Even discounting the ridiculous notion of judging deep-lying playmaker by his goals or assists I'm pretty sure that those stats (the assists, it's unlikely that someone counted the goals wrong) aren't accurate
Henry?
Nah I think you're going too far the other way there. Zidane was overrated for what he did in 1998, but his Euro 2000 was the best Euros performance since Platini in 1984. He was immense from the group stages through the huge quarter and semi-final games. I'd agree that Totti played better in the final, but otherwise it's a landslide.
Whoever said it, I agree with them. Vidic was easily United's best player between 2009 and 2012. The success of the post Ronaldo era was built on an incredible defence.
Yes, I have seen them all live.
Carrick is nothing compared to Pirlo. He just doesn't see the game the same way. Pirlo used to pass the ball like he saw the game a few moves ahead.
There is no way Pirlo had 8 assists during his career at milan, absolutely no way.
Have no idea what people are on about.
Nedved in the same sentence as Zidane? Criminal.
Rivaldo was easily as good as Zidane, for both club and country.
You should have given up after the first post. You're on a forum full of fans of a club that play a 35 year old as DLP because they can't find a replacement and haven't been able to for years. And still can't.
He really wasn't. More a figo level player.
Well, I can't honestly remember how Zidane played those games but I'm sure you're right. And no question Cristiano was good in 2008 final. He was good almost every season at United as I remember it. But since leaving I don't think he's that much better. I don't think he has the level that Zidane showed several times in big games, mainly international but also in Real, 98-06. Cristianos game is just not enough in big tight games to be regarded on the same level as Zidane, Ronaldinho and Messi. I mean he's played several el clasicos and several international tournaments and CL-finals. Same story every single time. It's like he always plays on top of his potential and just can't step up more than that in big games and instead looks average. Whereas players like Zidane has that extra level. If Cristiano just had one or two great "big" games I'd be the first to admit that but I can't remember he's been great in anyone although good against Chelsea in 2008.
Evra really ruined his reputation in his last few years here. He was an excellent defender in his prime. He lost his form at the end of 09/10, had a horror show at the world cup and frankly was never the same since/
What exactly made Zidane tier above Rivaldo? Rivaldo's 1998/99 is better than any individual season from Zidane. Rivaldo was at least as good for Brazil as Zidane was for France. Honestly, what made Zidane better?
Yeah. I'd say that the majority of people who watched La Liga regularly around 1997-2002 would put Rivaldo either ahead or on par with Zidane.
Firstly they were different players so trying to describe what the other did over the other is pointless as they had largely different roles in their teams. So me writing about Zidanes ability to create space, manipulate the ball, retain the ball, control the ball, pass the ball would be pretty pointless as would someone saying rivaldo scored more, had a better shot, created more chances and off the ball movement. Truth is Zidane was just a better player than him, i can't believe anyone who was old enough to understand football during 1998-2004 would think any different. Zidane was a genius, Rivaldo was just a great player like there were many of them.
Nice post. Thanks. I would love to have seen Georgie Best play.
They were different but not largely different. They played in similar zones for their teams.
He was consistent and that counts for alot.
True, his longevity has probably gone against him as well as not hitting peak on a regular basis ( I consider him a great fwiw).Said it many times, Giggs is seen by lots of young(ish) fans as a decent but nothing special player because he played for so long being way off his peak. Usually footballer's career ends a few years after his peak, while Giggs continued playing for almost a decadeHis longevity became his main characteristic, while his image should've been mostly formed by the young prodigy capable of destroying the best defenses single-handedly that he was. Rhodri-gate didn't help too, obviously.
I agree Rivaldo is underrated. That Valencia game where he ended up scoring a hattrick with an astonishing bicicleta was not a coincidence. What a goal and what a game.
The way you talk about him diminishes your credibility on the subject to be honest.
Yeah, I was a bit harsh on him. He has a "special" personality but shouldn't be judged by that.
Yes, and Id like to add Romario to that list. Top goalscorer and essential to the Brazil team 94.
Tore us apart at the Bernabau in 2003.
He missed a crucial penalty in the 2003 CL final and in the 2006 World Cup final. He was Higuain before Higuain. A great player but not clutch in big moments.
Nah would be hard to justify mate Vidic was excellent for most of that period. But Rooney was our best player in 09/10 by a distance was on course for 40 goals, when he got injured our season fell apart. You could maybe make a vase for Vidic being better in 10/11 certainly as Rooney was awful before Xmas that year and only regained form from January onwards. But in 11/12 Vidic only played 10 games while Rooney scored 35 goals he certainly wasn't better that year.
What a great post. Very interesting to read old forum threads. Don't know if I'm changing my mind though. There's a guy talking about Zidane as the greatest talent since Diego in post #18 for example.
They were largely different.
Things he was good at I have not seen anyone better yet at them so no way was he overrated. Incredible midfielder. World class without a doubt
Sammer is regarded as one of the best in his position, his legacy is intact imo.
The general vibe I'm getting from that old thread is that Figo vs Zidane was the big debate in 2001. This would make sense when you think about what other legends were up to around this time. Ronaldo was in the middle of recovery from horrible knee injury while Rivaldo was gradually declining after 1999 and was underwhelming for Barcelona in his final years.
Messi as brilliant as he is, played for the best club team most people have seen (Barca) here he helped them achieve some major trophies. He didn't do much on the international front, some may argue because he was part of a pretty average national side. On the other hand Maradona played for some pretty average Italian clubs and took them up another notch. He was a one man team in many ways and it took many players to try and stop him. He also played for what most thought was a bang average national side and systematically took them to another level.
