you see that outside of the foot pass, then think about bruno's horrible attempts
man...
man...
So where is Modric rated in best CM’s of all time ?
- Thread starter 432JuanMata
- Start date
Best outside foot in the world by far. Makes it look so easy.
Modric's average position has always made less frequent for him to hit those long passes than Pirlo who was ideally set up for it. In terms of execution and accuracy, I never noticed that much of a gap between them. Going into a further comparison between would be difficult because the different role would impact it too much. At their best, I'd still take Modric without a single doubt in my mind
Comparing Pirlo to Modric or Xavi or Scholes is totally legitimate. I find it bizarre when Iniesta or Zidane are part of the conversation though.
It’s a good thing that we have seen Xavi and modric play against each other so we have some evidence to play with and the evidence was Xavi made Modric look completely mediocre when they played. I’m not talking about real or barca as a whole. I’m just talking about the midfield battle and in those games Xavi made a fool out of Modric every time. Never stood out, Couldn’t get near him, couldn’t touch him and that was a Xavi close to retirement and Modric in his prime age. Recency bias is the worst thing and I hate it. Xavi is the best CM of all time bar none. He made every midfielder look poor to bang average. Schooled everyone of them. No one is fit to lace his boots. Never seen a midfielder that dominant ever in football. As fabulous as Modric still is right now , there is a real dearth of world class midfielders, a time where Jorginho is one of the best midfielders on the planet. If only Xavi was still playing and we could see then, oh wait they did play in the same era and we know what happened and who was better.
Go watch his games again for barca or Spain whether against Scholes or Modric or pirlo or anyone if you have some confusion left in you. Stupid mindless chatter is what it is declaring Modric better than Xavi.
Go watch his games again for barca or Spain whether against Scholes or Modric or pirlo or anyone if you have some confusion left in you. Stupid mindless chatter is what it is declaring Modric better than Xavi.
Last edited:
You can't just say something outrageous and put 'arguably' to it to make it a supporting narrative! That's more a strawman than anything.
Xavi was the heartbeat for his country and has a fair claim for club too. Others contributed for both, of course they did, but Xavi was the reason systems flourished. There's literally no player in history not in complementary teams, and if we are talking Roy Of The Rovers, that's not a discussion for any player who has been mentioned in this thread and is more the realm of a Robson or whoever else who had to do everything (relatively) by themselves.
If you're going to say 'arguably" David Silva had more influence than Xavi, support that claim.
Lots of you underplaying the fact that Xavi had a whole cohort of players, both at club and country level, that played a style maximising his talents. Tiki Taka was *the* identity at club and country around the 2010 time. Bravo to him for shining in that environment. But Modric never had it so good.
Barca had a whole development school La Masia for producing these types, for goodness sake.
Modric was carrying the likes of Assou Ekotto and Kaboul.
Barca had a whole development school La Masia for producing these types, for goodness sake.
Modric was carrying the likes of Assou Ekotto and Kaboul.
Last edited:
What the actual...
What games was Xavi marginalised for from 2008 to 2012?
Come on that’s not true, Xavi has the second most assists in La Liga history and 20 assists in one season, 2008/09. Proper assists too, many unbelievable defence splitting passes.
Spain have won nothing since Xavi and Barcelona haven’t got the CL final without Xavi in their squad, despite having some star midfielders.
Interesting read this one.
Lots of you are underplaying the fact that Xavi had a whole cohort of players at club and country that dominated using a style playing to his strengths. Tiki Taka was *the* identity around the 2010 time. Bravo to him for shining in that environment, but Modric never had it so good.
They had a whole development school La Masia dedicated to it, for goodness sake.
Modric was carrying the likes of Assou Ekotto and Kaboul.
They had a whole development school La Masia dedicated to it, for goodness sake.
Modric was carrying the likes of Assou Ekotto and Kaboul.
Prime, premier-league-player-of-the-year, Juan Mata couldn't get into the team around then. You're comparing 2 different levels of depths.
How are these allowed to be promoted ? Inspirational stuff.
And then there is this. Kill me now.
For a few years at Spurs but since then Modric has been at one of the most expensively assembled teams ever for nearly 10 years alongside two of the best pure passers of their generation (Kroos and Alonso) and for country a Barcelona star midfielder (Rakitic), so he hasn’t been with complete mugs. Modric and Kroos on paper could dominate midfield like Xavi but they’ve allowed the opposition to take a foothold on games too often, relative to any Xavi team.
I love that Vernon posted this twice and it is my copy paste you chose to reply to.
Haha I blame my dodgy phone - have deleted the duplicate!
Thiago couldn’t make the 2018 Spain World Cup team, they always have a lot of depth in midfield. Doesn’t mean the first team is successful.
And @B20, sorry that was the message I had seen!
For me Xavi and Zidane are at the top with Modric and Iniesta just behind them but the difference is not much considering the different strengths of all the players.
As much as I love Pirlo, him and Scholes are behind Modric and Iniesta, again considering that these two are also very different types of midfielders who play very different roles.
As much as I love Pirlo, him and Scholes are behind Modric and Iniesta, again considering that these two are also very different types of midfielders who play very different roles.
For having a differing of opinion about Xavi?
Xavi was a fantastic player but I think people just put him as the default number one because he was wonderful in the tiki taka system , but he had the best about playing alongside him too, I’m just not sure he does it for Croatia, maybe he does and I’m wrong no way of knowing, it’s just an opinion.
Last edited:
: “David Silva is one of the most talented players that Spain has ever produced - without a shadow of a doubt
“He’s a spectacular footballer! He has been throughout his entire career.
“Right from when he played for Eibar and Celta, and when he went back to Valencia.
“For the national team he has been a cornerstone, of that generation of highly talented Spanish footballers.
There’s a quote from Xavi himself..
I am just not sure Messi would have been as good if he long balls pumped to him all the time instead of playing with xaviesta.
And Ronaldo is good at heading.
QED
And Ronaldo is good at heading.
QED
Lucky he didn’t play for Liverpool then..
Well, he’s still running the show at the highest level at 36. Took Croatia to WC final last time and now another CL final incoming?
Fair to say he’s one of the greatest, if not the best ever in that position. Of course There are many good midfielders but for me he’s the best out there with Kroos.
That assist yesterday was just ridiculous!
Fair to say he’s one of the greatest, if not the best ever in that position. Of course There are many good midfielders but for me he’s the best out there with Kroos.
That assist yesterday was just ridiculous!
Modric is amazing. If he goes on to win yet another CL this year then surely he and Benzema go up a notch in the rankings. Got to be getting to be on par with Zidane soon you'd think.
This.
To think that Modric, Pirlo and Xavi was on a higher level to Scholes is fair enough, though I disagree. What is not fair enough is forgetting all the times Scholes was instrumental against the best teams at the highest level - which is one thing I pointed out. The other thing that I pointed out is the tendency to think that any of those four always were good or functioned well even.
I think it’s well known why Scholes had an ok carreer with England but not much more. I think for those of us who have watched Pirlo and Xavi in good and bad days, it’s easy to imagine how they might have looked if put on the right wing or as a second striker in a team playing like England. Good for them, they both experienced a period of time at their NT where a coach put them in their best role in a team that played to their strengths. That very seldom happened to Scholes, and if we look at the coaches in question, the competition and the rest of the context, it explains a lot. Now, you might still want to put Xavi, Pirlo and Modric higher based on their NT carreers, and that’s fair enough, but using the NT carreer of Scholes without mentioning the context, I think is unfair revision against Scholes.
Of all these, I think Modric is the most rounded player, he would do well in almost any team, and he’s been one of my favorites since he broke through for Croatia. It would be revisionism though, to omit the fact that several periods at club level, people have counted him as ‘overhyped’, ‘through’, ‘reached his level’ or similar things, things I would attribute more to team factors than to his level, but still. He has been made to shine, and shined, at especially two international tournaments, and that colurs peoples memories. And he deserves it!
I just think Paul Scholes also deserves being remembered in the right light, no need to downplay him to win am argument for Modric.
That is not supporting your claim. Games, data, frames of reference?
Xavi is not just a player in a system; he is a system in a player. As corny as that may sound, it is backed by statistics, trophies and metrics revolving around Xavi’s forte, which I am certain no other player who has played, period, can match.
Whether those qualities are your cup of tea or not, or if they constitute the ultimate midfielder of his type is in the eye of the beholder, but it is tangible proof of what he is and what he represented.
I find it very hard to judge Barcelona players. It's a club like no other- where they have had a footballing style from the ages of Cryuff.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'd have it Iniesta, Xavi, Modric, but for me Iniesta is ahead of both of them. The ultimate big game player who had that magic and deciding factor surrounding him, moreso than anyone else.
Modric still playing at a higher level late in his 30s than Xavi or Iniesta doesn't really change anything for me, it's a tiebreaker when you're in the same tier but he's in a tier below for me. And it's actually Benzema who is running the show and dragging Real through this year's CL, even though Modric is quite clearly still class.
I'd take Modric over Xavi, but Iniesta was a different animal altogether.
Who’s downplaying him to win an argument for Modric? I was saying the other poster had a good point about Scholes and international level, wasn’t even the one to bring Scholes up, but I also believe how good as Scholes was he wasn’t in the same tier as the other 3 and mostly that is because of international success.
Xavi isn’t going to win polls or even be credited in the same way as the other two. In fact, Xavi may even be seen as boring and one-track with his ‘subtle’ game.
Iniesta is primed to win such things because his work was done further upfield and led to more direct goal actions, plus his style is the most aesthetically pleasing of the lot by some distance. He shouldn’t even be in a poll with the other two; his competition is Zidane, Ronaldinho and anyone else who played in those more nebulous areas of the pitch which blur the lines of what position the player actually plays in or is defined by.
I agree they're different players but you'd still place Zidane ahead of Pirlo even though they were different midfielders, no? Or any CAM who is in your opinion a tier above a DM.
There's always some subjectivity to these things of course. Maybe Xavi would have scored the winning goal in the 2010 final had he played Iniesta's position, but he didn't and Iniesta did score that goal.
I don’t expect Zidane or anyone else mentioned to come close to Pirlo as a deep-lying playmaker, equally, Pirlo is expected to be no match for any of these guys in an interactive game. I think the gauge, if there must be one, is in who was more exceptional at their role, which is where we can say Zidane or Iniesta are better players than Pirlo despite not having a prayer of recreating what he did on the pitch.
I don’t think things like the last sentence should have any bearing in such a discussion, and that they do shows why they are tainted and tilted towards the player further upfield than their compatriot. It’s not a coincidence that the top 10 players of all time is flooded with forwards and offensive players with someone like Beckenbauer literally incapable of being considered the best player ever under any circumstance.
Agree with the overall point and Xavi certainly dominated the majority of those games, but to be fair to Modric, this was a brilliant do-or-die performance against a juggernaut of a Spanish midfield.
Still, it feels like Xavi isn't fully getting his dues here as the hub of arguably the greatest club and international teams of all time. You can draw a close parallel between his peak and the peaks of Barcelona and Spain. When he moved into top gear in 2008, Spain overcame their international hoodoo as he won player of the tournament. Their 3 consecutive major international tournament wins has never been matched. When his powers started to wane in 2012, so did the success of Barcelona and Spain. So much so that the system no longer worked. Both Barcelona and Spain became vulnerable to the counter-attack, getting skelped famously a number of times, as the system could no longer function without Xavi's iron-clad grip on the centre of the park. Incapable of replacing him, Barcelona then had to redesign their team and midfield to be more transition-based to be successful again.
While a whole generation of great players coalesced around Xavi to a greater extent than Modric (or Pirlo or Scholes), he was still the starting point for that dominance. His instant command of the game, almost every single game, has never really been matched. What is particularly persuasive is how poorly Spain struggled when he was absent during those prime years. In 2010 Spain were unbeaten in 55 out of 58 games and had won 15 friendlies in a row prior to drawing against Mexico then losing against Argentina, Portugal and Italy. The common factor tying each of those defeats together was the absence of Xavi.
- Mexico 0-0 Spain. Mexico did the early running and took the lead through Hernandez. Only once Xavi came on midway through the second half did they start to compete and he set up Silva's equaliser.
- Argentina 4-1 Spain. Xavi didn't start and Cambiasso, Banega and Mascherano ran the show as they raced into a 3-0 lead. Xavi comes on at half-time and instantly regains control of the midfield.
- Portugal 4-0 Spain. With the game goalless until the stroke of half time. Xavi comes off and Spain collapse to a 4-0 defeat.
- Italy 2-1 Spain - Xavi absent.
There was a five year period where Xavi dominated literally every midfield battle he played. Domination so total, that it was a foregone conclusion before the first whistle. It was a certainty that the opposition would be unable to win the midfield battle if Xavi played.
No midfielder has ever even come close to the kind of dominance Xavi exerted over the middle of the pitch. It's simply unprecedented.
No midfielder has ever even come close to the kind of dominance Xavi exerted over the middle of the pitch. It's simply unprecedented.
That assist was an absolute joke. An absolute fecking joke. I nearly smashed up my TV.