Greatest Modern Player ??

[kingkong1]

Yes but he controlled the pace of star studded teams and more effective at it than the normal ones that do.As a matter of fact, there is a legitimous tendency to give Zidane a respectable place in the world scénarium (and let's remember that ANY of the 100 best ever are geniuses) - not among the Top 22, but at least among the Top 44-66, and very far from the Top 223-250 as some black-hatted guy insinuates.

However even among the Top 44 it would be hard for him.

Being in the Top 44 in a 4-3-3 formation means that he'd be among the 12 top midfielders ever.

Without thinking much I'll give you at least 12 post-1950 midfielders (it could be more) undisputably above Zidane's level: Didi, Boszik, Di Stéfano, Cruyjff, Beckenbauer, Zizinho, Bobby Charlton, Gérson, Tostão, Rivelino, Zico, Platini.

Regardless hors-concours n. 10s Pelé and Maradona.

I find it very hard he could fight his way into that select group.

The most certain is his presence among the top 18 midfielders ever (13th - 18th place).

What's not saying little.

He'd still be in the elite of world football (with the only difference that, among those deities, he'd be Mercurius, the messenger-god).

And that's an honour to ANY midfielder in the world.

[babaorum]

As a matter of fact, there is a legitimous tendency to give Zidane a respectable place in the world scénarium (and let's remember that ANY of the 100 best ever are geniuses) - not among the Top 22, but at least among the Top 44-66, and very far from the Top 223-250 as some black-hatted guy insinuates.

However even among the Top 44 it would be hard for him.

Being in the Top 44 in a 4-3-3 formation means that he'd be among the 12 top midfielders ever.

Without thinking much I'll give you at least 12 post-1950 midfielders (it could be more) undisputably above Zidane's level: Didi, Boszik, Di Stéfano, Cruyjff, Beckenbauer, Zizinho, Bobby Charlton, Gérson, Tostão, Rivelino, Zico, Platini.

Regardless hors-concours n. 10s Pelé and Maradona.

I find it very hard he could fight his way into that select group.

The most certain is his presence among the top 18 midfielders ever (13th - 18th place).

What's not saying little.

He'd still be in the elite of world football (with the only difference that, among those deities, he'd be Mercurius, the messenger-god).

And that's an honour to ANY midfielder in the world.

Bozcik, Didi, Beckenbauer (as a midfielder but we all know he was much more than that), Gerson, Charlton, Rivelino are not clearly ahead of Zidane.

Tostao didn't exactly play at the same position.

Only Cruyff, Platini and Zico are undoubtedly better.

[babaorum]

...and Di Stefano.

[Gregoriak]

Bozcik, Didi, Beckenbauer (as a midfielder but we all know he was much more than that), Gerson, Charlton, Rivelino are not clearly ahead of Zidane.

Tostao didn't exactly play at the same position.

Only Cruyff, Platini and Zico are undoubtedly better.

I think Beckenbauer undoubtedly would have to be rated superior to Zidane as a midfielder had he kept on playing in that position for all his career.

Zidane played three World Cups as a midfielder yet I doubt anyone can come up with a similarly impressive compilation of World Cup highlights for Zidane as this Beckenbauer World Cup 1966 compilation (when he was only 20 years old).

KEiQ8QOjMzI

[Perú FC]

Only Cruyff, Platini and Zico are undoubtedly better.
Not for me, I think Zidane is over Platini and Zico, only undoubtedly better Cruyff and Di Stéfano, and not clearly Beckenbauer.

[Antonio81]

As far as technique, Zidane gets the nod for arguably the most skillful player of modern times. When he was actually in the game, that is. Platini(not nearly as skillful but with a much higher work ethic) carried France to the Euro in 1984 by playing superbly every time he stepped on the field(something Zidane never did.)

However, claiming Zidane had nothing or little to do with what France achieved is ridiculous, like I've said before, France played horrendously every time he was absent (or absent in spirit, which was quite often.) As far as technical ability, I would rank him with Cryuff, Maradona, and Pele. Outside of that he's definitely below them.

Having said that, he definately is among the top 3 players of modern times (which probably says more about the lack of great players nowadays than how great he was.) Other than Ronaldo(the original) I couldn't rank any modern player as overall better than him. Maldini, Baresi, etc. are entirely different players and there's no point in comparing them.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

Bozcik, Didi, Beckenbauer (as a midfielder but we all know he was much more than that), Gerson, Charlton, Rivelino are not clearly ahead of Zidane.


Not for me, I think Zidane is over Platini and Zico, only undoubtedly better Cruyff and Di Stéfano, and not clearly Beckenbauer.

Based on what criteria? There is little point in people listing players if we do not know your reasoning.

[erick]

Based on what criteria? There is little point in people listing players if we do not know your reasoning.


thats why i dont share my opinion because im young n i havent seen much of the older players :D

[Teso Dos Bichos]

It might be a good thing as you will not be tainted by nostalgia.

[erick]

It might be a good thing as you will not be tainted by nostalgia.
...

cuz i would name players like del piero,cr7,figo,and nedved

[Perú FC]

Based on what criteria? There is little point in people listing players if we do not know your reasoning.
In my case, the same I've wrotten sometimes in the discussion we've had about Zidane and haven't changed; I'm not going to repit again that here because I know your position about the French and I believe would be a repetitive discussion.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

So now I have a 'position about the French'? Would you care to back that up with some evidence?

Refusing to post your criteria or reasoning does not help those who do not know where you are coming from and does not help the progression of the discussion. If all people are going to do is list players then we are going to achieve nothing.

[babaorum]

I think Beckenbauer undoubtedly would have to be rated superior to Zidane as a midfielder had he kept on playing in that position for all his career.

Zidane played three World Cups as a midfielder yet I doubt anyone can come up with a similarly impressive compilation of World Cup highlights for Zidane as this Beckenbauer World Cup 1966 compilation (when he was only 20 years old).

KEiQ8QOjMzI

I got no doubt that overall Beckenbauer was a better player.

[babaorum]

or absent in spirit, which was quite often

Not that often. Zidane actually had few poor games with France. He was good or very good most of the time and pretty often great.

[babaorum]

Based on what criteria? There is little point in people listing players if we do not know your reasoning.

- skills
- influence on the game
- personal and collective achievements
- longevity

He was good or great in all these areas. It is not enough to rank him into the elite (Platini, Maradona, Zico...) but it is to consider he's on par with some of the players mentioned earlier (Didi, Rivelino, Charlton. I could add Rivaldo and a few more names).

[kingkong1]

- skills
- influence on the game
- personal and collective achievements
- longevity

He was good or great in all these areas. It is not enough to rank him into the elite (Platini, Maradona, Zico...) but it is to consider he's on par with some of the players mentioned earlier (Didi, Rivelino, Charlton. I could add Rivaldo and a few more names). Wait a minute.

Let's respect Zidane, but with perspective.

Zidane had all those attributes in the Bonze Age of football (nowadays).

Beckenbauer had them in the Golden Age of football (60's/early 70's).

While the emblematic rival of Zidane was Canavarro (worse, Materazzi), Beckenbauer's was Bobby Moore.

Yes, Zidane was great, but for his time - the level of football was another one.

Were he playing in the 60's, & he'd be an illustrious nobody in the multitude.

A mere talented apprentice amidst Charlton, Gérson.

And still way behind Zico, Rivelino, Platini.

Not to mention midfield gods like Di Stéfano, Pelé, Didi, Cruyff, Maradona, all way above his sphere.

Those guys - technically - were hevyweights: Zidane, compared to them, was no more than a featherweight (a great featherweight, but still a featherweight).

His 'gang' of midfield rivals are Romário, Baggio, Ronaldinho Gaúcho, Hagi, Rivaldo, Stoichkov, Bebeto.

Be the best (or one of the three best) among them's good enough for him.

[zizouForlife]

^^^ but football was not as advanced as it is now, is it?????? know doubt they where great but how many teams could compete with them only few exclusive as compared to now where the gap has closed in terms on playing

[phil80]

Being in the Top 44 in a 4-3-3 formation means that he'd be among the 12 top midfielders ever.

.

but there has not been that many defenders that are rated in that top tier.

[kingkong1]

xxx

[kingkong1]

^^^ but football was not as advanced as it is now, is it?????? know doubt they where great but how many teams could compete with them only few exclusive as compared to now where the gap has closed in terms on playingFootball nowadays didn't necessarilly 'advance'.

It changed.

Money-show-businness wise for better.

Technically for worse.

Teams today are prepared for not to lose - & not for winning.

Football of results (0 x 0's, 1 x 1's, 1 x 0's, 2 x 1's) is what money demands.

Taking risks 'just' in order to win (arrgh! :eek:) is anti-businness.

You said well:

Nowadays we have a greater number of average competitive teams.

30/40 years ago there were the real big or the mediochre ones - & very little in-between.

Nowadays the in-between predominate.

That's what the last 20 years generation of world football represents - a transitional era.

And transitional eras are by nature mediochre (in the sense of being in the middle).

From the late 80's to our days football hasn't still retrieved the level of those primeval times.

I believe in a important upheaval in a close future though.

Other economic crisis will succeed each other, money in great part will loosen its grip, world cups will start being seen not as an exclusive European businness any more (out of eighteen, 10 were disputed there, and other 4 in practically neuter territory).

South Africa and Brazil - 2 WCs in a row out of the Old Continent - are a great step ahead, and real football will start showing its face again.

Even Europe will benefit with it - it'll have to start taking its native gems from the closet.

Like in the 'past'.