This is a convo about the best ever, right? Puskas and Di Stefano were winning European Cups back when Pele was winning World Cups and Puskas never returned to Hungary after the communist takeover and Di Stefano basically had no country.
Also, comparing to Pele to Maradonna, let alone Messi is hardly less "apples to apples" than comparing him to Puskas and Di Stefano.
While fair, I didn't compare Pele to them. I don't put them in that top-top class.
And you saying great players didn't come from there or couldn't have? Help it make sense. That was the point.
Yeah, Pele was injured in 1962. I didn't say he didn't deserve a medal. I said he barely played.
And yes, he had a push behind him. Brazil pushed him, then the US when he came to the Cosmos, and finally FIFA as he started the rise of international football taking preeminence.
And if your argument for Brazil struggling in 1966 was match-fixing, then you are talking comedy.
I also never said Pele wasn't great or one of the best ever.
All I've said is he needs more context. Man is claiming to have like 1,279 goals when we know a lot of those came in exhibitions and Brazilian state championship tournaments. Pele was one of the game's best, but Messi>Pele, even without a world cup title.