I'll add to Maria's answer, because I do not completely agree.
1 - Implies the specific action referred to is finished, completed, or otherwise in the past. Do not confuse this with "once". Pelé played football. Obviously he played in many games. Those are in the past. He may continue to play, but my statement refers only to games in the past.
2- This is more concerned with the experience than the action. That is, if someone asked you "What did you do yesterday?" you would not answer by saying "I have played football." This is because you are referring to the fact that you have experience performing the action and does not refer to the action itself. It also does NOT imply the action is continuing. Again, it refers only to the past, even if I am playing football at this exact moment. In that case, it would refer only to the times in the past I previously played, not the current game I am playing.
3 - This one is very difficult, so I'll expand, but Maria is correct.
This is basically saying that, if you could travel back in time to the past to some specific moment, then you could, at that time, make the statement "I played football." It is as if you are saying "In the past of the past, I played football." Again this refers only to action in the past and does not refer to any current action.
For example, if the current time is 2:00 pm, I could say, "At 9:00am this morning, I got out of bed and ate breakfast. At 11:00 am, my friend wanted to eat lunch with me, but I had eaten only 2 hours before."
So we have three times, the preset (2:00pm), the past (11:00am) and the past of the past (9:00am).
I may eat in the near future, I could be eating lunch at the moment I make these statements, or I may have even eaten lunch at 1:00pm (still the past). These things make no difference.
Normally the actual time, 9:00am, would not be specified, but something should indicate an event, action, or moment that occurred after the "had" action.