Revisionism: Which players have had their legacies embellished or reduced since retirement?

[Fortitude]

There's a running theme, I think, where reputations and legacies get beautified or brutally deconstructed over time and then that mud or positivity is passed around until it sticks.

Ryan Giggs has definitely seen his legacy tarnished to the point where it's practically pointless to fight against the tide, for example. Another obvious one on here is Roy Keane, who has come under all kinds of scrutiny that would have been laughable whilst he was active.

The deification process is something I hope is discussed as I'm interested to see what names people come up with in this regard.

So, in your opinion who have become beneficiaries and who have suffered in terms of legacy post-retirement?

 

[LouisDanGaal]

Keane's legacy is overwhelmingly positive at least on here. There is usually a thread every couple of weeks about how he was underrated to which everyone agrees he was, so not sure he can be classed as underrrated or having his legacy tarnished.

 

[Xeno]

Brazilian Ronaldo. By having a Portuguese homonym.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Rooney's unusual in having his legacy tarnished while he's still playing. In another few years it will bounce back spectacularly.

 

[Infordin]

Zidane has become a universal top 10 player of all time since his retirement. This is the product of a few moments of genius in big games (1998 WC final, 2002 CL final). When he was playing live, I didn't think that he was much better than Figo or Nedved to be honest.

Rivaldo on the other hand is underrated. He's seen as a sidekick to Ronaldo these days. In his prime (1999) he was the best player in the world. I rank him higher than Zidane personally. He was fantastic for Brazil and for Barcelona. IMO he was the best player at the 2002 World Cup too.

 

[roonster09]

This thread is made for Giggs. He is seen as some ordinary winger and some of the posts about him are laughable.

 

[Decomposing In Paris]

There's a running theme, I think, were reputations and legacies get beautified or brutally deconstructed over time and then that mud or positivity is passed around until it sticks.

Ryan Giggs has been definitely seen his legacy tarnished to the point where it's practically pointless to fight against the tide, for example. Another obvious one on here is Roy Keane, who has come under all kinds of scrutiny that would have been laughable whilst he was active.

The deification process is something I hope is discussed as I'm interested to see what names people come up with in this regard.

So, in your opinion who have become beneficiaries and who have suffered in terms of legacy post-retirement?

It's sad. I consider them both to be legends of the game, and our club. I'd have both of them in our all-time 11, or at least on the bench. People only need to look at Giggs' assist record, and performances against the top teams in Europe... but I think that in another 30 years, the tide may have swung again. I think that Van Nistelrooy comes in for quite a bit of unnecessary stick. Had he played here for 10 years, he possibly would have been our record goal scorer.

 

[Shiva87]

I don't see how they legacy of Ryan Giggs is tarnished. If he comes back to manage United ever (which means he would have done well as a manager at other clubs), the fans here will be over the moon given history, legacy, and blah blah. As a player - no one argues against what he did for us in his career.

 

[Needham]

Irwin was terrific but he often seems untouchable when his name crops up. Possibly because SAF loved him and he had a face like a very pleasant bus driver. But I don't recall him being that good.

 

[Pass and Move]

Pirlo.

Only when he started being 'very good despite his age' did people start to consider him one of the best midfielders in Europe.

Also, he looks cool. I genuinely think Carrick playing in Pirlo's place would have been at least as effective, but wouldn't have received the plaudits due to being less cool looking. Seriously.

 

[pacifictheme]

Irwin was terrific but he often seems untouchable when his name crops up. Possibly because SAF loved him and he had a face like a very pleasant bus driver. But I don't recall him being that good.

He was. Better than Evra as well.

 

[2cents]

Keane's legacy is overwhelmingly positive at least on here. There is usually a thread every couple of weeks about how he was underrated to which everyone agrees he was, so not sure he can be classed as underrrated or having his legacy tarnished.

We did have someone on here recently claiming Schneiderlin is a better passer of the ball than Keane.

 

[Infordin]

Pirlo.

Only when he started being 'very good despite his age' did people start to consider him one of the best midfielders in Europe.

Also, he looks cool. I genuinely think Carrick playing in Pirlo's place would have been at least as effective, but wouldn't have received the plaudits due to being less cool looking. Seriously.

Pirlo from 2002-2007 was one of the very best midfielders in Europe; heads and shoulders better than Carrick has ever been. He was the engine behind Italy's World Cup triumph in 2006 and AC Milans 2003 and 2007 CL wins.

The only people who consider Pirlo overrated are they who only judge him by when he was completely past his prime (2013-2015) and didn't watch him during his actual prime (2002-2007).

 

[Needham]

We did have someone on here recently claiming Schneiderlin is a better passer of the ball than Keane.

Was it Schneiderlin?

 

[Stacks]

Zidane has become a universal top 10 player of all time since his retirement. This is the product of a few moments of genius in big games (1998 WC final, 2002 CL final). When he was playing live, I didn't think that he was much better than Figo or Nedved to be honest.

Rivaldo on the other hand is underrated. He's seen as a sidekick to Ronaldo these days. In his prime (1999) he was the best player in the world. I rank him higher than Zidane personally. He was fantastic for Brazil and for Barcelona. IMO he was the best player at the 2002 World Cup too.

strange. His individual awards list is insane. These were awarded whilst playing. Nothing to do with retirement. All these were awarded while still active. This suggests the general football community places him in the highest order. I don't necessarily agree, but hey.

• Ligue 1 Young Player of the Year – 1994

• Ligue 1 Player of the Year – 1996

• Serie A Foreign Footballer of the Year – 1997, 2001

• FIFA World Player of the Year – Bronze award 1997, 2002

• ESM Team of the Year – 1997–98, 2001–02, 2002–03, 2003–04

• UEFA Club Midfielder of the Year – 1998

• L'Équipe Champion of Champions: 1998

• FIFA World Cup All-Star Team – 1998, 2006

• FIFA World Cup Final Man of the Match – 1998

• World Soccer Awards Player of the Year – 1998

• French Player of the Year – 1998, 2002

• Onze d'Or – 1998, 2000, 2001

• Ballon d'Or – 1998[3]

• FIFA World Player of the Year – 1998, 2000, 2003

• FIFA XI – 1998[145]

• El País European Player of the Year – 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003

• UEFA Euro Player of the Tournament – 2000

• UEFA Euro Team of the Tournament – 2000, 2004

• Serie A Footballer of the Year – 2001

• UEFA Team of the Year – 2001, 2002, 2003

• UEFA Champions League Final Man of the Match – 2002

• La Liga Best Foreign Player – 2002

• UEFA Club Footballer of the Year – 2002

• FIFA World Cup Dream Team – 2002

• FIFA 100 – 2004

• UEFA Best European Player of the Past 50 Years – 2004

• FIFA FIFPro World XI – 2005, 2006

• IFFHS World's Best Playmaker – 2006

• FIFA World Cup Golden Ball – 2006

• FIFA World Player of the Year – Silver award 2006

 

[JPRouve]

Trezeguet's legacy reduced since he retired.

 

[Culero]

Zidane is probably the one with the biggest legacy embellishment. Amazing player but when people say he is a top 5 or so of all time that's a clear sign. He lacked the consistency in a league campaign, for instance many people I know laugh as soon as I suggest Iniesta can be compared to Zizou.

 

[Fortitude]

Keane's legacy is overwhelmingly positive at least on here. There is usually a thread every couple of weeks about how he was underrated to which everyone agrees he was, so not sure he can be classed as underrrated or having his legacy tarnished.

There's no way that's true, certainly not to the extent of his actual greatness as a player.

A lot of opinions you see about him now would have been laughing stocks whilst the remnants of his actual playing career were still prominent in the minds of the collective.

What you get now is a myriad of posts coming to the defence of the player or in countenance to the detractors he now has. Then the threads escalate and go back and forth before dying down and then being repeated again a few months later.

 

[ijc]

There's a running theme, I think, were reputations and legacies get beautified or brutally deconstructed over time and then that mud or positivity is passed around until it sticks.

Ryan Giggs has been definitely seen his legacy tarnished to the point where it's practically pointless to fight against the tide, for example. Another obvious one on here is Roy Keane, who has come under all kinds of scrutiny that would have been laughable whilst he was active.

So, in your opinion who have become beneficiaries and who have suffered in terms of legacy post-retirement?

How has Giggsy's legacy been tarnished? Can you explain further? In my eyes he is the ultimate UTD player.

 

[Invictus]

Only when he started being 'very good despite his age' did people start to consider him one of the best midfielders in Europe.

Nope, no way, must've missed Milan from the mid noughties, when he was considered to be a pre-eminent European midfielder in his mid 20s (and probably the best regista in football) as the heartbeat of Milan (leading them to European Cup finals), and was arguably THE top midfielder of the 2006 World Cup at age 26.

The Wizard
For Pirlo, there can be no greater reminder of his passing mastery than the pair of boots that he wore throughout that 2006 World Cup. And what a tournament he had, being named Germany 2006’s third-best player behind Fabio Cannavaro and Zidane.

A metronomic presence, the then 27-year-old was Italy’s main attacking threat throughout the tournament. After scoring Italy’s first goal, a long-range effort against Ghana in the team’s opening game, Pirlo went on to assist four others and won a tournament-high three man-of-the-match awards – including for the Final itself.

Perhaps his most significant contribution, however, came with his no-look pass to assist Fabio Grosso, 119 minutes deep into the semi-final against Germany.

Picking up the loose ball from a corner - awarded after his own stinging shot - the midfielder found time for five touches, despite facing four defenders intent on stopping him. He waited, then waited some more, delaying the release of the ball until the perfect moment.

When it came, his pass cuts through the Germans, finding an unmarked Grosso inside the box. The left back duly curled his first-time shot into the corner of the net, and reeled off in celebrations reminiscent of Marco Tardelli in 1982.

A beautiful goal, crafted by the right boot of Andrea Pirlo. A boot that is now on show for all sports fans in Zurich.

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/y...he-watchman-italy-s-2006-triumph-2804836.html

Pirlo only played ten games for Brescia during that loan spell but Mazzone’s transformation of Pirlo was something that would change Italian football as we know it. In the same summer that Ancelotti became Milan manager (2001), Milan splashed €17m to bring Andrea Pirlo to the red side of Milan. Even then, Milan probably did not know that Pirlo would define Ancelotti’s teams.

Pirlo’s ability to control the edge of the middle third was unparalleled in world football at the time. This meant Gattuso and Seedorf acted as wide midfielders to add width to the notoriously narrow 4-3-1-2. Of course, width in today’s game leads you to think of wide players, which Gattuso was not, but the width of Seedorf and Gattuso opened up the middle for Pirlo, and especially Rui Costa, to operate. It’s all about space.

http://www.italianfootballdaily.com/calcio-tactics-through-time-carlo-ancelottis-milan-unfinished/

Milan may be studded with household names but it was one of their lesser-known characters, Andrea Pirlo, who was voted the team's player of the year last week.

Pirlo has been described as the Milan linchpin, a deep-lying playmaker who can dictate the game with his control, vision and passing. He is also a free-kick specialist par excellence, but his learning curve has been gradual.

If anyone is a danger to Liverpool it is Pirlo. "He is the best in the world in his role," said the Milan coach Carlo Ancelotti. "He is a complete player; he can do everything on the pitch."

"Pirlo is the key to Milan's game," said Lippi, now the Italy coach. "Whenever we were facing Milan we prepared the game keeping in mind Pirlo's characteristics. He is pivotal for Milan with his technical qualities and intelligence."

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2005/may/25/championsleague6

 

[harms]

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 decade His 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.

 

[Infordin]

His individual awards list is insane. These were awarded whilst playing. Nothing to do with retirement. All these were awarded while still active. This suggests the general football community places him in the highest order. I don't necessarily agree, but hey.

He was a fantastic player, absolutely no doubt about it, but when people compare him with Messi or Maradona I really don't know what to say.

 

[2cents]

I missed the Liverpool teams of the 70s and 80s thank feck, but given their success we never really hear much about individual greats in those teams with the exception of Dalglish and maybe Souness. A case of some great players being forgotten as time passes or were they not a team that highlighted individual talents?

 

[Sparky10Legend]

Ok:-

Irwin - great player>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Evra (He could defend as well as attack, who'd have thunk it)
Zidane - I agree, classy Cam, but not top 10 of all time material or even close.
Giggs - the only people who dont rate him are people who werent of an age when he emerged or Stevie Wonder
Rivaldo - a peak way higher than ZZ's, yet now forgotten.
R9 - So much better than CR7 its untrue.

 

[roonster09]

Zidane is probably the one with the biggest legacy embellishment. Amazing player but when people say he is a top 5 or so of all time that's a clear sign. He lacked the consistency in a league campaign, for instance many people I know laugh as soon as I suggest Iniesta can be compared to Zizou.

Maybe because you ask Barca fans?

 

[rcoobc]

Zidane is probably the one with the biggest legacy embellishment. Amazing player but when people say he is a top 5 or so of all time that's a clear sign. He lacked the consistency in a league campaign, for instance many people I know laugh as soon as I suggest Iniesta can be compared to Zizou.

Zidane was thought off as one of the best players of all time by a lot of people. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but he was.

I mean, I bet if I asked 20 random casual football fans if they'd rather have Zidane or Xavi, 18 will say Zidane.

 

[Swaters16]

How has Giggsy's legacy been tarnished? Can you explain further? In my eyes he is the ultimate UTD player.

Most people think of his a pretty good winger, turned midfielder who is know for his long career. It's forgotten that he was a world class left winger in his prime

 

[shaky]

Van Nistelrooy seems to be overlooked in many lists of Premier League or Utd greats. 100 goals in his first 3 seasons, 150 goals in 219 games overall, which is a goal every 1.46 games. A better scoring ratio than Shearer or Henry could boast in England, or indeed any Utd legend either.

 

[Sparky10Legend]

Zidane was thought off as one of the best players of all time by a lot of people. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but he was.

I mean, I bet if I asked 20 random casual football fans if they'd rather have Zidane or Xavi, 18 will say Zidane.

Good point BUT i think if you ask 18 coaches who they would rather have and they would say Xavi.

Like the Scholes/Gerrard comparison i guess.

 

[Stacks]

Pirlo.

Only when he started being 'very good despite his age' did people start to consider him one of the best midfielders in Europe.

Also, he looks cool. I genuinely think Carrick playing in Pirlo's place would have been at least as effective, but wouldn't have received the plaudits due to being less cool looking. Seriously.

This is highly entertaining. Carrick has a weakness against top teams and certainly could not do that job. He lacks the skill, guile and mobility to escape pressure and tough situations. He has never shone at European or International levels where as Pirlo has been a decisive factor in Milan, Juve and Italy success stories. Carrick virtually admitted he gave the ball to Scholes and shirked responsibility where as Pirlo was an orchestrator. Your post should be deleted

 

[Culero]

Maybe because you ask Barca fans?

Barca fans wouldn't laugh at it, and no its fans of whatever teams. Its a sensible comparison.

 

[Culero]

Zidane was thought off as one of the best players of all time by a lot of people. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but he was.

I mean, I bet if I asked 20 random casual football fans if they'd rather have Zidane or Xavi, 18 will say Zidane.

Exactly that is my point, he is a great player, one of the best of his generation but all-time top 5 list? Nahh.

 

[2cents]

Exactly that is my point, he is a great player, one of the best of his generation but all-time top 5 list? Nahh.

Who has him in their top 5?

 

[Stacks]

He was a fantastic player, absolutely no doubt about it, but when people compare him with Messi or Maradona I really don't know what to say.

This is where I draw the line. You will be surprised how many people think Ziande was better than Messi because of his international record. Iniesta also has a great international record and Zidane is actually closer to Iniesta than to Messi. even Raul states the best he has ever seen is Messi

 

[Sammyjunn]

Brazilian Ronaldo. By having a Portuguese homonym.

This, it absurds me that people can say he was better than Messi. But not taking any credit from him, the best number 9 of the past decades (excluded Messi in 2011 and 2012).

 

[Gio]

Zidane has become a universal top 10 player of all time since his retirement. This is the product of a few moments of genius in big games (1998 WC final, 2002 CL final). When he was playing live, I didn't think that he was much better than Figo or Nedved to be honest.

Rivaldo on the other hand is underrated. He's seen as a sidekick to Ronaldo these days. In his prime (1999) he was the best player in the world. I rank him higher than Zidane personally. He was fantastic for Brazil and for Barcelona. IMO he was the best player at the 2002 World Cup too.

Agree with this. Zidane's legacy was always embellished by performing in big games in front of big (British) audiences. And I think the 2006 World Cup made a real difference - performing so commandingly at that centre stage again - with his career having largely been fizzling out during the previous couple of years.

There's no way that's true, certainly not to the extent of his actual greatness as a player.

A lot of opinions you see about him now would have been laughing stocks whilst the remnants of his actual playing career were still prominent in the minds of the collective.

What you get now is a myriad of posts coming to the defence of the player or in countenance to the detractors he now has. Then the threads escalate and go back and forth before dying down and then being repeated again a few months later.

I wonder if that's more about who is voicing the opinion. Some groups of the new generation of supporters value players more on their statistical contribution or their youtube highlights. Neither way really lends itself towards appreciating the metronomic and off-the-ball dominance of the likes of Keane, or even the great Serie A attackers of the 1980s and 1990s whose goal returns look a little hollow by modern big-club standards.

 

[POF]

Zidane has become a universal top 10 player of all time since his retirement. This is the product of a few moments of genius in big games (1998 WC final, 2002 CL final). When he was playing live, I didn't think that he was much better than Figo or Nedved to be honest.

Rivaldo on the other hand is underrated. He's seen as a sidekick to Ronaldo these days. In his prime (1999) he was the best player in the world. I rank him higher than Zidane personally. He was fantastic for Brazil and for Barcelona. IMO he was the best player at the 2002 World Cup too.

Completely agree. I think Zidane is incredibly overrated. He played for 2 of the biggest club sides in world football and won 3 league titles. He was the talisman for France but the strength of their team was the defence.

Zidane was thought off as one of the best players of all time by a lot of people. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but he was.

I mean, I bet if I asked 20 random casual football fans if they'd rather have Zidane or Xavi, 18 will say Zidane.

Well then 18 would be wrong. Xavi was a key man for one of the greatest club sides of all time. Zidane was a very good player but both Juve and Real were better teams after he left.

 

[CG1010]

Scholes, atleast on the caf. Many people have stopped considering him the world-class midfielder that he was. Instead some act as if he is only considered a "great" because of his longevity.

 

[Fortitude]

I wonder if that's more about who is voicing the opinion. Some groups of the new generation of supporters value players more on their statistical contribution or their youtube highlights. Neither way really lends itself towards appreciating the metronomic and off-the-ball dominance of the likes of Keane, or even the great Serie A attackers of the 1980s and 1990s whose goal returns look a little hollow by modern big-club standards.

That's definitely got to be part of it. There is a thing about quantifying midfielders in absolute terms now due to the compartmentalisation of the middle of the pitch and within that, people who didn't see Keane play are desperate to define and categorise him by whatever means they can and that's where the stats come in and further confuse things. Trying to convey his intangibles for those who didn't see him play is also seemingly preposterous.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

I always wonder how good the "holy trinity" of Best, Law and Charlton were at the time. Obviously, YouTube clips tend to make any player look amazing, so it's hard to judge from that sort of footage. Has their ability been embellished over time or were they really just "that good"?

Edit: even more so with Duncan Edwards - there's very little footage at all and fewer and fewer people around who remember him first hand.