big-boned) I have ever seen in any sport in over 50 years of viewing. And I include this year’s World Cup in my comparison.
I was watching the 1997 WS highlights on the MLB channel a while ago. Each year’s highlights also includes the earlier playoffs; each segment ends with a shot of the last pitch of the game — except the end of the Marlins-Braves series, which ended with a closeup of Hernandez’ face. I guess even MLB is too embarassed to actually show that pitch. The game ended with a called strike 3 to Fred McGriff that bounced in the right-hand batter’s box — ridiculous beyond belief.
@105 David
I’ve seen the numbers you speak of. I agree that football and baseball have a crazy amount of down time.
However, that down time is needed because of the exertion of energy.
Pitchers can’t throw very long without a 30-second break.
Running backs/receivers have a long way to go to get back to the huddle after a sprint.
Your comment would be fine if my comment was about the boring aspect of teammates passing the ball back and forth in the backfield for two minutes.
My problem is the time running during “injuries” and after scores. That is ludicrous. That also takes away the “ball in play for 90 minutes” argument. After a goal, can the goalie get the ball and pass it out to his teammates while the celebration time creeps into parade-length?
@ #104: Buchholz Surfer
Soccer has an official noting stoppages; as the 90 minute mark nears the extra time to make up for these is notified to the referee and he sets his watch. When that extra time is up he stops the game, usually when the ball is in flight and away from the goal. A fair system.
I don’t watch much NFL but I often come across NBA matches when waiting for baseball to start. For some reason, ten minutes to play takes 30 minutes. Joe had a clip up a while back showing some dopey player celebrating too soon and creating a turnover. The game was held up while all sorts of officials gathered around to check the time remaining . . . was it 1.9 seconds, was it 2.4 seconds, was it 0.3 seconds – back and forth, back and forth; I’ve an idea NASA was called in to adjudicate.
All that clockwork was as stupid as the player’s ballsup.
The NFL is an offshoot of rugby union, wholly modified by Americans. Fair enough, if that’s the way you want to play the oval ball game go for it. But your game bears very little resemblance to the original. Eighty players turning up for an eleven-a-side(or is it nine-a-side?) match for instance, all that padding, unlimited substitutions (the whole team is switched when attack turns to defence – explain that to me), endless on-field committee meetings, every play being choreographed and called by the coaches (are the players allowed no say?), one guy all togged up like one of Darth Vader’s troopers who comes on solely to kick at goal (why can’t one of the on-field players do it?), and every second calculated down to four decimal points. And there’s obviously more.
The people who run soccer would have seen how Americans took rugby and added layer after layer of modifications to it until it became this bizarre thing, this non-sport, this outing for automatons, and said no thanks, not for us.
They want a game that flows, a game where the eleven who took the field at the start are pretty much the eleven who finish the game — their stamina as well as their skill having been tested.
When I started playing rugby, substitutions were allowed only in the case of injury; a player had to be pretty much carried off before the ref would allow a replacement. In internationals, no subs were allowed; if somebody dislocated his shoulder
he’d be sent out to the wing and told to defend as best he could.
That changed in the late 1960s and there’s been an incremental creep until today seven substitutions are allowed, for no reason at all. Has it improved the game? Not at all.
America has one decent sport, baseball. It’s as good as anything on the planet – although, it has to be said, over-coached to the nth degree.
God help other sports if the Yanks ever get hold of the rulebooks.
Graphite #107: “In internationals, no subs were allowed; if somebody dislocated his shoulder he’d be sent out to the wing and told to defend as best he could.”
Do you really think that’s a good thing?
Graphite said:
“Soccer has an official noting stoppages; as the 90 minute mark nears the extra time to make up for these is notified to the referee and he sets his watch.”
Yes I know that. My point is, what is the problem with letting everyone else know how much time is left? Why keep it a secret?
“When that extra time is up he stops the game, usually when the ball is in flight and away from the goal. A fair system.”
Do you really believe “Fergie Time” is a fair and good way to handle the length of games? I couldn’t agree less with that.
You’ve made it clear that you don’t like the NFL or NBA, and that’s fine, but nothing you said indicates that merely transparently keeping the time of the game on a scoreboard in full view of everyone would bring about a single one of the changes you loathe.
The end of NBA games is silly, but that’s because of the stupid rules they added to basketball to drag the game out. College basketball doesn’t have the stupid rule about getting the ball at halfcourt after a timeout, and the end of college basketball games are just fine.
I can only imagine if college basketball refs kept the game time on their watches, with no scoreboard clock, and just held up their hand when the game was over. Duke has the ball, and they just happen to have just enough time to get their winning shot off? That would be a joke.
“Joe had a clip up a while back showing some dopey player celebrating too soon and creating a turnover. The game was held up while all sorts of officials gathered around to check the time remaining . . . was it 1.9 seconds, was it 2.4 seconds, was it 0.3 seconds – back and forth, back and forth; I’ve an idea NASA was called in to adjudicate.”
But NONE of that would happen in soccer if they just kept the time on a scoreboard clock. The game wouldn’t be changed in any way, except everyone would know exactly when the game was going to end, end every game would be 90 minutes, unlike now, when some are 89 and some are 91. (And in the end, the basketball refs got the time right, they didn’t just throw out a guess and end the game randomly, too early or two late, depending on their whims.)
When I played soccer, (for 25 years, until ruining both knees in separate soccer injuries) we didn’t have a scoreboard clock, but the official gave us a countdown of how much time was left– 30 seconds, 20 seconds, ten, etc. Because it was fair and it made it clear he wasn’t just being arbitrary and favoring either team. In FIFA matches, the teams and the fans should get the same information, or the end of games looks arbitrary and fishy.
This isn’t a huge problem with soccer, but it’s a very easy fix, one that would stop the perception of unfairness and bias at the end of games. It would change none of the flow of the game and wouldn’t cause any stoppages. The only reason not to do it is stubbornness.
Buchholz Surfer @ #109:
When the 90 minutes are up, a sideline official holds up a board indicating how many minutes of extra time will be added. This is visible to anyone in the stadium with average vision. In any game I’ve ever watched on TV, the camera has shown this sign.
Only the most pedantic of pedants could want to know the time remaining to the fourth decimal point, as in American sports.
Plenty of people, myself included, like sport to be a little rough around the edges, just as life is.
Leave that sliderule stuff to the engineers, architects, surgeons and the like.
Jeremy the Math Guy @ #108:
“Do you really think that’s a good thing?”
No. It was stupid. Absolutely stupid. Which is why in New Zealand and Australia, playing under local rules, substitutes were allowed when injuries occurred. Matches between countries, however, were played under international rules and as the old farts who ran the game in the British Isles outvoted the antipodean countries, their wishes held sway until the late 1960s. Apart from Wales and to a lesser degree Ireland, the game was a toffs’ sport, played in the public schools (i.e., private schools) and universities by the upper classes. Those guys didn’t play the game with the ferocity of the colonials and injuries were rare.
But it is one thing to allow an injured man to be replaced and a totally different thing to replace the entire on-field personnel depending on whether you’re attacking or defending.
I think I’d rather have no subs at all than turn up to play with 5x the number of people required.
The desire for a split-second game clock seems to be cut from the same cloth as the desire for spreadsheet-worthy stats in order to pass quantitative judgement on Messi. I’m happy to pass on both. At his best during the La Liga campaign, he’s brought joy to those watching: if you get a chance to see the victories over Valencia or Real Zaragoza in their entirety, please do.
I’d add one supplementary point: Messi brings that Barça season to the World Cup, with no sign that his form has peaked. That places opposition defenders in the unenviable position of having every dribble through the back line, every shot from the D and every run into space flashing through their heads when they face him.
Graphite said: “When the 90 minutes are up, a sideline official holds up a board indicating how many minutes of extra time will be added. This is visible to anyone in the stadium with average vision. In any game I’ve ever watched on TV, the camera has shown this sign.”
And then the ref arbitrarily decides whether the match will last 91 minutes or 89 minutes. The sign says 4 minutes, but no one knows whether that’s going to actually be 3:17 or 4:59. It’s up to the whims of the ref. That’s the whole issue. It’s not a case of splitting seconds, it’s often a case of 30 or more seconds, even minutes sometimes, more than enough time for a team to go the length of the field and generate one or more scoring chances.
But there’s no point continuing on like this, you’ve made it clear that you value not being like the Americans more than fairness, transparency and accuracy. I’m the opposite. I like sports to be as fair as possible for both teams, and to not have the appearance of referee bias. You want the sport to be “rough around the edges,” though I notice you also made suggestions of your own for changes in the game. I guess you want to get rid of some rough edges but not others.
Like I said above, this isn’t a huge problem, but it is an issue and it’s easily correctable, but it’s never going to happen, mostly because of stubbornness.
@Buchholz Surfer #109, 113:
I will agree that not making the time visible to all is a bit of a bother, but then again, all you need to do is add 45 minutes to the time on your watch when the game started. I will also agree that the “added time” (aka “stoppage time” and “injury time”) calculation by the referee is at least obscure. OTOH, if you are even a moderately serious fan, you can probably figure out how much that is going to be before it is officially announced.
But when and where in the world have you ever seen a game end after 89 minutes (or anything less than 90 minutes)? Seriously: when and where did this happen? Apparently, it is something you think happens with some regularity, as you mentioned it in both of these comments. I defy you to produce any evidence of such a game — and no, I do not count peewee or sandlot games, nor those shortened by mechanical or electrical failure.
Football (soccer) games are 90 minutes plus whatever added time the referee adds. Period.
[...] Joe Posnanski » Blog Archive » Tһе Genius οf Messi [...]
@ Curtis said at 7:17 am on June 29th, 2010:
Terry is a good center back, one of the best in the world, and man the US could have used him something fierce. But a center back is never going to be considered the best player for much the same reason a nose tackle will never be considered the greatest American football player – the range of skills you are called on to have is just more limited. You can only affect games in particular ways. No, the glory boys will always be strikers and attacking midfielders, quarterbacks and running backs.
——
Wrong. Paolo Maldini, the greatest defender of all time, a man who at times could have been mistaken for a brick wall, was considered by many to be the best player in the world in 1993 to 1995.