Bearing in mind the perception is of Harry kane being a archetypal technically boring English centre forward These are passes from just half of 2017/18 I don't recall any conventional CF of the past 5 or so years displaying this level of vision There is increasingly a case for Harry kane surpassing prime alan shearer at club level as the best English CF of the last 25 years By virtue of his all round game and relatively good champions league record At international Shearer 96 remains the standard by which all English centre forwards should be judged
I miss some sort of an explanation? Though I would put Nesta ahead of Ramos without a doubt, for more than one reason, I think I can understand how this happened. It has something to do with shining in tournaments and the degree of standing out in the Champions League, and the supposed peaks of defenders (decorated by key moments/goals). Cannavaro his peak was not just the World Cup but also the peak in the season/seasons before (though stripped of the championship). Will elaborate this in more detail later, also the fact by that time Serie A (+ highlights) wasn't shown on terresterial television any more (though when Stam was there many ppl said and concluded Nesta was the stand-out #1 in the league, and Stam did very well at Lazio - see DBScalcio and the Oscar nominations - and had later at Milan ratings that were close/between to the ones of Nesta, Cafu, Maldini). The league by itself wasn't followed that much any more. Will return to this...
That perception only exists for non-EPL watchers imo. EPL fans have known of Kane's buildup/holdup play for a while. Many pundits and analysts have said for a long time that Kane is the central pivot for Spur's high-tempo attack as his holdup play and flick-ons are needed to bring out the best in roaming attacking midfielders like Alli, Son, Moura, and Eriksen. As for conventional CF, perhaps not in England, but Lewandowski has been operating at a very high level for a while as well. I agree that Kane has a chance to surpass Shearer. He's not there yet though. His peak hasn't even surpassed Shearer imo, who before the injury, was perhaps better than anything Kane has ever been. Pre-injury Shearer was stronger, faster, a bigger aerial threat, and much nastier (a product of his time) than Kane. Kane is the more well-rounded player, skill-wise. He's essentially the Sutton/Shearer duo in one, if not quite as good as Shearer at goalscoring yet. If Kane stays injury free (something Shearer didn't achieve) and in the EPL, he could actually break Shearer's scoring record. Coupled with his superior team-play, he could go down as the greatest no.9 in EPL history.
He had all the attributes which mark out the best defenders; his anticipation and positioning were excellent, he read the game so well and he had a great ability to win the ball cleanly. Physically he was good and he was strong in the air, but his scrupulous fairness (not from a moral sense but just because it was more effective) marked him out. Moreover he managed to avoid the pitfall of many similar players which is the lapses of concentration. I can see why people in future will look at their respective CVs and see that Ramos and Cannavaro won more but I think that those who saw them both would appreciate Nesta more. He was just the better all round player.
Going a bit further; Yes I agree with this (although without the World Cup the captain Cannavaro didn't win more than Nesta) but think I can see what happened. First the situation: the original list had Nesta on 51. The 'peer reviewers' kept him out of the top 50, but to make space for Mbappe (who isn't in the original 100) they didn't drop him either. They dropped Shearer, Rio Ferdinand, Van Nistelrooij, Hagi and Van der Sar from this 'honorable mention' row. What is the explanation? I guess this starts with the fact at his zenith the Serie A wasn't on terrestrial television. The Premier League, Bundesliga (later not any more, which is relevant for the Ribery vs Robben case), the highlights of Primera Division all were. Plus of course the Champions League and the tournaments, thus for Serie A players there the reputation was forged. Nesta has an unfortunate history with the tournaments. From injury (1998 as a right back injured for the KO stages, 2002, 2006), a sub standard euro 2004, to euro 2000 where he was good but fatigue cost his side in the final against France. At euro 2000 he was excellent without rising to heroic heights in the defining matches. The Champions League was more like his territory but it might well be he didn't reach the prominence of a Ramos in heroic performances, iconic goals and a sizable presence. Nesta actually has good ratings here (hence my own opinion; he has a few 7s in KO games by Gazzetta) but for example the kicker ratings of the 2003 final tells a story: Maldini, Gattuso, Seedorf, Rui Costa and Shevchenko were rated just as well. Looking at ESM team of the month: Nesta has three at the business end of a season, which is again good, but Ramos has in an absolute and relative count many more, including seasons he didn't win the Champions League at all (starting in 2006-07). Someone like e.g. Jaap Stam has 75% of his total in the 2nd half of the season (at that time there was a 2nd group stage). It might well be Nesta had his prominence - hence he isn't dropped - but just not quite of Roberto Carlos (2001-02, or that free kick against Kahn), Zanetti, or Sergio Ramos as Champions League heroes. Something I also noticed: Nesta has two ESM selections in the final month, his team-mate Seedorf three (not counting the 1994-95 season). Personally I'd put Nesta above Sergio Ramos (and Maldini for post-1994, who has four in the final month, which might have been aided by reputation and captaincy) without much doubt but can see how it happened. Pique has just as Ramos in an absolute (twice as many) and relative count (close to 1/3rd) many more ESM selections in the final two months. Nesta is still the 4th central defender on the list, behind Ramos, Cannavaro and Pique (or 5th with Maldini as CB). ------------------------------------------ For my personal interest I looked previously at whether Nesta made his club team clearly better. His arrival to Milan in 2002 (next to other players, like Pirlo becoming a starter) brought a revival. His win percentage in the Serie A is 57.8%, and loss percentage 18.5%. Without him it is 53.6% and 21.8% respectively. In the Champions League it is 48.5%, and loss percentage of 24.8%. Without him it is 44.4% and 33% (he missed 36 Champions League games). Thus there is a (for him) positive difference but yet the correlation might not have been all too spectacular (when corrected for opposition quality and team-mate quality). Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler The 1996 - 2005 period:
Sometimes I wondered though whether all those acrobatics contributed to his injuries. It can give strain and impact at landing.
On the same trope, maybe open for discussion whether VvD is already ahead of Stam or De Boer. Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler (that goal at the end...)
Gazzetta ratings of Nesta in CL knockout stages during the first two Champions League finals he reached: Ajax: 7 and 6 Inter: 6.5 and 6.5 Juventus: 7 Manchester United: 6.5 and 7 (Stam also a 7 against his former club) Inter: 6 (Stam 7.5 ) and match abandoned, Milan got the match assigned 3-0 (can't see ratings) PSV: 5.5 (did not play the other game) Liverpool: 6 (Gerrard a 5.5 by the way, Kaka a 7.5) Seems the Gazzetta archive is messed up for knowing the 2006-07 knock-out stage ratings (kicker has some though) - the archive doesn't show pictures so maybe that's the reason. Maybe that changes the picture for Nesta, in particular the final I guess. About Roberto Carlos, or more recently Sergio Ramos or Van Dijk I'm 100% certain they have some knock-out games with 7.5 or above (the 2019 Champions League final a 7.5, for example). I'm not saying this is fair but *think* this might play a part for Nesta (in combination with the things mentioned above). Yet, the 'second reading' didn't drop him down either, to make space for Mbappe.
I can't quite put my finger on Pique though, other than him playing for Barcelona. He does have some outstanding knock-out matches in the Champions League (Inter 2010, Manchester United this year) yet can also give the impression he was propelled forward by his more illustrious team-mates further ahead, and even Alba, Umtiti, Mascherano, Dani Alves in some seasons. Him conceding 21 league goals in a season is great, and there are also seasons conceding 40+ goals. All those meltdowns conceding 3+ goals are also on his CV. He has his games with (very) poor ratings too. He was in the euro 2012 team of the tournament, but can't quite remember how good/great he was. This were the first few months of Ramos playing as central defender so that skewed the attention and the (vague) memory. WhoScored shows him as joint number eight of his team, which is at first glance not looking great. Ramos, Alba are ahead (both in the team of the tournament too) and Arbeloa the same rating. I do remember thinking during the 2010 World Cup he looked better than Puyol. Many pundits thought Puyol wasn't really good that tournament, and he needed many (uncalled) fouls or shirt pulls... That was said before the semi-final, and the final confirmed that picture. Pique five times in the ESM team of the year is leaning to the 'surprising', everything considered.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...nal-ajaxs-golden-boys-1995-now/finidi-george/ Potentially could fit somewhere in the 95-100 range (over last quarter of a century-the best RW in Europe during in any given year has to have some historical weight)
At his best I think Pique is tremendous. He's great on the ball, is big and physically imposing and is good one on one. I'm not sure he's the best positionally and he benefits from a good organizer (like Puyol) alongside him. I think he's a hard one to assess. At times he looks a world beater and at others far from it. This season he was excellent, but as you say, he has been part of a number of meltdowns and to me that feels more of a defensive issue than one for an attacker.
Pique is maybe a bit lucky to survive so long at Barcelona, while others at elite clubs have been discarded far easier and sooner after a (supposed) weaker spell. He is of course a child of the club and city, which is an advantage to remain in favor. I remember a while ago I predicted Sergio Ramos will be remembered as the #1 defender of his generation (even though I'm personally more Pique>Ramos tbh, I rate Pique as the better footballer and defender, generally operating in a slightly tougher set-up to excel as a defender) because of all the things going for him. Trophies, big goals and moments, big presence (as opposed to a Nesta or Ricardo Carvalho who despite their technique most often remained understated and low key with the ball), the right club and the right country. It's no coincidence all the defenders on the FFT list are from 'bigger' countries; the likes of Vidic, Carvalho (UEFA Cup, Champions League, another final), Godin miss out (bold statement: Carvalho his international career is significantly better as Terry's). Seems that prediction on Ramos is not too far off though his ever worsening disciplinary record can be a weakness for his standing. Ramos is not the most reliable defender of his generation, but that is rarely a decisive element for the great defenders like Sammer, Baresi (who has some true howlers) et al. in the past.
From 1998-2000 arguably the greatest goalkeeper of the last 25 years (certainly the most technically+athletically gifted) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2001/jan/28/sport.comment4 SAF said he could even play him as right back to replace Gary neville He had a spectacular fall from grace (with his howlers well known and publicized) In a way he was the Ronaldinho of goalkeepers(unpredictable genius) The three best players in no particular order of the legendary NT France 98-00 were Thuram,Zidane and barthez ZIdanes contributions were overstated in 98 even though he came big in 2000 (still in the final he was neutralised and was bailed by Henry,trezeguet and barthez who had a tournament defining save) In the 98 final he completely frustrated R9 and co At his best he always proved reliable in the big moments
Honestly though, why do the Brits have such a low opinion of dutch football and footballers. No dutchman higher than 30 by FFT (or belgian in the top 80 for that matter). All that ignorance of relatively steady national team results (and typically tough draws), and that many CL finals featured dutch starters (others like Brazil have done well or better too, but not too many in that respect; Brazil obviously the #1 country and not #2 like some poisoned usual suspects think). Oxbridge elitist Wilson also busy again with his claim modern football and 'total football' was made by Hungary, and not 'Holland'. But maybe I expect too much from a sports culture where a David Brailsfraud (and his pal Cookson) can become a Sir.
All those Brazilians in the top 15 (four; six in the top 30) maybe also on the high end, the upper limit, considering the not-equally-dominant-or-convincing Champions League record during the last 25 years (in case of Ronaldinho 6 of his 18 goals are penalties). https://www.foxsportsasia.com/footb...ilian-goalscorer-in-champions-league-history/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Cup_and_UEFA_Champions_League_top_scorers https://www.worldfootball.net/alltime_goalgetter/champions-league/tore/2/
I don't think they do necessarily. I think overall that this was a pretty poor list from FFT and the Dutch element reflects that. In terms of Belgium, the disparity between Bale and Hazard is baffling to me.
Given how highly rated Bergkamp, Robben, or VVD are, it's not so true that the English fans and media are typically anti-Dutch. VVD wouldn't win the PFA otherwise.
Yes sure Bergkamp is usually rated high (their all-time list from 2017 had him ahead of Henry while the original VI list did not). What is there for evidence that Robben is rated high? For now I have only seen English lists where e.g. Lahm let alone a Scholes is put higher (and FFT in 2017 included Lahm but not the other). To be fair, that Spanish list Vegan10 recently showed has no player who made their debut in the last 27 years in his top 12 (the most recent is Seedorf, who he puts at five all-time of his country). Can't say though he is negative perse because his 11 greatest "most important" Barcelona players of all-time includes three NED players, and he is also making a positive/favorable comparison with Uruguay (he does say, in his observation and opinion, modern football and modern Spanish football started with Holland if there is a single place where it started). I think the 'second reading' of the FFT list is overall an improvement (e.g. Modric goes up, Baggio for post-1994 goes down), although some things are still untouched. Hazard has at Madrid now the chance, too, to work on his CL resume and production record.
Honestly, the only one that came to my mind, which prompted me to write this was his PFA award in 2005, when he played less than half the league games lol. I don't look at all-time list too often, honestly. I just know that Dutchmen, while they're in the EPL, are rated quire fairly by the fans. We can throw RvP into the mix as well, for example. If I have to make a guess, Robben being lower than Lahm or Scholes by English fans can easily be explained by: 1. Lahm is a World Cup winner and captain of both Bayern and Germany, and given the English media bias towards captains, he gets a boost 2. Scholes is an EPL legend, so he's always rated quite highly I have no real intent on arguing about this, as I don't think we have any real disagreement here. Just wanted to share that I don't feel like there's an anti-Dutch sentiment among EPL fans and media. This is one of my favourite moment with a bit of relevance to the topic:
Of course you don't see it that way given your own rankings and last but not least the historiography (very typically, the 1974 World Cup chapter is exclusively written from a german perspective and their journey). Other example: when the british readers of the self-styled 'Bible' World Soccer voted the players of the 2000s decade, no one ranked higher than #24, which was Van Nistelrooij. Below players as Owen, Ballack, Torres and Deco (also noticeable btw is the total omission of Pirlo, proving he got a bump after 2009). Similar to FourFourTwo now, a dozen countries had a player ranked higher (this is though the readers of the same magazine that voted MvB #9 all-time in december 1999!). Although I'm not the greatest RvN fan myself (here another one), the ESPN six men panel put him in their team of the decade, and also others as Sid Lowe rated him fairly high. Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler CF: Ruud Van Nistelrooy Rutgerus Johannes Martinus Van Nistelrooij. The only Real Madrid player to be (my) Player of the Year over the last decade, Ruud almost single-handedly took Madrid to an extraordinary and barely plausible title in 2006-2007, scoring 25 goals in 37 games despite being virtually starved of service. As one El País columnist put it: "He has gone from the plenty of the jungle to the desert." The argument against him would be that he did not do it for enough seasons to be included here, but his impact was so extraordinary in that 2006-2007 season, when taking the title from Barcelona appeared impossible, that he sneaks in. He scored 64 goals in 96 games for Real Madrid. Ultimately, injury and age brought his time at the club to a close. The pity was that he did not arrive sooner.
I've done a provisional attempt myself, limiting to the 101 names of FourFourTwo. It is open to some alterations and some are hard to place for me. Main things I took into consideration: - The skill level, range and effective application of the skill by the player - Did the player make his team better or give it a spark? - Five years peak goes above 15 years longevity - Record in big games for club and country - Performance in multiple settings and circumstances Goalkeepers: Buffon Van der Sar Neuer Schmeichel Kahn Casillas Full-backs: Dani Alves Lahm Thuram Roberto Carlos Maldini Cafu Zanetti Center backs: Nesta Godin Pique Terry Puyol Cannavaro Ramos Rio Ferdinand Desailly Hierro Sammer Adams Defensive midfielders: Busquets Edgar Davids Yaya Toure Makelele Central midfielders: Xavi Modric Seedorf Pirlo Keane Xabi Alonso Schweinsteiger Vieira Scholes Veron Attacking midfielders: Zidane David Silva Bergkamp Iniesta Deco Lampard Ballack Sneijder Gerrard Riquelme Hagi Gascoigne Wingers: Figo Robben Nedved Beckham Giggs Ribery Bale Forwards: Messi Cristiano Ronaldo Henry Ronaldinho Hazard Del Piero Kaka Neymar Salah Rivaldo Totti Müller Rooney Baggio Zola Tevez Cantona Stoichkov Le Tissier Strikers: Ronaldo Shevchenko Ibrahimovic Suarez Lewandowski Raul Weah Suker Van Nistelrooij Batistuta Villa Eto'o Drogba Aguero Owen Shearer Klose Larsson Romario Torres Klinsmann Vieri Inzaghi Trezeguet ----------------------- Maldini is very hard to place. I'm certain I wouldn't have him #9 overall for post-1994, but whether he would be 25 or 50 I don't know. Others hard to place are Vieri, Klinsmann, Cannavaro, Cantona for a start. Cannavaro and Sammer have somewhat comparable backgrounds. I think Cannavaro his 2006WC was better with certainly fewer clear-cut errors. Raul his peak fame and influence came as a striker so I have him there. Bergkamp had his most acclaim as a forward, but maintained his influence in a (in practice) more withdrawn/facilitating role (8 non-penalty goals and 14 assists in 04/05). Some of those categories are not 'set in stone'. For the wingers though I have a pretty clear picture right now and what the respective players did with respect to influence and longevity (if fit) so that will for myself not change much.
Great list and I didn't see David Silva >post 94 Bergkamp coming (especially not from you) Would be very interested to know your reasoning behind this