Guest firetotheworks Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 He still won everything there was to win almost, not that I consider trophies critical to how great a player is or was and while it’s a legitimate argument when comparing to others and perhaps why Messi not winning a WC may count against him in that regard in such debates, it shouldn’t or wouldn’t with me when assessing how great a player was/is. If you need to include trophies and stats to back up an argument why x was better than y we could say Andy Cole was greater than Alan Shearer for example. Zidane for me belongs to the greatest players to have ever played the game based on being able to play at a level that renders the dynamics of the game almost obsolete in a way that meant he could perform outside of all those elements regardless. Xavi and Iniesta couldn’t control a game on sheer talent alone, because they didn’t have enough talent to be able to do that like a Ronaldo could or a Ronaldinho. Different players of course, but some players are so good they don’t need to be in an all-star conquering team or rely on a system or set of tactics for them to do their thing. That’s why Messi is better than Cronaldo as an individual, at playing football, as a footballer. It’s noticebale looking back through the history of the game at the true great greats they never had a definitive position or role and that’s because they were so good they didnt need one and doing so would have restricted their game anyway. Great players play wherever they like on the pitch and don’t need to be up front or in midfield or out on the wing or need an enforcer alongside them to perform. Pele, Cruyff, Zidane, Maradona and even Ronaldinho didn’t have a role, they weren’t strikers or central midfielders, they weren’t wingers or whatever. Wayne Rooney has been a great player, but could have been one of the greats had Fergie not restricted him or enforced a rule of discipline such as tactics, role in the team or position over his natural ability. Ronaldinho’s attitude prevented him from reaching that level, but even then his talent was so great, he has to be mentioned in that breath. Ronaldo of Brazil was a centre-forward, but he was like no-one else we’ve seen in that position before or since and likely never will see and that’s why he’s considered. Xavi and Iniesta will go down as legends and greats of Barcelona, their national team and of their era and position, better than most, but they won’t go down as two of the greatest players to have ever played the game of all-time in the way Zidane is and rightly so IMO. Opinions and all that jazz of course... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at. I don’t know if he could play that role as such, but he has shown time and time again he can play those kind of passes and many a time better than they ever could and that’s why he’s so great among everything else he’s great at, because he can do it. He’s not too shabby in the air either for being cock height. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astroblack Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 A player like Xavi, because the main part of his game was control pass, control pass, it is not what alot of people watching are looking out for, it is almost boring for some people, they would rather watch someone dribbling past everyone etc, that is more flashy and eye catching They watch Xavi and think that anyone can do what he is doing, as if constantly controlling and passing the ball, never giving it away is somehow easy, anyone who has played the game at any level knows that it is definatley not! I suppose everyone likes watching different styles of play. When i played, i was a passer, which is probably why i sympathise more with those type of players. Don't get me wrong, i love watching Messi and Ronaldo, but not as much as a great passer like Xavi, Scholes, Pirlo. I am sad that those 3 are finished tbh. Really well said 1892. I feel the same way. when I play(and I mean at the park in 5 a side and 8 a side, real football scares me) I also like to pass. I get just as much satisfaction from pinging a diagnol than skilling 3 or four players. But the true reason I play deeper is because I'd rather be a cog in the team and win than be the main man and lose. If I missed a chance or miscontrolled a pass, it could rock me and I might hide the next time. I like to play deep so I can set up chances for others. It's safer. I guess that's why the Zidanes of the world stick out. Their heads don't drop and they continue inventing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 He still won everything there was to win almost, not that I consider trophies critical to how great a player is or was and while it’s a legitimate argument when comparing to others and perhaps why Messi not winning a WC may count against him in that regard in such debates, it shouldn’t or wouldn’t with me when assessing how great a player was/is. If you need to include trophies and stats to back up an argument why x was better than y we could say Andy Cole was greater than Alan Shearer for example. I think we're going around in circles here. I'm not judging players solely on stats, I was just saying that if Zidane is the all-controlling God you say he is, you'd maybe expect there to be a level of consistency that resulted in an amount of honours more in line with other players who are considered to be the greatest of all time. But as it happens his honours are pretty paltry in that regard. That's the beginning and end of my point really. Anyway, we're having a discussion so we're undoubtedly boring everyone now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonArmy1892 Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at. Workrate? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 He still won everything there was to win almost, not that I consider trophies critical to how great a player is or was and while it’s a legitimate argument when comparing to others and perhaps why Messi not winning a WC may count against him in that regard in such debates, it shouldn’t or wouldn’t with me when assessing how great a player was/is. If you need to include trophies and stats to back up an argument why x was better than y we could say Andy Cole was greater than Alan Shearer for example. I think we're going around in circles here. I'm not judging players solely on stats, I was just saying that if Zidane is the all-controlling God you say he is, you'd maybe expect there to be a level of consistency that resulted in an amount of honours more in line with other players who are considered to be the greatest of all time. But as it happens his honours are pretty paltry in that regard. That's the beginning and end of my point really. I didn’t quite say he was this all controlling God like I actually think your point is valid, if they were that good why didn’t they score more goals, win more stuff etc. but it’s a weak one that takes away how good they were as footballers on their own which can only be judged on how good a footballer they were. Xavi and Iniesta were obviously very good footballers, great footballers, but Zidane was better and so good he belongs in that small category of al-time greats. Greats where trophies and personal honours and stats don’t and never could define how good a footballer is or isn’t otherwise Butt again would be up there or someone like Beckham. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at. I don’t know if he could play that role as such, but he has shown time and time again he can play those kind of passes and many a time better than they ever could and that’s why he’s so great among everything else he’s great at, because he can do it. He’s not too shabby in the air either for being cock height. Of course he could, even Xavi says he could do it better than himself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinho lad Posted November 16, 2018 Share Posted November 16, 2018 Zidane's dominance at Euro 2000 is something that Iniesta never reached, imo. He was a boss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Boy Posted November 21, 2018 Share Posted November 21, 2018 I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at. Workrate? His football intelligence means he doesn't need to have a high work rate. he is always in the right place. He isn't lazy mind Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonArmy1892 Posted November 21, 2018 Share Posted November 21, 2018 I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at. Workrate? His football intelligence means he doesn't need to have a high work rate. he is always in the right place. He isn't lazy mind I meant if he were to play Xavi's role, technically yes, but to play CM you have to constantly cover ground, and you can't just switch it on and off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Boy Posted November 21, 2018 Share Posted November 21, 2018 I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at. Workrate? His football intelligence means he doesn't need to have a high work rate. he is always in the right place. He isn't lazy mind He closes down as part of a group. never seen him tackle mind but he intercepts the ball a lot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 Zidane's dominance at Euro 2000 is something that Iniesta never reached, imo. He was a boss. Would agree with this. The great Barcelona and Spanish teams are marked by superb teams in the truest sense. I don't rank them individually as high as I rank the unit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 I don't like how footballers wages in the UK are (a) not public domain - not that we have a right to know, it's just interesting and (b) why it's often calculated in weekly pay. Who thinks of their wage/contract/salary in terms of weeks? Unless you are paid by the day / hour? When I played FM I would switch the wages to a year. A £100k p/w contract was something like £5.1m a year. 3 year deal, £15m. Can quickly look at the other finances to decide whether it was worth it or not. Much easier to compare to other players too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnNUFC Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 I don't like how footballers wages in the UK are (a) not public domain - not that we have a right to know, it's just interesting and (b) why it's often calculated in weekly pay. Who thinks of their wage/contract/salary in terms of weeks? Unless you are paid by the day / hour? When I played FM I would switch the wages to a year. A £100k p/w contract was something like £5.1m a year. 3 year deal, £15m. Can quickly look at the other finances to decide whether it was worth it or not. Much easier to compare to other players too. Because for the vast majority, the weekly pay rate was somewhat relatable, but now even that's getting out of hand. We might begin to see pay by day soon enough tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astroblack Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so. Squires nailed him https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2018/may/01/david-squires-on-peter-drury-commentator-what-is-football-if-not-for-dreaming Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnNUFC Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so. Squires nailed him https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2018/may/01/david-squires-on-peter-drury-commentator-what-is-football-if-not-for-dreaming Normally don't like Squires but that's brilliant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon25 Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so. Aye. He’s another fucking melt. Very few commentators I can take these days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 I want us to go down. Whilst not really an opinion, reading the Other Games thread, this would appear to be an unpopular thing to want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 I want us to go down. Whilst not really an opinion, reading the Other Games thread, this would appear to be an unpopular thing to want. If rafa stays and we get taken over = No relegation. If ashley stays = Relegation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 I want us to go down. Whilst not really an opinion, reading the Other Games thread, this would appear to be an unpopular thing to want. Why? It changed nothing the last 2 times and wouldn't again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 I want us to go down. Whilst not really an opinion, reading the Other Games thread, this would appear to be an unpopular thing to want. Why? It changed nothing the last 2 times and wouldn't again. Because the fat cunt got lucky. Tell me what decent manager is going to touch us if we go down? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbnufc Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 I want us to go down. Whilst not really an opinion, reading the Other Games thread, this would appear to be an unpopular thing to want. Why? It changed nothing the last 2 times and wouldn't again. Because the fat cunt got lucky. Tell me what decent manager is going to touch us if we go down? Exactly. Then what? We're stuck in the Championship with a shit manager and Ashley as owner. In what world is that any better? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted December 30, 2018 Share Posted December 30, 2018 Exactly. Then what? We're stuck in the Championship with a shit manager and Ashley as owner. In what world is that any better? Less money coming into club. That's when Ashley will start to take notice. He may not sell us even then but i'll take something from the fact that he's not creaming off the TV money for himself. On the playing side, we may win a greater percentage of games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now