Talk:George Best

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Be bold

George Best scored six goals in one game against Northamton Town in the fa cup, NOT against West Ham, the information in George Best's entry is incorrect, will somebody kindly correct this. Nobbler.ca

  • Thanks for your suggestion. If you feel a change is needed, please go ahead and make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. You don't even need to log in, although there are several reasons why you might want to. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. Guinness 14:07, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] News from hospital

As of 06:32 (UTC), it has been made known that the hospital is discontinuing his treatment. He is currently alive but unconscious, and his death is said to be imminent, within "hours if not minutes", to the point where the doctors are confident that he will not last another day. For now, I am adding today as a date of death in a comment so when a formal announcement is made the tags can just be taken out. Chris talk back 06:39, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

What is your source that he has just died? There is nothing about this on TV news, teletext etc. I know his doctor is supposed to make an announcement soon. PatGallacher 13:02, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

BBC News 24 have confirmed. Tonywalton  | Talk 13:04, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes confirmed dead on BBC web site. Jooler 13:09, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Nice going folks. The first confirmation of his death was at 13:04. We first "reported" his death at 12:58. Would the owner of the crystal ball please stand up ... Chris talk back 13:12, 25 November 2005 (UTC) OK, it's now official on BBC1 and ITV as well, but I think the last person could have jumped the gun slightly. People should be careful to give their sources. PatGallacher 13:14, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

According to the BBC reporter outside the hospital the announcement came first on a news wire service (puzzlingly he said "as had been arranged"). Everyone was waiting for it to come from the hospital but it seems they too were reporting as a tertiary source. Somebody will report the exact time of death soon enough, I suppose. Tonywalton  | Talk 13:22, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
12:55GMT, per Sky News quoting a statement from the hospital. No gunjumping involved. Well done, David F Tonywalton  | Talk 13:31, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Is that the time the announcement was made, or the actual ToD as will be recorded on the certificate? Chris talk back 13:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Either way it's before the edit was made here (12:58), so unless the orspital was pre-announcing Wiki hasn't jumped the gun. Sky have, by the way, just repeated "he passed away at 12:55". Looks like Davidfarmborough has a better news source than we have, but not a crystal ball! Tonywalton  | Talk 13:46, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
I suppose the person who updated it could have been at the hospital at the time and seen it happen. Or been a family member and therefore told ahead of the news. -- Smjg 12:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Ah, yes, because when you've just seen your idol/a close relative die, your first priority is to log on to Wikipedia and update the article immediately. Chris talk back 16:18, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Date Formats

With regard to the edit/comment 2005-11-25 10:48:35 192.18.1.5 about date formats, you may be interested to know that if you create an account, you can set your preferred date format in preferences, and dates entered in this format (and some other recognised formats) will be displayed as you specify. (Guinness2702)

The key word being if you create an account. If you are browsing an article as an unregistered reader the dates are not reformatted, so you could potentially see a mishmash of dates in various inconsistent formats, which looks very nasty. Not all users are registered…Tonywalton  | Talk 13:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
True, but since people are never going to agree on dates, unless ISO8601 ever gets internationally adopted, they're going to have to create accounts or put up with it. Guinness 13:55, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Or kindly wikipedians can edit articles to at least make them look consistent ;-) Tonywalton  | Talk 13:57, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I'll buy that, that was part of why I tidied up that whole section in the first place ;-) I was never considering....hang on, it feels like I'm arguing here, my original comment was only trying to be helpful.Guinness 14:08, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
192.18.1.5 was me (not logged in), by the way, which is how I noticed it: see the ensuing discussion on my and ChrisCF's talk pages. Tonywalton  | Talk 13:43, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] {{current}}

Since he is now dead, I think we should lose the {{current}}. Chris at another computer (will re-sign later) 131.251.49.202 15:24, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Was thinking of doing the same myself, however the page is still undergoing rapid change. Perhaps consider use of {{flux}}? Guinness 15:31, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
{{flux}} appears just to be a redir to {{current}}. Tonywalton  | Talk 15:33, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
I remember reading somewhere that the current template was for articles that were major news stories where new edits were appearing very frequently, say once a minute or more. The idea is to warn people not to try to write too much at one time as they'd just get into edit conflicts. If the page is being edited so often that it is difficult to get an edit in without someone else trying to edit it at the same time then the template should be there, otherwise it's not needed. It looks like the page has settled down a little bit now, so I wouldn't worry too much about it either way. Image:Yemen flag large.png CTOAGN (talk) 15:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
You mean like the SEVEN IN A ROW I had to endure earlier? ;-) Incidentally, for such occasions, I have something called the 3 Conflict Rule, based on the idea that it's more important to actually get new information into the article in the first place than to fix up the formatting, since that along with re-merging anything that gets lost can always be done in a subsequent edit. Chris talk back 17:54, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
I added {{current}} earlier today, and I would say it's still needed - a lot of folk are still editing the article (roughly an edit every 3 mins), a lot of new editors too... wangi 16:22, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
The {{current}} label means that the article is about a current event. George Best is not an event, let alone a current event. It has nothing to do with the frequency of edits. -- Smjg 12:05, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] In the News

Why is Best's death not on In The News ? Jooler 19:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

  • A member by the username of Art The Superman has vandalized this page, replacing the entire contents of the page with contents from the Lynching article on Wikipedia. This is not the first time this member has vandalized this page. The member vandalized the page at least twice today (and more under the IP Address 81.108.166.233). If you are Art The Superman, please stop. Your actions are in poor taste. This is a talented footballer who just died. Have some respect.

--Arbiteroftruth 23:47, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

NOTE: All edits made to the comment above were made by the author himself.

    • Vandals are unlikely to read the talk page of articles they've vandalised. Art the Superman has been banned from editing for 24 hours. - Arwel (talk) 01:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
    • I know Arwel, it's just a FYI thing. I am really (too) uptight with these protocol things. 70.190.225.86 03:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Being vandalized again.


has he ever been known as "the rent boy" or is this vandalism?80.43.143.57 16:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, not sure how long that has been there, but removed it now. Stu ’Bout ye! 16:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sexual assault case?

Is this true that Best was charged w. sexual assault, this year? Funny, I don't remember it. Maybe I was out that day. Are there any references for this that I could check? Le Hibou 01:46, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Arrested, not charged. See The Scotsman for the arrest and agent says it's not true, snd here for "no further action". -- Arwel (talk) 03:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. He's still my boyhood hero! Le Hibou 03:51, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

Amongst the tributes etc appearing recently, I read an anecdote about Best discussing the best player in the world at the time (1976), Johann Cruyff, prior to an international match. Acknowledging Cruyff's talent, when asked if he considered Cruyff a better player than himself, Best said no and promised to 'nutmeg' him in the upcoming game. Naturally, Best lived up to his promise. The last 6 paras of this article tell the story. Perhaps I could add it somewhere in the article? Any comments? tmimh 02:06, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I'd like it to go in the article as long as it isn't too long (2-3 sentences would be about right I think.) Love the bit about him punching the air afterwards. Image:Yemen flag large.png CTOAGN (talk) 17:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

It's sad to have this unfounded allegation on the main page dedicated to factual information on the late George Best.

CTOAGN: My comment above was in reference to the sexual assault claim, but I'm unable to edit there for some reason. Sorry.

  • I'm not sure what to do about this. What's in there at the moment is accurate, but as he wasn't charged I don't think it's important enough to go in here. On the other hand, as long as we've got a section titled Arrests it should probably be included for the sake of completeness. I'll leave it in for now (won't object to anyone else removing it though) and probably remove it later, as I'm planning to reorganise the sections a bit later on to make the article more continuous. Image:Yemen flag large.png CTOAGN (talk) 21:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

In 1976, Northern Ireland were drawn against Holland in Rotterdam as one of their group qualifying matches for the World Cup. Holland and Johan Cruyff were at their peak at the time. George Best wasn't. Bill Elliott from The Observer newspaper asked Best what he thought of the acknowledged world number one and he said he thought the Dutchman was outstanding. 'Better than you?' He asked. George looked at him and laughed. 'You're kidding aren't you? I tell you what I'll do tonight... I'll nutmeg Cruyff first chance I get.' Five minutes into the game Best received the ball wide on the left. Instead of heading towards goal he turned directly infield, weaved his way past at least three Dutchmen and found his way to Cruyff who was wide right. He took the ball to his opponent, dipped a shoulder twice and slipped it between Cruyff's feet. As he ran round to collect it and run on he raised his right fist into the air. Only a few in the press box knew what this bravado act really meant. Johan Cruyff the best in the world? Are you kidding?

[edit] "widely regarded as one of the greatest players in the history of the game"

Now, that's a good joke. I didn't even know this guy until 2 minutes ago.

You are a mere child, then. Nobody who saw him play is in any doubt about it. -- Arwel (talk) 23:19, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Exactly, you right Arwel, this guy clearly has little or no knowledge on football if he has never heard of Best, one of the greatest footballers of all time. If he is not regarded as one of the greatest, then why did Pele say he was the greatest footballer ever?

"The greates players" is too much. Let's go back to "one of the greatest players...

Pele is the greatest footballer ever. Is that a statement of fact or is that an argument? I don't know. It's all subjective. One thing Pele did say was that George Best was great- the greastest that he had ever seen. I've only seen highlights of Best and I'm am in awe. And who am I to argue with Pele? One thing about Best is indisputable, he was THE biggest pimp in sport of all time.

Even Pele's opinion (although he has always been quite deferential to other 'great' players) is POV, although I hope that most people would concede that it carries more weight than most. The use of the definitive "the best" cannot be justified: it's POV. Still, Pele's views and polls indicate that Best was up there with the "best", therefore it's clear that the use of "one of the best" is more appropriate. I think we should avoid going round in circles over this bigpad 22:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nationality

In HuWiki there's an ongoing discussion on how to best describe his nationality? Is it correct to describe him as Irish or British?

Thanks, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.59.139.191 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC).

  • Similar questions have caused some three hundred years of problems. By citizenship, probably British (Northern Ireland is part of the UK - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). By religion, possibly British (as a Protestant), though Best himself is well-known for taking no part in the NI sectarian question, and is also well-known for advocating a united Ireland football team (drawn from Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, akin to the Ireland Rugby Union team). You might get more certain answers on the Northern Ireland talk page, but prepare for opening a can of political, cultural and historical worms! Tonywalton  | Talk 17:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree, it should be entered as Northern Irish. easytiger 22:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
  • He was a footballer. The lion's-share of this article relates to his football career. As a footballer he represented Northern Ireland. There is no 'UK' in the 'world' of football. Keep him as Northern Irish! (plz!) Luke-Samual Ezekiel Cullen 19:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brisbane Lions

The Brisbane Lions link is directed to the AFL club, not the football club (which was renamed QLD lions, and then QLD Roar). This link should be changed.

[edit] San Jose Earthquakes / Golden Bay Earthquakes

The San Jose Earthquakes article states that the club was only known as the Golden Bay Earthquakes from 1983 to 1984, after Best had left - any suggestions? --172.189.128.31 16:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jewish Guild

The internet doesn't seem to have any substantial information about the club, or apartheid-era South African football in general - if anyone has any print sources, would they consider writing a stub which could then be linked to? --172.189.128.31 16:31, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I read that he played for the Jewish Guild somewhere but can't find where. I also read that he played in Hong Kong for the Tampa Bay Rowdies in the USA, Motherwell in Scotland and Deportivo La Coruna in Spain (though I know not all of theose are true. G. Best is unusual in that he's almost a myth and no-one seems to really know every club he's played for and which clubs he played competative football for. For example, can the Jewish Guild be counted if South Africa weren't recognised bt FIFA at the time? Saying that, the Manchester United Legends sections of the Manchester Utd. official website lists him as playing for Jewish G. see http://www.manutd.com/default.sps?pagegid={847FFC5F-947A-470D-A13B-E757FD63C2A8}&bioid=92106&section=&page=2

Luke-Samual Ezekiel Cullen 19:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is it true

George best I never heard of him. But not to be disrepectful or anythink I have seen goals that he's managed to score. The news said that he was the man who pushed everything to it's limits. By watching how he did it I think he was a very good and nobal player for Manchester United. -- (Shabbir Bokhari) . 3rd DECEMBER 2005

[edit] Funeral

Presumably RTE also carried the funeral, can anyone confirm/deny? 86.10.97.164 16:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fifth Beatle?

Perhaps the writer means Pete Best, who was part of The Beatles during their formative years? Perhaps I am wrong as I don't know football, but I do know The Beatles. I notice that the statement is reiterated in the "Fifth Beatle" article. Does anyone has any verifiable sources on this statement? Reviewed sources. Seems I've learned something. A.Octavia 22:34, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Unencyclopedia

"The eldest child of Dickie and Anne, Best was brother to Carol, Barbara, Julie, Grace and Ian."

Maybe I'm picky, but could this be worded in a more formal way? Not wanting to make edits, as it may be a personal thing.

[edit] I am Mr.X

Look at Sony Liston on WIKIPEDIA GO TO DISCUSSION.

[edit] BEST GOAL?

"One of George's greatest goals (1981) as a member of the San Jose Earthquakes, which is also considered one of the greatest goals in NASL history, can be viewed from here: http://eteamz.active.com/naslearthquakes/videos/GBest81.mpg"

Dont make me laught, this goal is pathetic in comparison with his other goals:/ Defenders are just watching him how he easily dribbles in low speed. Who agrees with me?

Look at this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6000929952097818068&q=%22george+best%22

I've seen almost all of George's goals that have been committed to video, and while there are many that you could make a case for being "better", George himself said that the Earthquakes goal was his favourite. Among the players for the Ft. Lauderdale Strikers that he dribbled past in that play are Thomas Rongen and Ray Hudson, as well as other former English First Division players, so they just weren't a Sunday pub team side.




If you have not seen it live,dont write about it.His best goal is Earthquakes one,even the movie says so 212.200.135.115 13:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)


He's entitled to his own opinion, just because he hasn't seen him live doesnt mean he cant be able to pass judgement. Personally I've also seen him score a lot better goals than that. Also, you say 'His best goal is Earthquakes, even the movie says so', it is a matter of opinion, it is not fact, I personally have seen him score a lot better goals for Man Utd in my opinion but could not single out one goal as his greatest. 81.151.43.170 22:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Whether or not it's his best goal, it's a very nice idea to have a link to something that shows george in action. Nice idea imo. 86.13.10.176 12:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

From a "soccer" point of view this may be regarded as a great goal but to those who watch and support football in Europe it's a bit of an oddity. for one it's not played in anything that could be regarded as a competative game. Hardly any defender moves towards best and those that do only make hearted hearted efforts to get the ball of cover the danger. Americans realy were suckered into playing to watch most Europeans would class as less then friendly (trial, warmup) games played by overage former stars. No goal coming in these games can be held up as an example to professional football IMO. Besides that Best scored many better goals in real competative game so it's a bit disrespectfull to the ability of the player too.

BTW - I'm putting a tributes page together for all footballers so if anyone want to write an tribute to Best or anyone else please send them to at mytribute@footballtributes.co.uk full crditation will be give.

[edit] What The?

The infobox would have you believe Best played for; Manchester United
Stockport County
Cork Celtic
Los Angeles Aztecs
Fulham Football Club
Fort Lauderdale
Hibernian
San Jose
Bournemouth FC
Brisbane Lions.

You can't possibly tell me that's true. The problem is, I don't know what is and what isn't true (I know he didn't play AFL for one!)--M Johnson (talk • contribs) 06:48, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

In the text Brisbane lions is a redirect to Queensland Roar FC but not in the infobox. I've fixed it now. I presume they were called the Lions at the time Best played for them. Jooler 10:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Traffic disruptions

I have removed the paragraph that has been inserted about people's "human rights" being abused by the traffic delays on the day of the funeral. Traffic was stopped for a few hours in a section of east Belfast, I don't think this constitutes a breach of human rights. Stu ’Bout ye! 08:03, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Removed this again. In addition I feel this is the point of view of a very small group of people, and therefore unbalanced. Stu ’Bout ye! 14:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Overshadowed Death?

Would anyone agree with me that his death had overshadow Richard Burns' death? --Skully Collins Review Me! Please? 11:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I had never heard of him so perhaps not, Best was ina different fame league but this death sounds greatly more tragic, because of his youth and because he didnt die from stupid self-abuse, SqueakBox 14:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anglican?

George Best states in his autobiography that his family are Presbyterians, so why does the article list him as being an Anglican? Manticore126

[edit] Greatest Player

The constant edits arguing whether he was regarded as the greatest player of all time or merely from the British Isles is really rather childish. For what it's worth I fall in the "all time " category (Paul210 16:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC))

In Pele's article the lead states he is "regarded by many as the greatest footballer of all time". In Maradona's article the lead states he is "regarded by many as the greatest football player of all time". In Best articles the lead states he is "regarded by many as the one of the greatest footballers of all time". I know I'm being pedantic, but all three articles should say the same really. Stu ’Bout ye! 14:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The "greatest of all time" would neccessitate him scoring highly in "greatest of all time"/ best player of the century/decade whatever polls. In the various Fifa polls available on their website the 2000 century polls he never breaks the 20's. In the greatest European player of all time he never breaks the top 10. I don't see how the tag can be justified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.145.197.3 (talk) 11:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

George Best is more of a local phenomenon, or rather British if you will, than global. I appreciate the impact he had on the British psyche but outside the UK he is not universally viewed as one of the greatest of all time and can therefore not be labelled as such in the article - a pedigree one should use only very sparingly.

The article's references state otherwise, including Pele and Maradona's opinion of him. The article should state the same as Pele, Maradona and Cruijff. Unless all mention of "the greatest" of any kind are removed from the four articles, "one of the greatest" should be reinserted here without the UK qualification. Stu ’Bout ye! 14:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Simple question: why do you compare him with these three greats in the first place? Please stick to the facts. I agree that he is mostly a local phenomenon. In all rankings he usually shows up somewhere between place 10 and 20

And being in the top twenty doesn't count as "one of the greatest"? Does Maradona's opinion of him (cited in the article) not show that he was known outside the UK? Please stop this unjustified campaign against Best's genuine international reputation. --Nicknack009 13:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

This is getting beyond a joke. Best's international reputation is supported in the article with cites. Stop trying to provincialise him. --Nicknack009 19:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Reverted again today to reinsert the "greatest" claim. My edit summary is "Reinserting statement. This is the status quo and shouldn't be removed until the issue is resolved. See talk and Pelé, Diego Maradona and Johan Cruijff." Stu ’Bout ye! 11:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I have raised this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football to get a wider view. Stu ’Bout ye! 12:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Although a great player, he is not on par with Pele, Cruyff and Maradona. In addition, there are a number of footballers that have more acclaim to the title of the greatest than Best. Adjectives like 'greatest' should be used very sparingly, and despite it being your countryman stubacca pls refrain from being carried away or suggesting that this is worth having a proper discussion over. In all polls and votes that include more than just the Northern Ireland or the UK he consisently ends up (well) outside the top 10.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Le Professeur70 (talk • contribs)

Your view that he is not on par with them is exactly that, your own point of view. The article contains many referenced quotes to back up the claim. Polls aren't everything. There is also a wider issue here, about whether any article should make the claim. That's why I have raised it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. Stu ’Bout ye! 13:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It is you, stubacca, who is trying to push through your own point of view. What is the big deal about toning the language down as he clearly hasnt had such a big impact on world football. The evidence is there in the numbers, the a number of authority polls (read: the general consensus of the rest of the world) and all you want to base this on are a few flimsy quotes - the Pele one not even attributable and an empty trophy cabinet.

I agree, a poll is not everything, but that is certainly the case with quotes. Especially when the quote is out of context e.g. not the entire interview is published or from a particular source only. However, a good number of polls produces the most balanced and weigthed overall picture. Adding in the odd quote for some spice and flavour is fine, but they should never be the definitive arbiter - especially if it just one person's view.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Le Professeur70 (talk • contribs)

Regarding the edits to my (beginning of a) rewrite. I didn't call him the "greatest", I said he was "regarded by many as one of the greatest", and that's backed up by the fact that any time anyone commissions a list of the greatest footballers, he's always on it. Anyone who regularly makes polls like that can justifiably be described as "one of the greatest". Football's a game of eleven against eleven, and there's no reason that only three players can be placed among the greatest of the game. Equally, Best was obviously known outside the UK, having starred in the European Cup, been named European Footballer of the Year, and come to the attention of South Americans like Maradona, so it's perfectly justifiable to say he was admired internationally despite never making the World Cup. Having said that, I do think there was too much hyperbole in the article in general, and have tried to tone it down and make it a bit more sober and encyclopedic. "Of all time" is a phrase I have a particular intolerance of - football's only been played for a bit over a century, and we can really only compare players since the advent of television, so referring to the last half a century as "all time" is frankly absurd. I also wouldn't place too much weight on Pelé's opinions, as he's notorious for praising players according to what country's media he's speaking to. --Nicknack009 18:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I edited some of the articles concerned a while back to read "one of the greatest" rather than "the greatest". I think either "one of the greatest" should be used in all the articles concerned (Pele, Cruyff, Puskas, Maradona etc) or the claim should be removed entirely. I'm siding towards it being removed entirely. Each article states the players acheivements, readers can come to their own conclusion. Stu ’Bout ye! 10:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem with Best is that, unlike Pele, Cruyff, Zidane and Maradona, his 'achievements' do not signal him as 'great' because his country did not play in the World Cup. It is his skill, far more difficult to quantify, than makes him indisputedly one of the greats. 81.157.125.245 16:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits

User:Marlon.sahetapy has recently edited the introductory paragraphs to put Best's personal problems before his footballing achievements. I think this focuses unncecessarily on the negative over the positive and have re-ordered the paragraphs again, this time in the order "football career - celebrity, alcoholism and death - polls", which I think is more balanced. --Nicknack009 11:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Stu ’Bout ye! 08:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


I added some additional info about the Runnin' Riot song - it showed citation needed. Perhaps I should have added that album info as a footnote, instead? This is my first attempt at a wiki edit, so please fogive me if I've made a mistake here. The facts I added, however, I believe to be correct, and can be verified at the Runnin' Riot website, http://www.riotbois.com/discography/albumcd.htm. Thanks - Rothabe 14:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war over Pelé's opinion

We need to come to some sort of consensus about this. My own opinion, is that, despite being from the BBC which is normally fairly reliable, the article linked to is not reliable as it gives no context to the quote - it's just hearsay. It's "common knowledge" in Belfast that he's supposed to have said it, but I suspect it all derives from Best claiming that Pelé said it. George was never one to hide his light under a bushel. Anyway, even if he did say it, we've got to stop this endless revert war. --Nicknack009 20:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it should be in the article, and as part of my recent major clean-up I think I removed it. I certainly removed the "from the second best footballer in the world" card thing. For one it's just not relevent for an encyclopedia. Pele's and, even more so Maradona's views are rendered quite irrelevent by how many times they say "oh such and such is the best player in the world". Maradona has been quoted naming about 10 different Argentinian players as his rightful heir. I don't see why their views are relevent anyway. Football players aren't noted for being especially bright... aLii 22:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
In that case should all quotes be removed? The ones on Franz Beckenbauer and Johan Cruijff for instance. We have to have conistancy. To say one person's quotes are ok to include and other's aren't is entirely POV. Stu ’Bout ye! 09:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, Beckenbauer's article only has two quotes and they are both by him. Cruijff's article is a terrible mess, and certainly shouldn't be copied — have the editors never heard of Wikiquote? I think entirely relevent quotations, e.g. by a colleague, coach or manager of Best are fine. However, his career should stand up to scrutiny by itself — isn't being consistantly voted within the top20 players of all-time good enough without a Pele quote? aLii 13:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Lets be clear, Pele talks a lot of s%@t depending on who he is talking to.--Vintagekits 21:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I must agree with the previous poster. Pele, a player who lets be honest is considered the best for his performances in a handfull of world cup games and whose club career was in the dreadfully poor Brazillian and American leagues, does tend to say that so and so is the best ever depending on which nation he is in. During his life I have heard him state this of at least a dozen players. That said, George was the best player ever. If he had been German, English or Italian it would never be in doubt. Alas he came from a smaller nation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.101.22.20 (talk) 09:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
That dreadfully poor league created 3 worldcup winning team in 20 years. In context this would imply that the EPL is roughly at school level play??? << That said, George was the best player ever. If he had been German, English or Italian it would never be in doubt. >> Actually the fact that he won very little at club level, has a very low strike rate(relavtively speaking) (far far lower than Ruud van Nistleroy for example), no longevity, isn't regularily voted highly in Greatest Player of all time lists is the reason that almost no one considers him the greatest player of all time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.145.197.3 (talk) 11:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


Pele, "O' Rey Pele", just how OVERRATED IS PELE?? Pele is the most overhyped, overrated player ever! Yes, Pele played in a rather poor very attacking League; The Sao Paulo League - it was not even a National League as many people state with quotes such as "Pele played in the Brazilian League". No the correct term was "Pele played in the Regional Sao Paulo League". And of course there was also a Rio de Janeiro League. Now, my point is that Pele played in a star studded Santos FC in a League that had no rival for Santos and Pele. The other League was the Rio de Janeiro League, and Garrincha, Didi, Jairzinho and Nilton Santos all played for Botafogo in the Rio de Janeiro League. Therefore it is only natural to draw comparisons between Pele's Santos and Garrincha's Botafogo - Both Clubs had no rivals on their respective Leagues, they had no challengers. However Santos and Botafogo did faced each other in the most prestigious Tournament at the time - Torneio Rio-Sao Paulo. And an important fact to acknowledge about the times Santos and Botafogo faced each other is that, Pele was not that great against good challengers, and as a matter of fact Pele and Garrincha both won the Torneio Rio-Sao Paulo 3 times. Another fact to take into consideration is the fact that Pele could only manage to win the Copa Libertadores twice (1962 and 1963) - that's no easy feat, but winning the Copa Libertadores twice with a star-studded team is nothing Legendary. (Luis, Spain)


Now, what I'm trying to get at is - Why is Pele regarded as "The Greatest" like if it was a fact of life?? Pele is praised as having won 3 World Cups (1958, 1962, and 1970) -while in reality- Pele won 2 World Cups (1958 and 1970), as Brazil actually won the 1962 World Cup without Pele, Garrincha was the outstanding figure of the 1962 World Cup, and Pele's absence was hardly noticeable. And a fact that is so massively overlooked is the fact that the 1958 Brazil side was clearly better than the 1962 Brazil - Now this last statement will always state that "if Brazil won the 1962 World Cup without Pele, then Brazil could have easily won the 1958 and 1970 World Cups without Pele". By the way, The teams that faced Brazil in the 1958 World Cup, well here's an interesting quote from a player who faced Brazil in 1958, Mel Hopkins - "Garrincha was considered more of a threat than Pele back then" "a phenomenon, capable of sheer magic". In fact Didi was voted as the player of the tournament in the 1958 World Cup. Pele was impressive for only being 17 years old, but Pele was NOT the best player of the 1958 World Cup - Both Didi and Garrincha were more outstanding. (Luis, Spain)


Another noticeable fact about Pele, is his unique World Cup record; played 2 out of 4 World Cups, he suffered injuries in 1962 and 1966. It is an odd record because players usually play through the pain barrier, this is the FIFA World Cup Tournament and injured players usually play through it. A noticeable fact about Pele's World Cup record is the fact that Pele only managed to deliver when Brazil had dream-teams, that is Pele only managed to deliver in 1958 and 1970. I mean, did Brazil needed Pele in 1958 and 1970?? Of course not!! they could've easily afforded to play without Pele, just like in 1962. Now, why couldn't Pele deliver when Brazil could not afford to play without him?? Why couldn't Pele deliver in 1966?? What happened in 1962 and 1966?? Well, firstly it is important to acknowledge the fact that Brazil used the same exact 11 players in the 1958 and 1962 World Cups (with a slight difference in 1962, as Pele suffered an injury in the Opening Group Match). In 1966 Brazil used the same aging champions, with a slight change as Nilton Santos didn't figured in the team. Now, unlike in 1958 and 1962 - in 1966 the ex-champions were way past their prime, and they were already veterans by 1962. By 1966 Garrincha was finished, Nilton Santos gone, and Brazil (unlike in 1958, 1962 and 1970)fully depended on Pele. What happened?? Just like in 1962, when things got tough, Pele got injured.. and with Pele's injury, Brazil's hopes of defending the title ended, just like that. (Luis, Spain)


Now the bottom line of the point I'm trying to make is - Pele could not withstand the pressure of playing with average teams, he could not handle the physical pressure, his body could not take it, and proof of that are the 1962 and 1966 World Cups - Pele could not withstand the demands that come hand in hand with being a team's focal point. On the other hand, when Brazil had dream teams playing, that is; Garrincha, Didi, Nilton Santos, Rivelino, Jairzinho, Gerson, Carlos Alberto, etc, etc.. It was in this star-studded sides that Pele managed to deliver because he had freedom, he had space, he had less pressure from opponents because opponents were too busy trying to mark Garrincha. In other words, with the Brazilian veterans of 1962 and 1966 - Pele received more attention and pressure from opponents as Pele was the only player in his prime, only 25 years old by 1966. Luckily for Brazil, Garrincha played by 1962.. but unfortunately there was no Garricnha to save them in 1966. Pele is one of the greatest, that's unquestionable -but- Pele never managed to deliver as his team's focal point, Pele was never a leader for Brazil, Pele never managed to deliver under the same circumstances as Garrincha, Johan Cruijff, and Diego Armando Maradona. (Luis, Spain) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.50.81.81 (talk) 08:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Man, are you complete fool? Let's put your "deep analysis" on Pele in some dark place. Pele was the greatest and he will the greatest yet another century, I think.Eichel-Streiber (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Polls

These polls are ridiculous. How could anybody place George Best behind Lothar Matthäus, one of the most overrated players in the history of football/soccer ever, and a very limited player, regarding Matthäus' skills? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam Golden (talk • contribs) 15:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Errata

From the introduction: "Pelé named him as one of the 125 best living footballers"

Good achievement for a dead guy.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BestCregaghEstateMural.jpg

Image:BestCregaghEstateMural.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Problem with clubs

The table says best played for Hibernian 86 times for 34 goals but on the Hibernian page it says:

"George Best was with the club for half a season, playing 22 games and scoring 3 goals" which corresponds the the Fort Lauderdale Strikers stats on Best's page. Constan69 (talk) 07:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Cork Celtic stats are also incorrect as the Cork Celtic page suggests he only played three times for them... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.46.184.176 (talk) 23:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)