Iniesta - Is there another? | Announces retirement

I can't believe how much some posters here underestimate Scholes... The way he dictated the game, his passing ability, it was remarkable
Ronaldo, Xavi, Zidane, Iniesta... they all praised him. Why didn't they praise somebody else? It's not that he is their best friend
 
Chicharo said:
I can't believe how much some posters here underestimate Scholes... The way he dictated the game, his passing ability, it was remarkable
Ronaldo, Xavi, Zidane, Iniesta... they all praised him. Why didn't they praise somebody else? It's not that he is their best friend
Click to expand...
They’ve all praised a lot of different players as well to be fair.

Scholes exists in a very different category where he’s either overrated or completely written off (as someone with a claim on being one of the best midfielders of his generation). In United’s fan base it’s a bit compensatory, I believe, as he was (and still is) often overlooked in comparison with Gerrard & Lampard because of his less shinier public profile. But, as much as I love him I don’t think that at this point you can claim that he was better or even quite as good as Iniesta, Xavi or Modrić — if anything, their careers for their NT would be a clear separation point. But Scholes was incredible, had one of the best passing range that I’ve seen in any player and also was surprisingly versatile and all-rounded (although he wasn’t world-class as a second striker/attacking midfielder like someone had mentioned previously, just very good).
 
Remember the geese said:
Truly bizarre. I would put it down to a Bayern bias, but even if that was the case, you would take Schweinsteiger over Alonso anyway.
Click to expand...
I have a Schweinsteiger 31 shirt from around 2006 back when he was a platina blonde winger loved by Merkel. Trust me, if it's about personal favorites he would be in my all time XI. But I happen to be able to, or at least try to judge based on percieved ability rather than bias.

You might have forgot but after playing for a rather good Sociedad as a youngster Xabi went on to play 5 years for Liverpool, 5 years for Real and then he finished his career with 3 years at Bayern. Both Schweinsteiger (32) and Xabi (34) were a bit shot during the year they shared pitch but the difference in quality was clear. Schweinsteiger admittedly lost a lot when his legs went but Xabi was different as he relied on anticipation, organizing and passing.

He was slow as a turtle, even slower than the remarkably slow Demichelis and van Buyten, but his mind was 3 steps ahead of everyone. A quarter back on the field and a coach on the pitch in one. The man started his first match for Bayern after 1 training session, 2 days in, and was MotM. Also learned to speak rather good german at an advanced age when he knew he was close to retirement, speaks better than players that were there for 10 years and arrived in their 20's. He is simply a genius on and of the pitch, I'm looking forward to him having an Ancelotti career as a coach.
 
harms said:
They’ve all praised a lot of different players as well to be fair.

Scholes exists in a very different category where he’s either overrated or completely written off (as someone with a claim on being one of the best midfielders of his generation). In United’s fan base it’s a bit compensatory, I believe, as he was (and still is) often overlooked in comparison with Gerrard & Lampard because of his less shinier public profile. But, as much as I love him I don’t think that at this point you can claim that he was better or even quite as good as Iniesta, Xavi or Modrić — if anything, their careers for their NT would be a clear separation point. But Scholes was incredible, had one of the best passing range that I’ve seen in any player and also was surprisingly versatile and all-rounded (although he wasn’t world-class as a second striker/attacking midfielder like someone had mentioned previously, just very good).
Click to expand...
Perfectly summed up, eloquently.
 
Chicharo said:
I can't believe how much some posters here underestimate Scholes... The way he dictated the game, his passing ability, it was remarkable
Ronaldo, Xavi, Zidane, Iniesta... they all praised him. Why didn't they praise somebody else? It's not that he is their best friend
Click to expand...

Gerrard was praised by them too and countless others.
 
At a certain high level like this, it's much more a case of personal preference than anything else.
In terms of that, Iniesta is the footballer I've always dreamed to be (great dribbling and scorer of huge goals), then Modric who is closer in style with Iniesta than with Scholes and of course lastly, Scholesy.
Scholes was an amazing player but like I said, from a preference POV, his style/mannerism didn't wow me like the other 2. Modric deserves huge credit for his longevity.
I feel lucky to have seen Scholes at his prime, for the majority of his career at his Utd. We take it for granted when an all time great plays for us
 
Chicharo said:
I can't believe how much some posters here underestimate Scholes... The way he dictated the game, his passing ability, it was remarkable
Ronaldo, Xavi, Zidane, Iniesta... they all praised him. Why didn't they praise somebody else? It's not that he is their best friend
Click to expand...

Were they all forced to praise just one player?
 
kouroux said:
At a certain high level like this, it's much more a case of personal preference than anything else.
In terms of that, Iniesta is the footballer I've always dreamed to be (great dribbling and scorer of huge goals), then Modric who is closer in style with Iniesta than with Scholes and of course lastly, Scholesy.
Scholes was an amazing player but like I said, from a preference POV, his style/mannerism didn't wow me like the other 2. Modric deserves huge credit for his longevity.
I feel lucky to have seen Scholes at his prime, for the majority of his career at his Utd. We take it for granted when an all time great plays for us
Click to expand...

Looking back on it now, there are a lot of players that I wished I appreciated more when I saw them in their prime as United players. Scholes, Giggs, Vidic, Rio, Rooney, Ronaldo.

You take it for granted when they’re there because you think someone will take up the mantle when they’re gone, and then you realize that it’s not happening.
 
Nope. A pretty much complete midfielder with subtle intelligence to read the game as well. But then again so was our Paul. It would have been a thing of beauty to watch them play together
 
I love Scholes, but lets be real - Iniesta was on a different level.
 
Scholes had incredible long passing, an awesome shot on him, but iniesta's dribbling ability sets him apart. Ultimate big game player as well.
 
El Jefe said:
If they are popularity contests how did David Batty make the team then? Its often repeated that individual awards are popularity contests but it's never really made sense to me because for the most part the winners are usually deserved or at the very least a case can be made for their inclusion.

Scholes made the PFA team in 2003 and 2007, he was unreal in both those seasons and made the team. He made the team when he deserved it, it really is that simple.
Click to expand...

No its not, the PFA awards are voted for by the players and popular players amongst other players means mote votes, it is known that United players at that time were not well liked within the England team and it probably why in 1999 no United player won the main award when they won the fecking treble!

As for the UEFA team of the year if someone wants to point out to me how so many players in teams that didn't make the semi final were included above those whose teams got to the semi final and final in 2008 is not due to some sort of popularity or club bias I don't know what to say to you.

Anyway back to Iniesta my favourite ever non United player, arguably the greatest midfielder in the modern era a one of kind talent and to me in 2010 was the best player in the world.
 
I put Scholes on the same level as Modric, who did not become a superstar until later on in his career when he was surrounded by world class talent. He is like Scholes in that he made other players better, and that's consequently why both get underrated compared to the likes of Gerrard and Lampard who grabbed headlines, but I don't think he was any better than Scholes. They could control games equally well but for me, Scholes was able to do it in all games and in all our teams better or worse, whereas Modric was not quite as effective in all games and over a season - and it's partly why Madrid had a poor league record.

Iniesta was on a different level to both of them. He was better than Messi at times.
 
Modric overrated. Moutinho shackled him every time they faced :)

I wish I could go back and just watch Iniesta from fresh all over the again. That drop of a shoulder, the ability to spin on a sixpence and leave the pressing player behind. Beautiful player. Deco was world class at the time, probably the best #10, and then this guy turns up making Deco look second rate. No mean feat.
 
One of my favourite threads, bringing it back up as he has announced his retirement. Probably the best midfielder I ever saw.
 
Unreal player. Id put him number 1 for midfielders
 
One of my all-time favourite players. He kicked our ass in the Rome CL final.
 
Seeing Devilish compare him to De Rossi on page 1 is definitely a weird blast from the past.
 
One of my all-time favorites. Good at everything, pretty much. Seems like a decent bloke too?
 
Legendary but Xavi was better. Iniesta appeals to fans and casuals more because of his dribbling ability. Football fans are extremely biased towards dribblers because they are easy on the eye. Xavi controlled games against the best teams in the world while having better end product than Iniesta from a deeper and more defensive position.


Iniesta, Modric and Pirlo are on a similar level overall but Iniesta probably has more magical moments than the other two. Pirlo is definitely the best passer of the three. Iniesta was in a system that tactically helped him(and Xavi) shine getting the absolute best out of their qualities. Not every top midfielder has that privilege. For instance, Modric played for a considerably weaker national team and a club which had a philosophy less suited to midfield technicians(compared to Prime Barca and Spain).


These debates and conversations are only about central midfield technicians though since we're leaving out true attacking midfielders/number 10's like Kaka, who peaked higher than all these players and was single-handedly dismantling teams while comfortably being the best player on the planet in his prime.
 
Probably my favourite midfielder, ever.

He did benefit from having an excellent supporting cast at both Barcelona and the national team, but it would also be remiss to overlook his wonderful flexibility. He was excellent out wide and even better, when played centrally. He even covered the DM position when required and was more than competent in that position too.
 
TenonTen said:
Legendary but Xavi was better. Iniesta appeals to fans and casuals more because of his dribbling ability. Football fans are extremely biased towards dribblers because they are easy on the eye. Xavi controlled games against the best teams in the world while having better end product than Iniesta from a deeper and more defensive position.


Iniesta, Modric and Pirlo are on a similar level overall but Iniesta probably has more magical moments than the other two. Pirlo is definitely the best passer of the three. Iniesta was in a system that tactically helped him(and Xavi) shine getting the absolute best out of their qualities. Not every top midfielder has that privilege. For instance, Modric played for a considerably weaker national team and a club which had a philosophy less suited to midfield technicians(compared to Prime Barca and Spain).


These debates and conversations are only about central midfield technicians though since we're leaving out true attacking midfielders/number 10's like Kaka, who peaked higher than all these players and was single-handedly dismantling teams while comfortably being the best player on the planet in his prime.
Click to expand...

Ive never really understood this idea that Barcelona had a system that suited technical players but Real Madrid some way were off. Real Madrid has been kings in getting technical players. With Croatia vs Spain 2008-2012 definitely. But for Madrid that is really understating them imo. Way before the 2010-2018 era, Real always looked a class above us in sheer technical prowess whenever we played them.
 
Best midfielder of his generation. I had no idea he was still playing. Best player after the best ever player in the best club team ever.
 
Best midfielder I’ve ever seen. Yes, imo. Getting the ball off him was impossible then added a wonderful vision, passing and an engine to it.
Imagine having him Xavi and Busquets at the same time.
 
TenonTen said:
Legendary but Xavi was better. Iniesta appeals to fans and casuals more because of his dribbling ability. Football fans are extremely biased towards dribblers because they are easy on the eye. Xavi controlled games against the best teams in the world while having better end product than Iniesta from a deeper and more defensive position.


Iniesta, Modric and Pirlo are on a similar level overall but Iniesta probably has more magical moments than the other two. Pirlo is definitely the best passer of the three. Iniesta was in a system that tactically helped him(and Xavi) shine getting the absolute best out of their qualities. Not every top midfielder has that privilege. For instance, Modric played for a considerably weaker national team and a club which had a philosophy less suited to midfield technicians(compared to Prime Barca and Spain).


These debates and conversations are only about central midfield technicians though since we're leaving out true attacking midfielders/number 10's like Kaka, who peaked higher than all these players and was single-handedly dismantling teams while comfortably being the best player on the planet in his prime.
Click to expand...
I'd say it's not just because it's easy on the eye - it's also partly because dribbling at such an elite level is so rare and uncommon. It's also difficult to compare Xavi and Iniesta. Different type of midfielders, but both GOAT tier, along with Modric of course.
 
His name needs to be kept alive because as the years go by, the stat nerds will look on him less favourably.
 
TenonTen said:
Legendary but Xavi was better. Iniesta appeals to fans and casuals more because of his dribbling ability. Football fans are extremely biased towards dribblers because they are easy on the eye. Xavi controlled games against the best teams in the world while having better end product than Iniesta from a deeper and more defensive position.


Iniesta, Modric and Pirlo are on a similar level overall but Iniesta probably has more magical moments than the other two. Pirlo is definitely the best passer of the three. Iniesta was in a system that tactically helped him(and Xavi) shine getting the absolute best out of their qualities. Not every top midfielder has that privilege. For instance, Modric played for a considerably weaker national team and a club which had a philosophy less suited to midfield technicians(compared to Prime Barca and Spain).


These debates and conversations are only about central midfield technicians though since we're leaving out true attacking midfielders/number 10's like Kaka, who peaked higher than all these players and was single-handedly dismantling teams while comfortably being the best player on the planet in his prime.
Click to expand...
There is so much wrong in this post, I don't know where to begin. But I'll focus on 'he appeals to fans and casuals more because of the dribbling'. What is this? This is the kind of illogical stuff I used to see Ronaldo fans saying when they were trying to argue against Messi.

When I first started learning about football, I learnt that when a player receives the ball, he can do 3 things. He can pass, he can dribble/run with the ball, or he can shoot. ALL of those things were important, and ALL of those things could help lead to a goal.

Now you get people saying that dribbling doesn't matter, or 'casuals' appreciate it more than the other skills in football, or whatever. This is just an ahistorical position to take.

Dribbling well at that level is insanely difficult. Not to mention that so many of the greatest players of all time, were great dribblers. Were they all just doing it for the casuals? Or does it actually serve a purpose, beyond 'looking good'?

Anyway, rant over. I'd agree with many in this thread in saying that Iniesta is perhaps the best midfielder I've ever seen, and I'd take him over Xavi, though I love Xavi as well. And I watched them both play week in, week out, for many many years. Happy retirement.
 
One of the 10 greatest players in history in my opinion. Impossible to get the ball off of.
 
Remember the geese said:
Better than Modric in my view. Not sure if that is in keeping with the majority or not.
Click to expand...
I think he's way better than Modric personally, and I don't say that to disrespect Modric, who is obviously also a great player.
 
I do have fond memories of him making Carrick look out of his depth in two CL finals.

One of the best big game players ever. Seems like he wins Motm awards in every final he's played.
 
There's two central midfielders who I've been in awe of live. Scholes and Iniesta. No other central midfielder I've seen live enters their tier.

B20 said:
I do have fond memories of him making Carrick look out of his depth in two CL finals.

One of the best big game players ever. Seems like he wins Motm awards in every final he's played.
Click to expand...
That was the only joy Liverpool fans got in those years, to be fair. Now the roles have been reversed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.