1. Messi 2. Ronaldo 3. Iniesta 4. Xavi 5. It's taken me too long to think, I think these four are the 4 most excellent players in the world. No one else comes near them. Maybe Suarez...
I agree. There are many candidates for that 5th spot and it depends on their form. Not many have been that consistent though.
Not sure what games you are watching. Xavi is the orchestrator who retains possession and controls the tempo, Iniesta is the more creative attacker that attempts the riskier passes and dribbles.
While I agree with you in such "general statement" , Sneijder is a more natural playmaker #10, while Iniesta is more of an AM or skillful general midfielder. Sneijder form was just delined last year due to the whole Inter situation. But in general, he has been fairly consistent from Ajax, to Inter and of course for his Holland NT. Both Iniesta and Xavi are a bit more fortunate to have player long with each other since day one - they grown with the team together!
But who had the better WC overall? One was topscorer and won the Silver Ball so going by FIFA it was Sneijder. Sneijder also won UEFA's midfielder of the year ahead of both Xavi and Iniesta. Here's what Xavi has to say:"Sneijder? he deserves the Golden Ball the most. Certainly last year was exceptional, almost single-handedly has made Inter win the Champions League and led his national team to the finals of the World Cup."
I think Schneider is definitely top 5, and should have won either Golden Ball at the WC last year or WPOY. One of the two.
Platini has just routed for a new (revive) UEFA European best player of the year - following the lost of the "original Ballon D'or" to FIFA. This new UEFA best player is based on the old Ballon Dor judges - 53 journalists of Europe Countries. The finalists are the usual suspects 1- Messi 2- CR7 3- Xavi
So if we eliminate the top three to four teams in the biggest leagues in Europe just how of a level are you really getting? For example of you remove Barca and Madrid from La Liga you may get parody but at best that would be it. Maybe you should spend some time actually watching some of the South American leagues before making such a clearly biased statement.
I'd tend to agree with most posts by putting Messi & CR at the top, followed by Xavi. But after that, it's difficult for me to say... I like Nasri & Schweinsteiger... how would you guys rank those two?
You know what would be cool? Starting one of these threads with a clear and defined set of criteria. Maybe something that doesn't just look at individual stats or prettiest hair but also direct tangible influence on the players they are around. Without a legitimate criteria is simply boils down to opinion which turns these threads into yet the same fanboy fest that every other thread of this nature evolves in to........I'm just saying.
And what happens if we eliminate the top teams from the biggest South American leagues? The fact of the matter is that the money is in Europe. The most talented players from the whole World go there to play and compete. There are plenty of good South American players who do not play in the biggest European teams yet they still play in Europe. Sooner or later they do make the move to one of "the big dogs". The best players play in Europe. And you have to play there in order to be voted the best.
Based on watching the Copa Sudamerica and Libertadores over the past few years in particular you still have a tremendous amount of parody. What it really translates to is quality players and quality play. Looking at Argentina for example both Boca and riber haven't played well in the recent two to three years yet teams like Velez put together not just tremendous results but very attractive play. That is true but for how long? European economies aren't exactly in great shape while quite a few South American economies are on an upswing. That too is fact. They go there to make money. It's because they dream of playing for the likes of Mainz or Celta Vigo........ You are absolutely correct but in the same vein had they stayed in South America many would at best be utility players. Some but not most. With that said why can't Europe produce their own talent to the same level of South American clubs? Some say it's purely financial but the reality is that an average South American is still more skilled and savvy then the average European player. To a degree that is true but you still have several players in South America that still produce consistently higher than many Europeans. Several of the top players in Europe are South American including the hands down best player in the world. They didn't gain that skill by playing in Europe, they gained it where they grew up. Messi for example is great because he has an inordinate amount of natural talent, it has nothing to do with being in Barca's system. The system allows him to showcase that talent. Truth is he may not put up the same results at another club but the talent will still be there. Truth is I enjoy watching European football to a degree but from a watching perspective it just doesn't compared to what you see week in and week out in leagues from Argentina, Brazil to Uruguay and Chile. Try watching it regularly before dismissing it. Honest question, when was the last time you watched full South American matches to form the opinion you have? I'm willing to be you either never have or it's been some time.
It's all based on cycles. Teams like Boca and River are in bad cycles at the moment. It happens everywhere, in Europe too. Sometimes, in some leagues around the World the powers are more balanced leading to more even competition. But that doesn't mean the quality is necessarily better. There is still more money in Europe than in South America. And the best players are still there. Making more money is not the only reason they go there. Competing against the best players and teams is another reason. Not all of them are stars in Europe either. Nor are they always the best players for their teams. I never claimed South America doesn't produce talents. I'm just saying they go to Europe to play, compete, earn more money and prove they are the best. So what? The best and the highly regarded competitions are in Europe. The best player at the moment is South American, true. But he is more a product of Barca than his continent or country. Messi's natural talent is undeniable, but he wouldn't be the player he is today if it wasn't for Barca's youth system. Remember, he has been there since he was 13 years old. What do you see that is not comparable? TBH with you, I used to watch some South American league games up until a couple of years ago. But the channels I have stopped covering many of these leagues. Now, from time to time I catch some Brazilian league matches. I'm not too impressed with what I see. Not any more so than when watching games from the top European leagues. I should also tell you that I'm not too impressed with the quality of the games in Europe either. My taste has been spoiled, however. Blame Barca for that. Since Guardiola has taken over, I've been thoroughly enjoying watching only them. Their playing style has raised my standards really high. Having said all that, I think Europe's Champions league offers the best quality football.
Interesting that a lot put Ronaldo right below Messi, then the others far below. My gut reaction is to put Xavi and Sneijder above Ronaldo, honestly.
Actually it is cylical, players want to make as much money as possible, top euro clubs have the best offer ergo they get the best bunch. AKA, Im too lazy to watch SA football, therefore that "lazy ass" latin player better prove himself in front of my eyes or else he is shit. Yonko, cut the crap. I remember how you were arguing adamantly against James and Dagoods in another thread when they said that Messi is more of a product of a great system and less of a natural talent yet here you agree with the same point when it fits your agenda.Please don't be a Teso. I see you didn't watch the Santos vs Flamengo game. It is weird how this game isn't brought up or hyped up like the europeans ones, people were creaming themselves over the Arsenal vs barcelona 1st leg match, yet I didn't hear any noise around this match anywhere in the world. So the latvian league is better than than the Brazilian league. I mean this the problem with the people who arrogantly sing the "Bestest football only in mighty europe" chorus that SA's have with, What do you consider the best leagues after EPL, La liga, Serie A and Bundesliga? Moishe is just arguing for this, he is not arguing for the superiority of the Venezuelan league over the porteguese but for the Argentinian and Brazilian ones specifically. Most Europeans believe somehow that Erdiviese (sp?) and Portuguese leagues are undoubtedly superior to the Brazilian which IMO is nonsense and screams "Euro-centric".
Burco touched on much of this but as the response was directed at me I'd like to respond. It would have been sooner but I was about to catch a flight from Miami to Austin. It does happen everywhere and while it's true that Boca had been in a bad run of form/results and riber, simply being in an awful way the rest of the league particularly Velez blew up and produced excellent team football. It's parody that's all. Think of it this way, when Barca had those lean years, it wasn't because the rest of the league got better. True and that too applies to European football as well. Last night at I watched Bayer Leverkusen and Weder Bremen which are supposed to be two well regarded teams and the quality particularly on first touches and shooting was horrible. It was no better than the Chacarita/Riber match I watched today. But for how long? European economies are exactly examples of stability right now while many South American economies are trending positively. What happens when the euro is worthless? Less and less players are going to go to Europe and then you'll see something really telling. Not nearly a fraction of the European players will be offered shots in South American leagues. Why? The strength of the almighty dollar is the only reason European football is what it is and if you were to eliminate the South American or African influence then you again would see a telling tale. It really is the money. Once again exclude the Madrids, Barcas, Inters, Milans....and do you really believe a South American player really looks forward to going to Getafe so he can mainly play against all the incredibly mediocre sides in La Liga that aren't Barca or Madrid and to a much lesser extent Villarreal or Valencia? Completely true YONKO no argument there. Still begs the question as to why they are there. Cheaper? Some would say so but the truth is a little more telling. They get purchased because they are simply more developed naturally than their European counterparts. That's it, not much else. Most that have played in both the Champs League and the Libertadores will likely say the Libertadores was the tougher of the two for a multitude of reasons. . According to Europeans you are absolutely correct. In South America you aren't going to find anyone putting it before the Libertadores. The same goes for the enormous South American immigrants in the United States. Europe too for that matter. Burco already touched on this but you can't move the goal posts to suit your argument. As important as Barcas system has been to his success it's also been a huge hindrance in that he can't function outside of it. Had he stayed at NOB's or any other Primera side until he was like 17-18 he would be a much better player particularly for the national team. The average Argentine (what I watch the most of) players have better first touches and vision than European players of the same age. And so it all boils down to an opinion based no recent experiences. Thanks for leaving me little doubt of a bias. I agree with much of the above though I feel the biggest detriment to football worldwide has been the almighty dollar. Players move so frequently that teams gain zero consistency. That Fulham vs Dnipro D'petrovsk match tomorrow is going to be a sterling example of football skill and class.
True, financial reasons might be the main driving force, but players want to test themselves against different opponents and in different competitions. It is not about me and these players proving themselves to me. They have to prove to themselves, everyone who is watching and voting for the best player awards. How are people supposed to value individual performances in SA when the best players of the modern game play in Europe? I've always said that Messi is a product of Barca's system. What I argued about with Dagoods and James is different. No, I didn't watch that game. The difference in hype is because most of the World's eyes are on Europe and top European competitions. That is a fact, whether you like it or not, regardless if it is fair or not. No, that is not what I've said nor is what I'm arguing. France's League 1. So, how strong would you say the Argentinian and Brazilian leagues are? Keep in mind that this discussion is not about which leagues are better. It is about where the attention is and where the biggest stars of the modern game are. I don't doubt even for a second that there is quality in South America. But for decades now, the best South American players play in Europe and get World wide recognition there. I didn't create that. Tell me, are there any players in SA who are better than the Top 5-10 players who currently play in Europe?