Coach: TITE






GOALKEEPERS:

CÁSSIO
GILMAR


DEFENDERS:

Armando DEL DEBBIO
DOMINGOS DA GUIA
FAGNER
KLÉBER
OLAVO
WLADIMIR
ZÉ MARIA


MIDFIELDERS:

AMÍLCAR
Roberto BELANGERO
BIRO-BIRO
MARCELINHO CARIOCA
José NETO (1966)
RALF
Roberto RIVELINO
SÓCRATES


FORWARDS:

Walter CASAGRANDE
CLÁUDIO
BALTAZAR
LUIZINHO
NECO
TELECO


__________________________________________________


RESERVES:


GOALKEEPERS:

ADO
CABEÇAO
DIDA
Ronaldo GIOVANELLI


DEFENDERS:

ALESSANDRO
João AMARAL
CHICÃO (1981)
DITÃO
GIL
Pedro GRANÉ
HOMERO
LUÍZ CARLOS
MARCELO DJIAN
ORECO
Fábio SANTOS
SYLVINHO


MIDFIELDERS:

BASÍLIO
DANILO (1979)
IDÁRIO
JÁDSON
Wilson MANO
PAULINHO (1988)
RATO
RUÇO
RICARDINHO
Freddy RINCÓN
VAMPETA
ZENON


FORWARDS:

Rodolpho CARBONE
Alexandre DE MARIA
EDÍLSON
FLÁVIO MINUANO
GERALDÃO
Paolo GUERRERO
LIEDSON
LUIZÃO
PALHINHA
SERVÍLIO
TUPÃZINHO
VIOLA









INFO:

I really wanted to ignore those "suggestions" but guess I have to reply here: How it's even possible to even think that the best ever GK from Brazil and backbone of Corinthians for a fucking decade should be out because he has less games than those two amateuers is out of my mind.
Funny btw that one of you insisted to put Domingos in first team and best XI here (exactly because he was better player than Luiz Carlos) and the other one doesn't say anything about that. But yeah, Gilmar is the problem here
What's next? Ralf in best XI because he has more games than Socrates? Seriously, you come to this forum, don't even try to understand our criterias and want to set up your own ones..
And since you don't understand the concept of best XI: It means the best players from the club, not the most capped or most decorated players

I know Gilmar won major titles with Santos but still played more matches for Corinthians than he did for Santos, was a regular at Corinthians for a decade and part of the team when he won his first World Cup — even though this is not the main criteria to consider. Therefore, he deserves a slot in the first squad in my opinion. Since the Best XI is supposed to have the best team possible in terms of abilities of the players, Gilmar surely makes it.

Yes, he has. Just like Ronaldo has (but he played more games and won more titles). Gilmar has 393 as a starter while Ronaldo has 602, and with a Campeonato Brasileiro and a Copa do Brasil, something Gilmar did not win, and the Paulistas are equal, 3 for each.

Cassio has 544 games as a starter, and his titles are not even discussed. He is the goalkeeper of the most important titles in the Club's history.

all sources are from the site "meutimão"

Lol, so put Tévez and Ronaldo in your XI and be happy. If skills is as equal as idolatry, then I don't understand the criteria either. It seems that the argument is more Brazilian national team than Corinthians.

edit: And just for the record, I have an opinion on Domingos' question here, but besides being fallacious to talk about it because it has nothing to do with the discussion, it still shows that your argument is more emotional than logical.

Well, it's a valid discussion, they're both goalkeepers with great longevity. But the discussion is not nonsense, that's what I mean. Was Gilmar better than the two combined? Yes it was. Did he play more than them? No. Did he Earn more than them? No. If we just rely on how good a guy was as a tiebreaker, then we're pretty much a hole in those same criteria. The 3 are goalkeepers for a decade, but I have no doubt who were the 2 most important for >>CORINTHIANS<<.

So, then, Cassio should replace Ronaldo. As the best Brazilian keeper ever, and as a Corinthians legend who played for the club for ten years, Gilmar is simply irreplaceable. If he played less, for example two or three seasons, then it would have been reasonable to remove him. In this case, it doesn't make sense at all.

The skills are the criteria for the best XI after the first squad is made by following the other criteria.




I was thinking the same. I'd rather replace Ronaldo with Càssio.

Well, I think this consensus can be reached, although I still have my doubts. Anyway, I don't think there is an "irreplaceable" in this case, there are 3 great goalkeepers at Corinthians, I just gave my opinion on the matter.

Yeah, because Ronaldo and Gilmar are comparable Are you too stupid to understand what Interista, Milos and I all told you or don't you want to understand it? We're talking about a GK that played over 400 games in ten years and at least won the Campeonato Paulista three times, not a guy like Domingos that spent four years at the club while he was already past his prime (not even mentioning Ronaldo or Tevez).
How is it even an argument that Gilmar didn't win Copa do Brasil and Campeonato Brasileiro when those tournaments didn't even exist when he played for the club? Socrates, Rivelino, Wladimir and Baltazar all didn't win those titles, should they be removed as well? According to your nonsense criterias they should be removed, that's for sure.

Different players, different cases. Next one.

Look at it this way. Was it Gilmar's fault that Corinthians didn't win the Campeonato Brasileiro or Copa do Brasil while at the club? Or was it more due to the fact that Corinthians didn't even participate in any national tournaments until 1967, 6 years after he left? Gilmar won the trophies with Corinthians that were available to him at the time. Not his fault that Ronaldo and Cassio got to compete in three times as many tournaments as he did.

I know for a fact that 500 games of being the best Brazilian goalkeeper of all time and one of the best in the world are worth more than 600 games of being a decent goalkeeper by international standards. This is like asking for Zidane to be removed from Real Madrid All Stars because Lucas Vazquez has more games and trophies than him.

Anyway Cassio was probably better than Ronaldo and should be there over him in my opinion.

Well, I think my criteria were misinterpreted, but it's my fault, I should have expressed myself better. There is a difference in comparing a reserve with many titles than someone who truly represented the club even though he earned less. The point is that specifically in this case, we are talking about 3 super representative and super important goalkeepers each in their time, one vastly better than the others but at the same time inferior in other criteria. What I mean is that it's not unreasonable to consider this hypothesis, and I would personally scale it that way. Yes, Gilmar is not to blame, but it doesn't change the fact that there are people who earned more, with the same importance when given the proper proportions. Yes, I think Gilmar and Cassio are correct, just as I think Gilmar and Ronaldo and Ronaldo and Cassio are correct.

By the way you ignored the Torneio Rio – São Paulo which was arguably the closest thing to a national title Brazil had at the time and had most of the strongest teams in the country. Gilmar won 2 of these. So he isn't actually below Ronaldo in trophies at all.

Also the number of games is largely irrelevant when the numbers are that close. Gilmar played almost 500 games for Corinthians, the difference between him and Ronaldo and Cassio is like 2 seasons of matches. You can't kick someone out the team because they played 10 seasons instead of 12 despite being 10 times better, it's crazy.

Yes, you're right, I didn't put the Rio-São Paulo tournaments because I didn't think it would interfere so much with my point, but I was wrong and you're right.



Yes, but that's not what i meant, the amount of games only served as statistical examples. If you go to Flamengo's thread, you'll see me defending a guy with less than 100 games and only 1 relevant title as a starting player. I take into account the player's representation in the club first, not the statistics, and no one can say that any one of these 3 goalkeepers was overwhelmingly less or more representative than the other, unless some crazy person volunteers to say so. The statistics served as a complement. What I said at the beginning was that ---->Me, Mikerdead39<-------- according to my criteria, I would put Cassio and Ronaldo. But I'm obviously not an authority here and I don't intend to be, and I think Gilmar and Cassio are the best consensus.

Besides, I think the discussion is taking a lot longer than it should. I really appreciate everyone, I really like putting ideas to the test.

Would you prefer Luiz Carlos instead of Domingos da Guia for Corinthians' first 23?