Jairzinho is too high, and Romário is too low.

Where is the new top 100?

The new top 100 hasn't been done yet.

Why do you think Jairzinho is too high and Romario is too low? Who do you think Jairzinho should be behind and Romario ahead of?

Thanks!
So ... Here in Brazil, there's a many discussions between him and Ronaldo to choice who was better. I think Ronaldo, Van Basten and Romário are in the same level.

Jairzinho was a very good player, But it is overestimated by the cup 70, which was one of the greatest players in the competition with a goal in each game.

But I think we'd agree Ronaldo achieved more at club level than Romario did? Even if they were similar at international level and Ronaldo is a far bigger "name" as well which rightly or wrongly is going to affect his placement.

You may be right about Jairzinho though, I didn't realise I put him that high on the last placement! He definitely shouldn't be ahead of Romario.

Yeah, you're right, in a club level Ronaldo is bigger than Romário.
After 96, Romario comeback to Brazil, and with that he failed to shine on the biggest stage in football, so he is behind Ronaldo and Van Basten.

Of course, in Brazil he played at high level but the level is much lower here than in Europe.

Well, nowadays I think it might be, but back in the 60s and 70s I think Brazil's domestic game was just as strong as any in the world.

I still think Brazil has a very strong domestic game, just maybe not as strong as Spain, Germany, Italy or England right now.

This.

RIP, Dr Socrates.

yeah read about that, RIP indeed....

Where's Henry?

Where's Roberto Carlos?? =/

sorry if i'm digging up a previous argument out of laziness, but ronaldo at 16 is too low. he's probably the greatest pure striker to ever play. i'd move him up ahead of everyone until you hit zidane, and zidane should probably be ahead of platini. i'd move up yashin just for the sake of some balance. but ronaldo was so dominant at psv, barca (especially barca), his first few seasons with inter and his first few with madrid. he doubled the ballon d'or and fifa wpoy twice (should have done it 3 times as he deserved the ballon d'or in 96) plus, add on what he did with brazil, especially in the 2002 world cup, you've got a top 10 all-time player. even with an awesome resume ronaldo will always be a "what could have been" type of player for me. Three gruesome knee injuries (and a fourth that ended his career. he was pretty far past his prime at that point, though) during his 10 best years held him back from performing even better.

^ seems like very good points to me

I don't agree that Ronaldo is a better pure striker then either Muller or Van Basten, but I do agree with your other points regarding the honours he did and should have won. Also the matter of his knee injuries is a fine point, he would almost certainly be top 10 if it wasn't for his bad luck with his knee

Really fascinating interviews by Tim Vickery with Mario Zagallo and Tostao about the Brazilian national team from 58-70 and Pele in the latest issue of the Blizzard.

http://www.theblizzard.co.uk/