[The Sundance Kid]

hi guys. argentina supporter here. just wanted to know what you thought of this debate we had on the argentina boards and which caused some posters to lose their tempers. we were talking about argentina's loss to brazil in the final, with some criticising juan roman riquelme's performance. this led others to (incredibly in my view) compare riquelme favourably to zidane. when some of us said zidane was the better player, some people went crazy.

here's the link: http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showt...567260&page=13

i've edited it for you so you don't have to read the whole thread:

Originally Posted by vipnerd

Yesterday, with the players Argentina fielded, Zidane would had also lost 3-0.

Originally Posted by The Sundance Kid

your original argument was absurd. zidane or roman? youre crazy. zidane every time.

Originally Posted by TKORL

If Zidane was on this team as the playmaker, we could/would have won the game. Zidane can move the ball forward and finish off moves.

Originally Posted by leoriver

Thing is probably Zidane would have done nothing in the first games,but he would've shown up for the big one. And thats all that matters.

Originally Posted by rios

your bashing of roman (in reference to zidane) clearly demonstrated that you do not have the intelligences to understand the magnitude of Riquelme's genius.

Originally Posted by Moishe

Are you even old enough to have actually seen Johan play? To mention Zizou in the same breadth is disrespectful to futbol. I don't deny that Zizou is amongst the most skilled players ever but of all the players to mention in the same breadth as Johan. As for Roman and Zizou in the same rare air, go read the some of the posts in the players and legends thread and you'll find that many disagree with you.

Originally Posted by The Sundance Kid

riquelme is a player whose qualities i admire, there are elements of genius in his play, but he is no zidane, you need to get your facts straight, or better still, turn your attention to ice hockey.

Originally Posted by vipnerd

Bla, bla bla Zidane.

Originally Posted by elciclon

this is why people hate riquelme because his fans want to say that riquelme is the best when we win, but he gets an exemption when we lose, i heard the temperature, whats next he got a call right before the game that his mom's hair was hurting so he couldnt play well.

Originally Posted by The Sundance Kid

come on man, say it as it is. zidane was better than roman will ever be.

Originally Posted by DiVo0oNeH

i just read what u guys were discussing!! yeah hes right dont compare Roman to Zidane sorry but too different calibers Zidane to me is probably the best playmaker since 94! Roman is a good player but hell nobody is near Zidane guys! other than he does everything that Roman does the guy plays face up! he'll actually face u up and blow by u like u werent even there! he's just great!

Originally Posted by Moishe

First of all Zidane never blew past anyone in his life. He too was slow and while he was great, he was no greater than Roman. World Cup aside, he attained no more than Roman. Fact is in the WC he won, he was a ghost and only got two goals from being in the right place at the right time.

Originally Posted by The Sundance Kid

i'm a fan of roman but i recognise his place in the scheme of things, and believe me buddy, zidane was a far superior footballer, it's not even a discussion.

Originally Posted by big daddy

I don't know how this thread got on to this topic but I think you are underestimating Zidane. World Cup aside...? Well the WC is a pretty big deal. The best players produce in big games and that's what Zidane did. France also went on to become the only team in history to hold the world and european crowns at the same time. There's also the small matter of the Champions League. He was the best player on the planet for a decade and deserves to be mentioned in any discussion about the all-time greats. Zidane was a master. The only aspect in which Roman comes close to him is in terms of brush strokes, but even then Zidane's were far broader, he simpy painted greater pictures. However, in every other aspect besides art, Zidane was better, physically and mentally. On his day, Roman can resemble Zidane, but to merit a legitimate comparison, you can't do it only when the ocassion suits you, or when things are going hunky dory, you have to do it in the most stringest examinations.

Originally Posted by Leon12

Look lets face reality in the face (and I am speaking as a Boca fan), Riquelme as a player is not in the same class as Zidane, end of story.

Originally Posted by The Sundance Kid

i have a feeling moishe is posting from either a sanitorium or a crack den.

Originally Posted by Leon12

It's not even worth discussing like debating whether Maradona was better than Ortega.

Originally Posted by TKORL

Zidane was outstanding in the final third, and didn't hesitate to disturb defenses with his dribbling, and not to mention, had a habit of scoring goals in important games. And, he was a leader.

Originally Posted by TKORL

Moishe, you have the right to your opinion, but what has Roman done in his career in Europe that suggests to you that he's a great player?

Originally Posted by Dr. Know

Zidane the greatest since Maradona? LMAO. Ohh behave.

Here read this whole thread but specifically these posts so you can once and for all debunk this Zidane myth.

Originally Posted by The Sundance Kid

those must be some strong pills you're taking. who was better than zidane since maradona? roman? take another dose.

Originally Posted by Pekerman

I don't give a sh*t about Zidane's place in history.

Originally Posted by big daddy

I can't believe we're still discussing the merits of Zidane over Riquelme. It's a no-brainer. I don't know how the subject started and I'm disinclined to go back over this thread to find out.

Originally Posted by The Sundance Kid

you'd get more sense talking to a squashed tomato.

Originally Posted by Dr. Know

He's just ridiculously overrated and he's not the best player since Maradona. Of course since you seem to be blinded by the glow of his bald head I don't expect you to see that.

Originally Posted by DiVo0oNeH

Ronaldinho is a good player so is Zidane and so is Riquelme!!! of course some are better than others but they're all good footballers!

Originally Posted by rios

make zidane play the same shit against brazil he'll lose the same way, or even more embarrassingly, without even getting that shot roman had...

what happened to the great zidane against italian trenches? did he score to turn france around?
And france had the upper hand in that match! they got a pk goal at just 5 minutes in! what did zidane do in the 110 minutes after that?

And don't forget what france played in that world cup, and how they got through the knockouts. was it zidane that carried them through?

get real.

Originally Posted by Spartak

As to the Zidane comparison, I'm in the "Zinedine Zidane is the most overrated footballer ever" camp. So I warn you, don't get me started.

Originally Posted by Teso Dos Bichos

I'm not even bothered by your frankly ludicrous man love for the most overrated player in football history, one Zinedine Zidane or your complete lack of knowledge towards a far superior player in Juan Román Riquelme.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

You know my thoughts on this subject. If anyone doesn't, do a search.

[celito]

Riquelem on easy mid competition games, Zidane on finals and tough matches

[nekkibasara]

"Originally Posted by big daddy
France also went on to become the only team in history to hold the world and european crowns at the same time. "

Not quite... Germany European champions 1972 and WC champions 1974. That would make France one of only 2 countries to do this.

But on to the issue at hand. How anyone could compare Zidane to Riquelme is, to me at least, laughable. In 20 years Zidane will be remembered as one of the greats, whereas Riquelme will be largley forgotten (just another footballer).

Lets face it Riquelme is to slow, static and uncharismatic to become what Zidane was. Riquelme is not a leader, and when the going gets tough he falls apart.

[Teso Dos Bichos]

In 20 years people will still be wrong. I advise you to read the following thread. It gets on 'topic' fairly quickly. If you still believe what you do about Zidane afterwards then fine. At least I can say I tried...
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=524206

[nekkibasara]

Originally Posted by Teso Dos Bichos

In 20 years people will still be wrong. I advise you to read the following thread. It gets on 'topic' fairly quickly. If you still believe what you do about Zidane afterwards then fine. At least I can say I tried...
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=524206

Reading it right now. I'll post again when Im done.

[nekkibasara]

Originally Posted by Teso Dos Bichos

In 20 years people will still be wrong. I advise you to read the following thread. It gets on 'topic' fairly quickly. If you still believe what you do about Zidane afterwards then fine. At least I can say I tried...
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=524206

I have read that thread and the points were well made, but I still believe that Zidane was a great player (and was not carried by France). The poster who mentioned the French team's performance w/o him had a very good point that all the detractors simply ignored.

On your list of players better than Zidane, I have bolded the ones that I agree wholeheartedly with.

"Originally Posted by Teso Dos Bichos
Schmeichel, Kahn, Buffon, Maldini, Lizarazu, Carlos, Zambrotta, Cafu, Zanetti, Nesta, Campbell, Stam, Ayala, Blanc, Desailly, Thuram, Ferdinand, Giggs, Figo, Overmars, Redondo, Keane, Scholes, Cocu, Makelele, Vieira, Davids, Ballack, Effenberg, Matthaus, Scholl, Veron, Paulo Sousa, Micoud, Mendieta, Riquelme, Rui Costa, Nedved, Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Totti, Zola, Del Piero, Baggio, Nakata, Ronaldo, Raul, Bergkamp, Henry, Shevchenko, Van Nistelrooy, Shearer.

That's 50 odd off the top of my head."
I have several problems with this list:

1. I don't think goal keepers should be compared to outfield players.
2. You're bias towards ManU/Arsenal players is quite apparent (Nistelrooy? really?).
3. Some comments on some specific players.

Henry: Great player; arguably the biggest choker of the last 10 years.

Micoud: Best passer France has ever produced, but he suffered from the same problem as Riquelme. They are too slow, cannot defend well, and do not have the best tactical minds (easily marked out of a game).

Campbell: Most overated defender in a long time. The English hype machine really wanted him to be great. (Better defenders=Cannavaro, Terry, Hyypia, Nesta, Maldini, Lucio, etc.)

As to my earlier comment on whether or not he would be remembered in 20 years as a great. I think he will for a couple of reasons.

1. He was great player who won lots of trophies.

2. Many of the other players you listed will be forgotten. Perfect example would be Scholl. IMHO the best attacking player Germany has had since Netzer. Sadly he will not be remembered by the world because injuries kept him from playing in 4 possible world cups (94, 98, 02, 06).

[argentine soccer fan]

Actually Zidane and Riquelme are very similar players in terms of style. They are both amazing talents who can be difference makers and take over matches. They are both intermitent, but when they are on they are magic.


I'd have to give the edge to Zidane because he managed to work him magic at the highest stage, the World Cup. Riquelme has yet to do that.


My opinion is that they both rank as world class in their era, but I wouldn't rank either as top ten or top 20 all-time, as some do. There are just too many brillant players who did more. Zidane maybe there's a legitimate argument for top 50, based on his significance in important matches both at WC and Champions league. Riquelme still has time, so he could still move up, but he needs to be at his best at the WC.


In Argentina the opinion of Riquelme is divided and people are passionate about it. Many fans strongly dislike Riquelme, partly because of club rivalries, partly because of his attitude sometimes, and because of his style. He is not a guy who will run a lot, and sometimes he seems disinterested. But he is great with the ball, he can create chances both from dead balls and from open play, and he can also score. I understand the criticism, but I think to say he shouldn't be in the national team, as some do, is ridiculous. He is definitely a top player for Argentina today.


He performed very well at Copa America. In the final against Brazil he didn't make the difference obviously, but in that match the whole team fell apart after Brazil's early goal, and particularly the defense. Riquelme was well marked, but he still was responsible for Argentina's most dangerous plays, he had the shot that hit the post, and another one that was stopped by a brilliant save.


People are right to say he didn't step up in the match, as a superstar should. But to say he shouldn't be in the team, especially after the tournament he had, I feel only somebody very biased against him can make that statement.

[TFC07]

Zidane!!!!!!

Greatest footballer in recent history!

[jpick]

Originally Posted by rios

they can shut him down with zone pressing too. basically any disciplinary side with good holding midfielders and fast defenders can do it. That's why there're very few teams still playing the passive playmaker style, and Glenn Hoddle is only a thing of the past.

italians during the period of Roberto Baggio for example, choose to push the playmaker up to become a deep lying forward, that's also an advancement though only saw limited success.

this interesting post from another thread got me thinking, specifically about how a guy like a passive playmaker can be successful in the modern game. i think the solution might not be to move them forward, but is the opposite to move them backwards and have the distribute from back there, a la xavi and pirlo, where it is ludicrous to have aggressive man-markers go that high to take you out of the game and then if they fail leave the defense totally exposed, even a simple long-ball can compromise if they move that aggressively up the pitch. pirlo is slow, and sets the pace, but even if he can't himself move at more than on epace, form back there, and letting the ball do the work for him, he can let the team go fast or slow and anything in between depending on the opposition and his teammates positioning and qualities. it is hoarder to man-mark them out of the game, and then you can faster players like kaka for milan and dinho and messi for barca, who aren't really tempo setters, but have speed themselves (yet of course have the technical ability to play possession ball and interplay when need be).
maybe that is where the slower passive playmakers can really find a home in the next few years? Going back more to the pre-specialization days (for that position at least)?

thoughts? feel free to disagree, I like debate, as this is more a question than a statement, if that makes sense.



cheers