v2 G.O.A.T Round 2 Match 9

Today's second match up will see Diego Maradonna face off against both Edwin Moses, Daley Thompson.

Please vote for the participant you believe has achieved the most in sport

Below are the previous round 1 articles written by forum members

Please leave a comment as to why you voted

Diego Maradonna- Football- Championed by- Hero

One day, Lionel Messi will possibly prove to be the global game's greatest player, but not yet, and certainly not just because he has blown the all-time number of goals in a calendar year. Messi may be scoring goals at a rate rarely seen since Dixie Dean's heyday, but he does have the advantage of being at the sharp end of probably the greatest club side of all time. Take Messi out of Barcelona and what do you have?

We already have an answer.

In the last World Cup Messi failed to score in five matches as Argentina lost in the quarter-final to Germany whilst his Barca teammates have lifted the Euro twice and the World Cup. It is argued that the Champions League is now a higher standard than the World Cup (not that the presence of Apoel Nicosia in the quarter-finals adds much weight to that view). Whether it is or not is irrelevant when judging Messi because he is playing for the best team in the competition, a team which even without him would be formidable. A truly great player is capable of turning a moderate team into a winning one. Like Diego Maradona.

English attitudes towards Maradona are understandably coloured by the "Hand of God" goal but his notoriety should not obscure his greatness. Maradona turned base materials into gold on both the club and international stage. Napoli were a shambles when they somehow found the cash to buy him in 1984. Fighting relegation had become a way of life with the club surviving by a point the previous season. Maradona turned them into title contenders and in 1986/87 they won the first scudetto in the club's history. A second Serie A title, and Napoli's first European prize, the Uefa Cup, followed. Since Maradona left, the club have not won a trophy.

Maradona was similarly central to Argentina's 1986 World Cup success. Ten of their 14 goals were scored or created by him, and his five goals included superb ones against England and Belgium of the type now associated with Messi. In the final, after West Germany had come back from 2-0 down to level, he supplied the pass for Jorge Burruchaga to score the winner. All this while carrying a knee injury which had threatened to rule him out of the tournament.

Brian Glanville, in The Story of the World Cup, his history of the competition since 1930, wrote: "It will always be remembered as Maradona's World Cup, seldom has a player, even Pele, so dominated the competition. In an era when individual talent was at a premium, defensive football more prevalent than ever, Maradona – squat, muscular, explosive, endlessly adroit – showed that a footballer of genius could still prevail."

This context is another factor in Maradona's primacy. He formerly played in an era when the tactics were negative and the tackling brutal. Maradona's relative lack of impact at Barcelona, and later decline, had much to do with the injuries he suffered including the notorious ankle-break by Andoni Goikoetxea, the "Butcher of Bilbao". Only after the 1990 World Cup, when Maradona carried to the final an Argentine team which was as guilty of these sins as any, did Fifa begin the crackdown which has allowed players like Messi to flourish.

Simply put Maradona was the best player in the most global sport and therefore rightfully should challenge for the biggest prize of all, the G.O.A.T.

Edwin Moses- Athletics- Champion by 88Chris05

122 races, spread over 9 years, 9 months and 9 days.

That's how long Edwin Moses went undefeated in the 400m hurdles. It is by far the most awe-inspring, dominant and lasting winning streak in the history of track and field, and must surely still rank as one of the most remarkable feats in the history of any sport. Michael Johnson in the 400m, Jan Zelezny in the javelin, Keninesa Bekele in the 10,000m - there have been some athletes who have made an even their own, but none of them managed it to the same extend that Moses did.

Edwin Moses, born in Ohio in 1955, was just that little bit different to many other track athletes of his era, or indeed of any other. He was a vegan, first off, and he insisted on keeping a trademark 13-stride pattern to his running between hurdles, waiving the convential technique of either 14 strides or, at least, adapting from 13 to 14 for the bends. He was also a demonstrative campaigner (rather than just a saying but never doing one) against the use of PEDs in sport; indeed, as an athletics administrator, he played a key role in the developemtn and introduction of out-of-competition testing.

Some athletes covered in this process have left an indelible impression on sport through their colourful personalities or roundabout political influence as they have through their purely physical achievements. Granted, Moses' appeal lies solely in his consistent excellent on the track and not much else more, but what an incredible level of excellence it was. He was the Olympic champion in the 400m hurdles in Montreal in 1976, and again in 1984 in Los Angeles. Sure things seldom exist in sport, but it would have required a rival of Moses' to scale some incredibly long odds to deny him a gold medal in Moscow in 1980 as well, had the USA not boycotted the Games. However, even aged thirty-three and certainly a few years removed from his prime, Moses was able to add a bronze medal in the 1988 final in Seoul. He is one of only four men to have won the Olympic 400m hurdles title twice (again, the it's worth repeating that it was surely only America's 1980 boycott which prevented him from standing alone in this regard), but absolutely nobody else has won a medal in three separate Olympic finals in the event.

Moses was also the world champion twice in his discipline, striking gold at the inaugural edition of the championships in 1983 in Helsinki and again in 1987 in Rome. Once more, nobody has outdone Moses' two world titles in the 400m hurdles, despite the fact that he first World Championships didn't take place until Moses was well in to his career and also that Moses competed in an era where these Championships took place only once every four years, rather than the once every two years schedule that we see today.

However, as with all of the great track and field athletes, the medals alone don't quite convey what Moses meant and still means to his event. Just as men like Usain Bolt and Sergei Bubka have expanded the parameters of what sports fans thought was possible the the 100m and pole vault respectively, Moses helped usher in new targets for the 400m hurdles which, by convention wisdom, just shouldn't have been achievable in his time. Before Moses' arrival on the world scene, the Everest of 400m hurdles running was to break the 48 second barrier. Only one man, in fact, had ever done this; John Akki-Bua of Uganda, who had clocked a world best of 47.82 seconds. However, by the time Moses was done, 400m hurdles runners were daring to dream of cracking the 47 second barrier. To the uneducated eye, one whole second seems like nothing. But as anyone in the know can tell you, to reduce the expected gold standard of a one-lap event, hurdles or no, by such a margin and in such a short amount of time is a wonderful feat.

In fact, Moses' world record reign of sixteen years remains one of the longest in the history of track and field. He started off with a 47.64 in the Montreal Olympics of 1976, improved on that mark with 47.45 the following year, took it down further to 47.13 in Milan in 1980 and then, finally, ran a barely believable 47.02 in 1983. As of today, Moses has run 25 of the fastest 400m hurdles times ever recorded - and this is a full quarter of a century after his retirement, in a sport where times considered world class in their own era are usually not good enough to even threaten such status a decade and a half later.

Consistency, continuity and forward-thinking were the key, and Moses was a pioneer in the latter, helping to bring about eligibility reforms for Olympic athlets in 1979. Without his input, it's likely that many subsequently great athletes the world over would have had to cut their careers short due to financial pressures, ala Mark Spitz who was forced to leave the sport of swimming after bagging his historical seven gold medals at the 1972 Munich Games. But with the drive of Moses and his desire to help bring about change, Olympic athletes were henceforth able to gain funding and backing to help their careers blossom and also help them concentrate on their athletics full time.

So then, if Moses was a phenomenon on the track, he was pretty damn handy off it, as well.

To put the magnitude of Moses' times and consistency in to context, he remains the second fastest man ever over the 400m hurdles - a claim no other man on the track can still make more than three decades after his peak, I believe) and only one Olympic final since 1983 has been quicker than his best mark of 47.02 seconds.

There have been some great winning streaks in sport; Australia's sixteen victorious test matches on the spin in cricket (done twice, between 1999 and 2001 and then again from 2005 to 2008), Bjorn Borg and Roger Federer both managing five consecutive Wimbledon triumphs in the men's singles and Real Madrid being crowned as champions in the first five editions of the European Cup from 1956 to 1960. But I genuinely believe that Moses' streak from 1977 to 1987 belongs right up there with them.

My favourite Moses highlight is the 1987 World Championship 400m hurdles final from Rome. Past his magnificant best, facing off against the young generation of Danny Harris (the man who, only weeks before, had ended his incredible run) and Harold Schmidt and coming under severe pressure in the final 50m, Moses kept his head, his form and his cool to set a new championship record in one of the best track races you'll ever see. That was Moses past his best - so just how incredible does that make a Moses at his peak? Incredible enough to be virtually untouchable for a decade, that's how incredible!

There have been some great names from track and field already mentioned so far in this 'tournament'.....Could Edwin Moses be perhaps the greatest of them all?

I don't like the man, but he is (IMO) the greatest footballer of all time, so I voted for Maradona.

Maradona.

Arguably the best player in the most played sport around. That second goal against England was imo the best ever scored. The defending may have been bad but that pitch was dry and bobbly.

were moses and thompson not in the same 1st round group as each other?!

Yes they drew level on points in round 1, therefore they both progressed and were drawn together for round 2.

As before, went for Moses. How many sportsmen can say they never lost for 10 years?

Tough not to go for Moses, but Daley Thompson was the ultimate competitor. It's easy to forget that in Jurgen Hincksen he had a rival who regularly broke the world record, only for Thompson to raise his game in the key competitions and go even further and faster.

Even in '88, when he injured himself early in the competition when his pole vault pole snapped mid-vault, Thompson still finished a fraction of a second outside the medals. As one of the medallists put it "Before the competition he was a god. Then we started to think he was human. Now, he's a god again."

Through gritted teeth I have to vote for Maradona - one of the two best performers (along with Pele) in the most globalised sport.

Yes, he was willing to bend the rules, and he was a drug-addicted maniac, yet despite that he still had incredible talent as shown by his performance in the 86 World Cup. I actually think the goal against Belgium was better than the one against England (after all, he only had to beat Terry Fenwick...). He was to 80s football what Messi is becoming for the present, but he also had one World Cup winners medal and a second appearance in the final.

Moses was one of the greats of track and field, but there is always the question of depth of competition in events such as the hurdles. He did though meld incredible technical ability with fantastic speed endurance and certainly deserves to be considered a legend. Just an unlucky draw for him here...

Moses gets this one because of his consistency, for me.

Maradona, in the form of the 1986 World Cup in Mexico, perhaps had a greater single 'high' than Edwin managed at any point of his career, but he also had more ignominious lows. I suppose what bugs me with Maradona is that he played in four World Cups but was disappointing in three of them, a fact which is conveniently swept under the carpet by his die-hard followers.

The weight of expectation was too much for him in '82; Gentile completely marked him out of the game against Italy and he blew his top against Brazil, getting sent off for a horrific foul in another game in which his positive impact was minimal. The idea that he single-handedly carried another poor Argentina kicking and screaming to the final in 1990 is a myth; Argentina's games in that World Cup are all still available to watch, and little more than a cursory glance will show you that Caniggia, Sensini and even Goycachea (not sure of the spelling, but the goalkeeper who replaced Neri Pumpedo after his opening-game howler against Cameroon) were all more important in Argentina making that final than Maradona was. In fact, Diego never really got going until that assist in the second round to put Caniggia through for his winner against Brazil, admittedly a genuine peice of virtuosity.

As for the USA '94 edition of the tournament.....Well, the less said about Maradona in that one, the better!

Moses, on the other hand, ruled his discipline with an absolute iron fist and total dominance for a decade. Maradona's peak, in comparison, was short-lived. Once Moses got to the top (ie, setting the 400m hurdles world record, for instance) he just kept climbing higher and higher, improving that mark a further three times. Though Maradona was lavishly gifted, you can cram just about all of his great moments from a twenty-year career in to just two or three of them, starting with the World Cup in 1986 and then Napoli's two Scudettos and the Uefa Cup which followed soon after.

Given how gifted he was, I actually think that Maradona, in a lot of ways, is an underachiever. No such problem for Moses, who gets my vote here.

That might be true Chris, but probably only a few hundred people a year actually try and take the 400 hurdles seriously every year as opposed to thousands and thousands of professional footballers. Its just too niche for me however great he was at it....and he was indeed amazing. Same again with the decathalon but to an even greater extent probably.

DALEY THOMPSON>>>>>


Maradona isnt worthy!!

Chris has convinced me not to vote for Maradona as I think that's an excellent point about the other World Cups. Certainly I remember watching 1990 and he was not one of the main stars of that tournament.

However, in that case my vote goes to Daley Thompson, rather than Moses as Chris would like!

Its worth pointing out that Maradnona made the FIFA all star team for the 90 World Cup, it wasnt just his die hard fans that thought he had a good tournament.

How many players have had more than two good world cups? Pele?

To lose points because of 82 when he was hacked and marked, and 1994 when he was well past his best, is a little harsh.

Was Diego more influencial in his major tounies than inesta was in his last 3??

Yet the later hasnt even hit the 64???

Is this board full of older footy fans- that dont apreciate what goes on today. Is inesta hidden from the casual fan!

mystiroakey wrote:Was Diego more influencial in his major tounies than inesta was in his last 3??

Yet the later hasnt even hit the 64???

Is this board full of older footy fans- that dont apreciate what goes on today. Is inesta hidden from the casual fan!

You're bringing the euro's into it though, something Maradona obviously missed. Maradona had the Copa America but I really don't know how he done in those.

couldnt it be argued that the euros are as quality as the wc if not more so!

mystiroakey wrote:couldnt it be argued that the euros are as quality as the wc if not more so!

Yes, lots of Europeans would argue that.....

And possibly rightly???

Iniesta is a brilliant player but maybe appreciated by purists. He doesnt tend to be as eye catching or dynamic as players like Maradona and Messi and Ronaldo and IMO thats why he suffers in comparison in polls and awards.
A true great though and a managers dream.

Just can't look past Moses.

10 years (rounded) unbeaten. No other individual in his chosen discipline can boast that can they?

Maradona was amazing, utterly mesmerising. Pele was better (IMO).

Thompson. Sorry, for me he just isn't GOAT.

mystiroakey wrote:And possibly rightly???

Im sure they would think so. Qualification is tough for sure, but no tournament that doesnt include Brazil can be seen as tougher than a world cup that does IMO.

mystiroakey wrote:couldnt it be argued that the euros are as quality as the wc if not more so!

Maybe but Maradona never had the chance to play in these tourny's, so best to stick to world cups.

mystiroakey wrote:couldnt it be argued that the euros are as quality as the wc if not more so!

In a word, no.

Still a tremendously high level of football, of course, and always some outstanding teams on show in the Euros, but let's not pretend that both of these statements aren't raised to an extra level when you introduce the South American behemoths of world football in Brazil and Argentina.

well if you go by that rationale Stella

Inesta has still had 2 influencial wc's

messi hasnt had one.


I think the best way to think about a footballer and rate him. Is to think which player would make the most effect on a team if he wasnt playing.

Yeah we could argue marradona back in the day and i would certainly argue inesta for spain..

However who would we argue as beiung more influencial for Barca.

I would say inesta over messi tbh..

MESSI is my most skillfull player of all time..

Inesta and zidane are my two Goats of football..

both the catalyst of there teams and i honestly believe spain nor farnce would have won stuff without them..

Maaradona arguable could be seen as having both pluses.

But this is one sportsman that I am slightly biased towards.. He hurt me as a child and i cant forgive..

Down with marradon!!

BOOOOO

Was Iniesta any good at 2006. I honestly cannot remember but two isn't three, like my questioned asked.

Also, is Iniesta better than Xavi?

Excuse my inaccuracies..

Inesta has had 1 influencial wc!! 2 euros!

mystiroakey wrote:Excuse my inaccuracies..

Inesta has had 1 influencial wc!! 2 euros!

Never ceases to amaze me these boards, you get great competitors eliminated on potential conjecture of drug use, another all time great with a minor offence on a substance that used to be banned and now isn't and another unsubstantiated allegation...eliminated against a much lesser opponent and then we come to Diego Armando Maradona, fantasticly skilful footballer granted but as the global superstar of his generation and role model he decided to embark on a love affair with the Bolivian marching powder very very very nearly killed him.
On the pitch he was fine when thing went Argentinas way but the way the World Cup final against Germany descended into farce when the Maradona captained Argentians completely lost the plot. So skilled though he was he's an epic fail both as a role model model and a sportsman.

Maradona was good but he never played for Mansfield.

Spoiler:

I can't vote against Daley in this thing. Sadly, I guess I won't have the chance to after today.

as technical good as xavi, inestia, ronaldo and messi are it is easier for thier type of players to play in this era than in maradonas imo. players today are ultra protected by the ref, play on perfect pitches week in week out and have all the latest technology is balls, boots, diets etc. the likes of maradona, best and pele would be booted off the pitch many a time. very difficult to be a tricky dribbler in muddy pitches where your opponents idea of stopping you would to be simply to foul you. think when messi has finished he will be regarded as the greatest footballer of all time but you cant ignore the tougher circumstances the older players had. just like you consider bradmans achievements were done on many uncovered pitches making it harder for him while the bowlers had it easier in that era.

modern day football is technically miles better than football of old, defending is miles better and it is so much faster. but dont think you should hold that against players of other eras, because they had it tougher in other ways, theres not a chance xavi and inestia would be as successful if the tackle from behind hadnt been outlawed.

i voted for thompson in the last round, but think my football bias is coming through and im voting for one of the greatest footballers of all time

would also like to add if you asked the question of who's the greatest between these away from these shores a large percentage of the world wouldnt even know who thompson or moses were, yet nearly everyone would know maradona, truely one of the biggest global stars ever

compelling and rich wrote:would also like to add if you asked the question of who's the greatest between these away from these shores a large percentage of the world wouldnt even know who thompson or moses were, yet nearly everyone would know maradona, truely one of the biggest global stars ever

There's also the small matter of blatant cheating to be added to his illustrious CV. Even though I found the outrage about it way over the top at the time, he did cheat and these contests have been harsh on those who have flouted the rules, hell if cheating is allowed lets have Armstrong back in. Given the indiscipline and recreational drug use I wouldn't even have Maradona in the top 64. Still think Pele was the greatest footballer of all time, not much to choose skill wise between the 2 but when character and integrity are thrown into the mix its a no contest.

performance inhancing drugs is blatant cheating for me, what maradona did was more between gamemanship and cheating. it was part of football and got away with it, do we label henry the same and totally ignore his acheivements for arsenal because his blatant handball against ireland. what about defenders who bring people down on purpose to stop them thats the majority of italian defenders out then!! these aspects are all part of sport, and nowhere near on level with some one who takes to drugs to become the best, armstrong wouldnt have been where he was without drugs, maradona was still a fantastic footballer whether he hand balled it or not

In my opinion Maradona had more singular impact for both Napoli and Argentina than any other player I've seen for any other club or country and therefore he gets my vote.

compelling and rich wrote:would also like to add if you asked the question of who's the greatest between these away from these shores a large percentage of the world wouldnt even know who thompson or moses were, yet nearly everyone would know maradona, truely one of the biggest global stars ever

Fair point but we can only judge from our own experience and perspective. I'm sure if you ran a truly global poll the winner would be some Chinese sportsperson a lot of us had never heard of.

compelling,
The difference between Henry and Maradona in this context is that the England game, especially his second goal obviously, became part of the Maradona legend, whereas the Henry incident was, well, incidental to his full career.

Daley Thompson for me, though Edwin Moses' phenomenal streak, and the grace with which he achieved it, will live long in the memory.

Hibbz wrote:In my opinion Maradona had more singular impact for both Napoli and Argentina than any other player I've seen for any other club or country and therefore he gets my vote.

He had a fantastic singular impact in many many games Hibbz and in games where Argentina won, all was rosy. Part (ok not a huge part but an important aspect nevertheless) of what defines the greats for me is not how they conduct themselves when winning but how they are able to conduct themselves in the face of adversity or impending defeat. In those scenarios Maradona's attitude could at best be described as ugly.

Also, given that others are pilloried for using PEDS, when a world renowned global superstar and role model descends self indulgently into something far more dangerous (indeed criminal) then does he not lose all the respect previously heaped upon him??

I think with Maradona vs Henry is Maradona endlessly boasted about his cheating and seemed to think it was some sort of revenge for a war that occured 5 years earlier. Vile little man.

To be frank I am not quite of the criteria in naming the GOAT. On Friday Bolt, the fastest man of all time lost to a guy who plays a fringe (in terms of how many people globally play it) sport because a few swing votes who said they cant vote for Bolt on the basis of him possibly doping. Today, an athlete who won during the "Up to the eyeball" era (ESPN 30 for 30 had a good doccie on this) is competing and suddenly the possibility of doping is a non-issue?
Not to mention the fact that Maradona actually doped (even if FIFA did suggest the pills as was his defence, he still used recreational drugs).


Now despite this, I selected Maradona, despite
1- Me believing that team sport players cant be GOATs as that whole "carried the team his own" is only possible in baseball as a pitcher.
2- Like I said I dont get the criteria.

Regardless, if this is about which sportsman was miles ahead of his peers... Bradman has this sealed in the end...

Has to be Maradona, despite his character flaws (which will count against in the overall competition), he is a big fish in the ocean of football history up against two big fish in relatively small ponds, in terms of this match up.

The more I think about this whole process the more Im coming to the conclusion that football should be streets ahead in terms of consideration for a sporting GOAT.

"To be frank I am not quite of the criteria in naming the GOAT. On Friday Bolt, the fastest man of all time lost to a guy who plays a fringe (in terms of how many people globally play it) sport"

golf is one of the most particated sports out there!!

about 500 mill play

Within the top 500 there are possibly more players from different countries than any other sport!

so not only is it massive on partcipation but also one of the most global spread

Not sure were you get your info from pal. But its not true..

Where do you get 500 million from Mysti, personally I dont believe that for a moment. I mean there are what 7 billion people on the planet, half are women who dont play so thats what 3.5 billion. Take off around 2 billion impoverished so say leaving 1.5 billion, you reckon 1 in 3 play golf ?
Propbably inaccurate but a quick Google coems up with 26 million which is a far more believeable figure.

I remeber getting it when i looked a couple of weeks ago..

I will dig through and have another look at some point. I may be wrong

however the point is on every top 10 partcipation list i can find golf is not only on it but also allways above running!!

Golf is a massively particpation sport and a global sport and couldd never ever be called fringe!

One piece of infop i have found is that your 28 million is probally for US only

" The number of golfers dropped by 1.5 million or about 5%, from 28.6 million in 2008 to 27.1 million in 2009. The number of golfers is down about 9% (2.7m) over the past five years. "

http://www.golfpreservationfoundation.org/webboard/views/13/create

I think you are right and 500 mill is pushing it however by other sources as well as that one listed i can see that 28 mill is US only

Id agree its not fringe, a lot of people play, though Id be utterly amazed..in fact Id refuse to believe it ...... if more people play golf than go jogging so depends if thats included in the running criteria.

hmm half a billion? I did a project on sport in PE a year ago, the number was 50 million. McIlroy must be a superstar of Beatle porportions then.

In all seriousness, I worded it wrong. But there more kids taking trying out in competitive track and field then there are competitive golfers. The variety of the top 1000 is great, really, but I think the lack of millionaires in track is a major reason for why so many kids stop running after (at maximum) college. In golf, Nicholas Thompson, who plays nationwide tour rakes $ 3 million lifetime.
The chasm in financial rewards means golf will have more pros, but there are a lot more people who partook in T&F before falling away.
Also the majority of those 50 million are middle-aged businessmen who couldnt be bothered to try exerting sport. I should know, I caddied for my dad

We all go jogging(well many of us at least once or twice!!)- but that isnt a sport diggs.

there isnt a competitive element to the way the vast majority approach it

[quote="kingraf"]hmm half a billion? I did a project on sport in PE a year ago, the number was 50 million. McIlroy must be a superstar of Beatle porportions then.


Yeah I must have added a zero!!



still a massively particpated sport