Iniesta too. The most underrated player in history.
Iniesta is one of the best players of the last 20 years.
But he's not even on the same planet as Diego Maradona. Not even close.
The best players in my lifetime are Messi, C.Ronaldo, Zidane, Maradona and Ronaldo. It's obvious that Zidane and Brazilian Ronaldo are 4th and 5th on that list. The other 3 are really close. Though obviously some of the best players of all time, the likes of Iniesta, Xavi, Figo, Batistuta, van Basten, Sammer, Nedved, Gerrard etc.. sit a rung below that.
The pros for Messi and Ronaldo are their goalscoring stats and the amount of trophies that they've won.
For Maradonna, he won a lot less and his stats are no way near as impressive. However, theres a context. Serie A in the late 80's and early 90's was a way superior league than La Liga is now. Ceraintly in terms of depth of quality. If you are under the age of 30, than go and have a look at the squads from Serie A teams at that time. It's probably relatively easy to make the argument that 7 or 8 of the best 10 squads in Europe were playing in that league. Milan, Juventus, Roma, Inter, Napoli, Sampdoria all had amazing squads. At times Fiorentina, Verona, Torino and Atalanta had squads that pushed these teams.
Diego Maradonna was not playing for a Serie A superpower. He wasn't playing alongside a group of mugs either. However, it would be like him playing for Everton now and them winning the league twice and the UEFA Cup (when it was arguably the hardest European trophy to win) in the space of about 4 seasons. He took a good team, in probably the strongest domestic European competition I've ever known, and elevated them to being the best. Not once but twice.
Could Messi or Ronaldo do this domestically? Who knows. They've both played the majority of their career at teams who are stacked with amazing players. Playing in leagues and competitions were the differential in quality between the best teams and even those coming 5th or 6th is a chasm. That's not meant to be a criticism of either player. It's context when you just compare stats between the players. The other difference is that Maradona had to deal with a serious level of physical abuse on the football field. If he played in this era, where attackers are protected, who knows how good he'd be. Would be interesting to see how Messi and C.Ronaldo fared if they were getting assaulted on the pitch nearly every game.
The more level playing field is when comparing international football. Maradona has the clear edge over the other 2. He dominated a World Cup like no-one has done since. If you weren't around in 1986 then go and watch what he did. Again he took a slightly above average team and his performances lifted them to World Champions. These weren't just any ordinary performances. These were back to back out of this world performances over the course of a World Cup. Arguably his weakest game was the final against West Germany.
Messi and C.Ronaldo have not had the same influence on a World Cup. Even Portugal's European Championship win was not dominated by C.Ronaldo performances.
I suppose my over arching point is that Maradona is easily on the same level as Messi and C.Ronaldo. Those 3 are easily the best 3 players of the last 30 odd years. Maradona's stats and medal haul don't compare but his individual contribution to what he did win was absolutely phenomenal. The teams he played for would have won nothing without him. Can you really make the same argument for the teams Messi and Ronaldo have played for?
It's easy to make an argument that Messi and C.Ronaldo are the greatest players of the last 30 years. Are they better than Maradona? Arguably so.
Iniesta or anyone else over the past 30-40 years? No fucking way. If you think so then you are either too young to remember Maradona or don't understand the context of how he dragged teams to unbelievable feats.