So, one more thing, I think, to consider in our search of the greatest goal scorer: goals scored in decisive games. In most of the formats used at previous World Cups that means goals scored in the knockout phase of the tournament. Clearly, a great goal scorer should not score most of his goals at the beginning of the tournament, when the opponents are weaker, but in the decisive stages of the game.
It may be a very extreme example, but compare Gabriel Batistuta to Andreas Brehme: both are great players, but no one would consider Brehme a greater goal scorer than Batistuta who stands at 10 goals. Well, let me make the case for Brehme (a defender!!!): He has scored only four goals while playing in three World Cups. But when Brehme scored it usually counted for a lot: his first goal was the game winner in the 1986 semi-final against France, the second one the game winner in an epic 1990 second round game against the Dutch, the third the go-ahead goal in the 1990 semi-final against England (yes, it was deflected). If that wasn’t impressive enough, his last goal was BTW the World Cup winning goal in the 1990 final, albeit scored from the penalty spot. I urge you to find me a more impressive scoring streak! Compare that to Batistuta: As we already saw, most of Batistuta’s goals (8 to be precise) came in the group stage including two hat tricks against truly weak opponents (Greece and Jamaica). And the two knock-out round goals were scored from penalties in the second round – none of which were game winners. As much as I loved Batistuta and loathed Brehme in their time, credit were credit is due! In terms of stepping up when it counts, Brehme is as good as it gets!
Now, that was a lengthy excursion, but should illustrate my point that goals in the latter stages should count more than goals in the preliminary rounds. Many ways to do so, but I think the easiest would be to double the IF of a goal if it was scored in the knock-out stages. Let’s call this multiplier the KOM (Knock-Out Stage Multiplier).
But before applying the KOM to each goal, we need to address a minor issue: What about the four tournaments (1950, 1974, 1978 and 1982) where there was a second group stage? While we could let these games also count fully, I think this is not entirely fair as there are also meaningless matches in there and also in a group of four, the first two rounds usually only set things up. To me, it would make more sense to use in these games a KOM somewhere between 1.0 and 2.0. So, how about KOM = 1.5? Sounds good, but we also have to examine the games tournament by tournament and one by one:
- 1950
Goals in the first four games of the final round should have KOM = 1.5, but the last two games where a quasi-final and quasi-third place play-off and I feel more comfortable using KOM = 2.0 there. - 1974
Similar situation as in 1950. Both groups had de-facto semi finals which should count as such (double score) and the first four games in each group should use KOM = 1.5. But the two games (Sweden-Yugoslavia and Argentina-GDR) held in parallel to the semi-finals should not get any boost as they were meaningless at the time they were played. - 1978
This one is “easy” as there were no real final or meaningless games. When they were played, every game involved at least one team that could progress to the final or third place play-off. So, all goals there are multiplied by 1.5. - 1982
Groups of three are a bit more straightforward as there is only one way to have a truly meaningless game (one teams wins the first two and the losers play the last one), which fortunately did not happen. So all goals use KOM = 1.5 except for three games: Brazil-Italy (epic quasi-quarterfinal), Poland-USSR (goalless) and France-Northern Ireland (a Northern Ireland win would have seen them through). These three games were essentially quarter-finals with the winner going through to the next round, while a draw would have benefit one of the two teams involved, and all goals from these games will have KOM = 2.0.
So, with that let’s adjust the previous IWV value with the appropriate multiplier for each goal. I will call the resulting value the GV4 (goal value based on 4 components – goal value, importance factor, game winning goal, elimination goal). In the table below, I also display the sum of (KOM*IF), which can be seen as an intermediary step between IWV and GV4:
Name | Goals | IWV | KOM*IF | GV4 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Gerd Müller | 14 | 14.615 | 14.75 | 19.972 | |
2 | Ronaldo | 15 | 13.539 | 14.50 | 19.518 | |
3 | Miroslav Klose | 16 | 14.687 | 13.50 | 19.130 | |
4 | Grzegorz Lato | 10 | 14.358 | 10.50 | 17.815 | |
5 | Roberto Baggio | 9 | 11.361 | 13.00 | 17.389 | |
6 | Salvatore Schillaci | 9 | 10.901 | 10.00 | 17.082 | |
7 | Paolo Rossi | 9 | 11.031 | 14.50 | 16.952 | |
8 | Gary Lineker | 10 | 9.862 | 11.50 | 16.194 | |
9 | David Villa | 9 | 11.141 | 10.00 | 15.574 | |
10 | Jürgen Klinsmann | 11 | 11.849 | 11.00 | 15.551 |
Now, we are getting somewhere! To be fair, both Klose and Ronaldo still are probably a tad too high on this list for my liking and I am not very fond of the fact that it features only players that have played in 1970 or after, but I cannot really argue with most of these names. Every single one of them were impactful, feared and great goal scorers (at the very least at the World Cup). As a bonus of my fiddling, the top spot is occupied by the player who I truly regard as the greatest goal scorer AND Brehme is also ahead of Batistuta (in case you were wondering). BUT, I want to make sure that in preparing for this series of posts, I considered a priori the factors in which we rate the goal scorers and not try to fiddle until I get a result to my liking. And if I am nitpicky, there are not only issues with Klose and potentially Ronaldo, but also with Schillaci. He may have had the single most impressive goal scoring performance at a World Cup, but unlike all the other players featured here, he only played at one World Cup. In that sense, Schillaci was more of an outlier, while the other nine were consistently great performers who made at least two World Cup squads. So, longevity in a way should also be part of the equation and this is why the ranking of the average 4-component goal value (GA4) does not really work for me:
Name | GA | IWA | KOA | GA4 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Salvatore Schillaci | 0.857 | 1.750 | 1.429 | 2.440 | |
2 | Leônidas | 1.600 | 1.144 | 2.600 | 1.889 | |
3 | Eusébio | 1.500 | 1.214 | 1.583 | 1.854 | |
4 | Geoff Hurst | 0.833 | 1.210 | 1.333 | 1.771 | |
5 | Oldřich Nejedlý | 1.167 | 1.082 | 1.833 | 1.664 | |
6 | Silvio Piola | 1.250 | 1.073 | 2.000 | 1.645 | |
7 | Gerd Müller | 1.077 | 1.147 | 1.135 | 1.536 | |
8 | Just Fontaine | 2.167 | 1.156 | 1.833 | 1.527 | |
9 | Tomáš Skuhravý | 1.000 | 0.925 | 1.000 | 1.408 | |
10 | Luis Suárez | 0.625 | 1.067 | 0.875 | 1.362 |
Although there is really only one player on this list that I do have a slight problem with (Skuhravý) and most of the names on there deserve to be in consideration when talking about the greatest World Cup goal scorer, the ranking just doesn’t strike the same chord with me as the one above. A player playing in only one tournament and performing well there is at an advantage here. I really do like the mix of players from all periods of the World Cup, but the order is a bit off. If I had to choose between the two lists, I would go with the former (non-averaged) one. Yes, you have a better chance to be high in the ratings if you play more games, but then this is also a clear sign that you are a vital part of your team. The statistician in me slightly cringes, but in this case the sum is superior to the average!
So, what is the conclusion here? I used a lot of words but not sure how much got through. 😉 Well, I am more than happy to crown Gerd Müller as the greatest World Cup goal scorer of all time! There are not many players that like him have scored goals at every possible stage including the game winner in a World Cup final. That this final was won in his home ground in Munich adds a really nice touch to Müller’s story. Full disclosure here: my favorite enemies are Germany and Bayern München. But putting aside personal preferences, there really is no equal to the Bomber and his top spot is well deserved! The spots below him, I am somewhere between surprise and disappointment. But both Ronaldo and Klose were linchpins of their team’s attack for at least three tournaments and thus they deserve that ranking, too.
You must be logged in to post a comment.