Greatest Modern Player ??

[kingkong1]

It's fairly fundamental though, gossip or not. Didi and Di Stefano did not get on.Ok,

Let's not fight about it.

Nothing to do with football though: Edmundo & Romério hated themselves in Vasco, but played memorable games together.Zarraga. Not Zarrate. Zarate plays up front for Lazio. :rolleyes: Zarraga was a holding midfielder or defensive player. Zagallo was an outside left who dropped into midfield. Huge difference.I told you.Thanks, I'm familiar with the term.

tpmazembe provided this explanation some time ago

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=5464468&postcount=36

Remarkably the Brazilians have 7 terms for what I would try and classify in two (attacking midfielder or forward). And you complain that I have too many different names?Those names when you deal with the top players are purely rethorical.

That's what you're refusing to accept.

All those frozen categories of yours (& the Brz's, why not) become irrelevant when the the great player makes them intermingle.No he didn't. Number 10 simply means inside left in the classical British system of numbers. Meazza was a number 10. Pele may define the role, but he didn't invent it.What I meant was that he was the firrst who elevated the Number 10 to the category of the Master of the team - the Big Chief.

Gave it noblesse. You need to have certain attributes to play in certain positions. Zidane might have made a good defensive midfielder, but he did not play that role at any level.I didn't say all of them exerted all the roles. Andrade did. But Andrade never played as an inside forward in old school terminology. The play makers in that team were Scarone and Cea.Idem.I have absolutely no idea what tampooning means.I didn't write tampooning, but 'tampooning': with quotation marks BTW.

Just a Brazilianism, any problem?...

Typical of Brzlns who write in English.

As Anglicisms are typical of Brittish writing in other languages (for example, in your article, 'ponta-de-lance' when the term in Portuguese is 'ponta-de-lança') :( ...

[kingkong1]

Remarkably the Brazilians have 7 terms for what I would try and classify in two (attacking midfielder or forward). And you complain that I have too many different names? Those names when you deal with top players are purely rethorical.

That's what you're refusing to accept.

All those frozen categories of yours (& the Brz's, why not) become irrelevant when the the great player makes them intermingle.And that's the great lesson conveyed by the Dutch Clockwork Orange.

More than a purely a revolutionary way of playing football the great contribution they left out for us was a concept.

The concept of the multifunctional player.

This kind of player exists since 'the Greek calendas', but only the Dutch put the concept in practice using the 11 players of a team.

Your 2 or 4 'denominations' or Tostão's 7 become totally irrelevant in face of that concept ;) .

[uamiranda]

At a first sight, and without thinking too much, comes a name into my mind...It would be...maybe...Cruijff? Didi is also a good choice IMO...If I consider nowaday's players, I'd say Kaká...

[kingkong1]

At a first sight, and without thinking too much, comes a name into my mind...It would be...maybe...Cruijff? Didi is also a good choice IMO...If I consider nowaday's players, I'd say Kaká...And Messi.

Didi & Cruyjff are in my All-Time 11.

Cruyjff is more recent though (or more 'modern' in a strict sense).

In a latu sensu though, Didi.

In absolute terms - O Negão.;)

[phil80]

I think people really underrate Ronaldinho as one of the modern greats. They tend to focus on how commercialized he got and put too much stock in his disappointing 06 WC. At his prime, his vision, shooting, passing, and technical ability was of the highest quality in modern times.

[Bronaldo]

I think people really underrate Ronaldinho as one of the modern greats. They tend to focus on how commercialized he got and put too much stock in his disappointing 06 WC. At his prime, his vision, shooting, passing, and technical ability was of the highest quality in modern times.

I agree. When he was at his best, he was just as good if not better than any player in the modern era.

[Dr. Know]

I think people really underrate Ronaldinho as one of the modern greats. They tend to focus on how commercialized he got and put too much stock in his disappointing 06 WC. At his prime, his vision, shooting, passing, and technical ability was of the highest quality in modern times.

The problem is that his peak didn't last very long.

[zizouForlife]

dinho showed to the world how to play football, he played the type of football people only dream of. he was unbelievable at his peak, to bad he hasn't regained that form, and only showed at barca and not brazil

[kingkong1]

dinho showed to the world how to play football, he played the type of football people only dream of. he was unbelievable at his peak, to bad he hasn't regained that form, and only showed at barca and not brazilNot for Brazil?...

We 'just' owe him the 2 goals that gave the 2002 Cup to us...

YouTube - 2002 WORLD CUP BRAZIL GOALS BRAZIL VS ENGLAND

Wait till 2010 :cool: ...

[uamiranda]

Wait till 2010 :cool: ...With the ideal coach, I suppose... :D

[kingkong1]

With the ideal coach, I suppose... :DBTW, what's your choice?...

[uamiranda]

BTW, what's your choice?...Ohh God...:( I wished it was not this question...:D

Well...I don't dislike Dunga's work at all, but I think he's not mature yet. I like Muricy Ramalho, but I don't know if he's the IDEAL choice. He's good at club stage, but for seleção I have my doubts... He has a style like Felipão, kind of military in some aspects, and this maybe works for what is neessary...

What about yours??? :p

[kingkong1]

Ohh God...:( I wished it was not this question...:D

Well...I don't dislike Dunga's work at all, but I think he's not mature yet. I like Muricy Ramalho, but I don't know if he's the IDEAL choice. He's good at club stage, but for seleção I have my doubts... He has a style like Felipão, kind of military in some aspects, and this maybe works for what is neessary...

What about yours??? :pSeveral times in this Forum I've stated that Brz players didn't really depend on a coach & that in general they themselves find their way on the field...

But after 2006...

Well, possibly Felipão would be the best (Muricy is too 'somber' to my taste & Vanderley too flamboyant and egotistic).

But Dunga's been for so long in the post that I think he deserves a chance: we're still ahead of Argentina in the qualifiers, are Copa America champs, just got behind in the OGs.

Besides the last victory against Portugal was convincing.

[uamiranda]

Several times in this Forum I've stated that Brz players didn't really depend on a coach & that in general they themselves find their way on the field...

But after 2006...

Well, possibly Felipão would be the best (Muricy is too 'somber' to my taste & Vanderley too flamboyant and egotistic).

But Dunga's been for so long in the post that I think he deserves a chance: we're still ahead of Argentina in the qualifiers, are Copa America champs, just got behind in the OGs.

Besides the last victory against Portugal was convincing.Yep...I used to think that too, but I concluded that even a star team like 1970 needed a coach.

WC 2006 is a good example, but I also remember 1998...IMO that team was not too tacticaly organized as it seemed... They went to the final with good and convincing victories (Chile, Holland), but others were not so convincing, especially at group stage (compreensive...adjustment time). But at least, the players had a minimal idea of what to do.

Felipão was a good choice, but now he's worried with other things...:D.

When CBF announced Dunga as the new coach, I was surprised and thought that was kind of a 'provocation' and after Copa America they would call a top-coach, like Luxemburgo or Felipão, to the WC. But Dunga did well at CA, and now I think he deserve a chance. We all know his capabilities, so its easier to wonder what to expect: if we win, good! but if not, at least we tried. I still believe he can do a good job.

Well...Although it was a good match, don't take that victory over Portugal so seriously... that was a Christmas gift...:D

[kingkong1]

Yep...I used to think that too, but I concluded that even a star team like 1970 needed a coach.

WC 2006 is a good example, but I also remember 1998...IMO that team was not too tacticaly organized as it seemed... They went to the final with good and convincing victories (Chile, Holland), but others were not so convincing, especially at group stage (compreensive...adjustment time). But at least, the players had a minimal idea of what to do.Yep.

Although more than by a coach I still think the Brz player (maybe the Latin player in general - see the case of Italy in 82) is spurred more by unfavorable circumstances, like in 58 (came from bad defeats in 50, 54), 62 (had to overcome the terrible handicap of the absence of Pelé), 2002 (the shocking defeat to France in 98), 2005/2007, when Argentina was the frank favourite to win Copa America, and now the victory over Portugal that commited the bad mistake of arriving as 'frank favourite'...

1994 (24 years without a title), was in my opinion the only time in which Brazil really depended on a coach in order to win a title.Felipão was a good choice, but now he's worried with other things...:D.I know...When CBF announced Dunga as the new coach, I was surprised and thought that was kind of a 'provocation' and after Copa America they would call a top-coach, like Luxemburgo or Felipão, to the WC. But Dunga did well at CA, and now I think he deserve a chance. We all know his capabilities, so its easier to wonder what to expect: if we win, good! but if not, at least we tried. I still believe he can do a good job.Good thing about Dunga is that although he's still unexperienced he's humble & nevertheless firm in his decisions (the worse people might think they are) - and that's a good quality in a coach.Well...Although it was a good match, don't take that victory over Portugal so seriously... that was a Christmas gift..Still was a victory by 6 goals on top of the MVP of the World's team: it'll make his prize ceremony not so sweet as expected...

How nicely it ornamented Brazil's tree! :D ...

[uamiranda]

Yep.

Although more than by a coach I still think the Brz player (maybe the Latin player in general - see the case of Italy in 82) is spurred more by unfavorable circumstances, like in 58 (came from bad defeats in 50, 54), 62 (had to overcome the terrible handicap of the absence of Pelé), 2002 (the shocking defeat to France in 98), 2005/2007, when Argentina was the frank favourite to win Copa America, and now the victory over Portugal that commited the bad mistake of arriving as 'frank favourite'...

1994 (24 years without a title), was in my opinion the only time in which Brazil really depended on a coach in order to win a title.I know...Good thing about Dunga is that although he's still unexperienced he's humble & nevertheless firm in his decisions (the worse people might think they are) - and that's a good quality in a coach.Still was a victory by 6 goals on top of the MVP of the World's team: it'll make his prize ceremony not so sweet as expected...

How nicely it ornamented Brazil's tree! :D ...I agree these 'unfavourable circumstances' contribute to the success in the sense that it touches the 'ego' of coach and players. But more than that, it's a matter of will, ambition, testosterone, boner! They must have the knife in the teeth, no mater who is the coach...That is just the begginning...

What I think is unacceptable is, right after refree's final blow in the match agaisnt France, a player like Robinho almost hanging up on Zidane's neck to congratulate him... It shows how big they wanted to win that WC...Shameful...:mad:

In fact, the brazilian tree really had a luso touch, opá... :p

[kingkong1]

What I think is unacceptable is, right after refree's final blow in the match agaisnt France, a player like Robinho almost hanging up on Zidane's neck to congratulate him... It shows how big they wanted to win that WC...Shameful...:mad:Really disgusting.

Even before the game at the dressrooms!...

The players of both teams almost 'kissing' each other...

Their clubs wages & 'mordomias' were more important to them than that ridiculous 'friendly' :p ...

[Glenn_69]

the best modern player?? I think these would be some great nominees:

Zidane
Raul
Ronaldo
Maldini
Roberto Carlos



I think currently the best Modern Players are Torres and Ibrahimovic, and Ronaldo completes the top 3. I think a Modern player needs to be fast, tough, strong and a goalscoring ability. Messi is still to fragile imo to be in this top 3, but he does have the speed and scoring ability.

[Perú FC]

the best modern player?? I think these would be some great nominees:

Zidane
Raul
Ronaldo
Maldini
Roberto Carlos
Personally, I think Raúl doesn't have chance to be between them, maybe I'd add Romário or Rivaldo.

[emmex]

This is a very difficult thing to measure...

here are some players that should have and could have (and possibly still can) earn this title...

Henry
Ronaldo
___________
african players that impressed me:
Roger Milla
George Weah
Abedi Pele
Tony Yeboah
Lucas Radebe
West (inter + nigeria)
Kuffour


Some great players of England/Wales etc.
Giggs (to me the best of his type ever)
Mark Hughes
Andy Cole (so sue me)
Ian Wright

Some great other players:
Bergkamp
Cantona(didn't wanna mention him but his name popped up the whole time)
Batistuta

:P