Comments on: Ballack: Not Even The Best At Being Second!

By: Lissette Evil Blue

Lissette Evil Blue — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 01:06:02 +0000

be a long time runner up to be a big timer winner then this people give me hope. Thats why when it comes to winning trophies and that tipe of shit I don’t give a f**k.

By: Rob

Rob — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 13:10:34 +0000

Well yeah, I think we’d all take being second 17 times, if it meant the countless amount of times he has lifted trophies for Milan. Although he was agonisingly unlucky for Italy – a penalty shootout and a Golden Goal.

By: diana

diana — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 05:56:41 +0000

Rob, that is definitely one interesting statistic (even after I read what the link to the Guardian’s The Knowledge has to say). I definitely remembered Maldini was part of the winning-AC Milan side in the 2007 Champions League final but…he got 17 runner-up medals?

Whatever they say about learning something new everyday.

By: Gianfranco

Gianfranco — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:54:42 +0000

I would take all Maldini’s second place medals to reap the benefits of all his first place medals.

By: Jan

Jan — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:53:53 +0000

BTW: did you have a hunch that Maldini could have picked up more runner up medals, or is there some database you can feed with such a request?

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:22:03 +0000

Martin – I’m glad someone got the point I was driving at!

Seriously though folks – obviously there is are bigger losers in football, and Maldini has been playing in a very successful side for a hell of a long time, so its only natural.

I just thought it was interesting who had picked up the most runner up medals.

By: Martin

Martin — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:55:31 +0000

Actually, that would make him second best at being second best. Which would make him better at being second than Maldini.. Paradox!

By: Jan

Jan — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:11:50 +0000

Well, I’d argue that reaching the CL final with Leverkusen was a bigger achievement than doing the same with Chelsea obviously. And should the multi-billion Chelsea squad win it in the next three years with Ballack I’d still rank Ballack’s achievement with Leverkusen higher. Anyway, I don’t like Roman’s empire so I could do without a Chelsea Champions League triumph, but at least it would end Ballack’s entirely statistical misery.

By: Corey

Corey — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:37:55 +0000

But Maldini has won alot more then Ballack, which would cancel out all of the losses he had, meaning Ballack still is the #1 loser.