For the 1997-today team, I would: (1) replace R9 with Luis Suarez, (2) replace Pirlo with Xavi, and (3) replace Ronaldinho with Makelele (or maybe Vieira). I don't rate Suarez as highly as R9, but, if you're playing a 4-3-3, I think you need one forward that does a lot of defensive work. You're not going to get that from Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, or R9. In my opinion, the best way to replace one of those guys with someone that has a good defensive work rate without losing too much attacking ability is to replace R9 with Luis Suarez. I said to replace Pirlo with Xavi not for any big tactical reason, but rather because I think Xavi is better than Pirlo. One could argue that Pirlo would work better with the teammates on this particular team (it's not exactly the personnel of a tiki-taka team), but you have the team being coached by Guardiola, so I'm assuming the team will play a style that suits Xavi at least somewhat. Using Pirlo here wouldn't be an awful choice, though, given the rest of the personnel. Replacing Ronaldinho with Makelele is a purely tactical choice. I think you need a DM, otherwise the team would struggle in defense and struggle to win the ball back high up the pitch. Ronaldinho is a better player than Makelele, but the team needs a destroyer more than it needs another creative player. One could use Vieira instead. I suspect he'd work better with Xavi, actually.
I agree and lastly, I would replace Roberto Carlos with Zanetti. I think you need at least one defensive minded fullback instead of two attacking fullbacks in a back-line of four. Carlos was defensively weaker than Cafu, so he is sacrificed.
I think you can get away with it if you have a more conservative midfield. I would theoretically not subtract any point from a fantasy team with 3 out and out attackers, if they assemble a midfield of say, Busquets, Keane, and Vieira. There is enough running power and defensive mastery in there, for a team to play counter-attacking style of leaving the front 3 up front at all time. There are a couple successful real life exceptions though. Barcelona with Alba and Alves is the latest example. The other classic example is the Milan side of 2007. They used both Jankulovski and Oddo in a back 4, but had a midfield of 5 central players, in particular Ambrosini and Gattuso who provided a lot of running power to assist the fullbacks defensively.
Certainly can't agree Xavi is better than Pirlo. Each of them has different attributes and talents that works the best under different styles of football. Pirlo in his prime 2003-07 has always been the best definition and example of deep-lying playmaker of his generation, he was the Brain of the Milan team that made into UCL Final 3 times in 5 years and the Italy team that won the 2006 World Cup. While Xavi in his prime 2008-11, was the best definition of Tika-Taka football and he was the center of the Barcelona and Spain national teams that won the UCL and World Cup. I think together, they have defined a generation(2003-2011 under their respect primes) and it is very unfair to separate them and favoring one over another. Therefore, I think we should have two teams from 1997-now, one that plays direct football and another that plays possession based football, that way, we can respect and appreciate all the top players under different styles of football rather than having the stereotype and biase of favoring one over another. Direct Football: Coach Carlo Ancelotti -----------Ronaldo-------- --C Ronaldo--Zidane--Nedved- ------Makelele-- Pirlo------------ -R.Carlos--Maldini--Nesta--Cafu-- ------------ Buffon----------------- Possession Football: Coach Pep Guardiola --------------Suarez------------- -------Henry----------Messi----- -------Iniesta----------Xavi------ ----------Busquets------------- ---Abidal--Pique--Puyol--Lahm- --------------Neuer------------
Yeah, that's true. It's all about balance. So, in that team, one could go with Messi/CR7/R9 as the front three, but then I think you'd probably need to replace both Ronaldinho and Zidane with much more defensive players. That could work too. The reason I replaced R9 with Suarez is that I don't think there's actually that much of a drop in attacking ability there (while, for instance, the drop in attacking ability of going from Zidane to someone like Busquets is more significant IMO). Yeah, one thing to note about Barcelona's use of two attacking fullbacks: When Alba and Alves both went forward, Busquets essentially dropped back into a CB role. So they'd basically operate as a three-man back line. Still risky, but not really suicidal. If an attack came down an exposed flank, the back three would just shift over towards that side, and it'd be as if you had a fullback back on that side. All that is to say that I think having two attacking fullbacks makes it all the more necessary to have a really defense-minded midfielder in there. Having two attacking fullbacks and a midfield of Pirlo-Zidane-Ronaldinho would definitely get the defense exposed IMO.
I think the direct football manager has to be Jose Mourinho. He's the most successful one of the modern era. Swapping Players I think Henry and Suarez played their best football in higher tempo styles, so maybe they belong in the direct team. I think Zidane and Ronaldo will do better than them in the possession style. Possession Team If Zidane plays the false winger for the Possession style team, Busquets qualities should be abused by adding a more attacking left wingback. Alba has done well for both Spain and Barcelona. Also, it would be a crime to not recreate the Messi/Alves right flank. Unlike the direct style, where there have been many successful teams, Barcelona clearly dominates the possession style. I wonder if we can break the Barca-centric selection by replacing one of the CBs with another CB who is also very good with the ball, like Sergio Ramos or Thiago Silva. It's the only area I can think of, since the midfield three of Busquets, Iniesta, and Xavi is pretty much non-negotiable due to how dominant they were. Direct Team If Suarez and Henry play for the direct team, C.Ronaldo has to move to the right and Nedved has to move to play in the middle. I'd prefer Gerrard to him in this role, but that's just personal preference. The team would play a bit like Rafa's Liverpool, with Nedved, Makelele, and Pirlo in place of Gerrard, Masherano, and Alonso midfield. However, that team had in Kuyt, a wide forward who was very good defensively. The team wasn't very successful though. In the modern era, the successful direct teams tend to either play with playmakers in a midfield three or just no playmaker at all. Both Real Madrid and Man Utd, when they won playing direct football, used playmakers in a midfield three. Chelsea didn't use any midfielder in their midfield three, neither did Arsenal, in their midfield partnership. I also don't think Pirlo ever excelled in a midfield duo with a holding DM in his club career, has he? I think, the team must choose to either play the Arsenal style by replacing Pirlo with a central midfielder like a Keane, Vieira, or Davids, or the Man Utd and Madrid style by replacing Nedved with another playmaker, like a Redondo, or someone modern like Modric. Also, I think direct teams tend to have contrasting sidebacks. The right back is usually more conservative than the left back, so maybe Thuram instead of Cafu?
I use Nedved more like a B2B to use his stamina and running to provide the cover and running for Pirlo in the middle so that when switching to the defense, you literally have a formation of 4-3-2-1 similar to the Christmas tree used by Ancelotti's Milan. In building attack phase, he can also drop into the CM position to serve as a ball recycle point for Pirlo to ease Pirlo's pressure in the playmaking. When the team pushes up, he can move forward into the RMF position, he is such a dynamic player in the middle that I doubt others will be to play this role as well. Now, between Ancelotti and Mourniho, I don't want to debate who is the better coach because everybody has his preference. But given that Ancelotti is the current coach that has won most number of UCL, I believe his Milan side in 2002-2007 was one of the most influential teams in the last decade besides Pep Guardiola's Barcelona. Not only achievement wise did Milan managed to get into 3 UCL Finals in 5 years(an achievement even Guardiola's Barcelona couldn't achieve), but also tactical wise, his Milan tactics was so crucial to Milan winning of UCLs/Italy winning the 2006 World Cup. In the 2006 World Cup, Marcello Lippi exactly copied the Pirlo-Gattuso partnership while using Camornesi in a role similar to Seedorf at the club level and used Pirlo as the brain of the team and that led Italy winning the World Cup. Just like in 2010 World Cup, the Xavi-Iniesta-Busquets that was pivotal force at the club level, was migrated to the national team by Bosque and they helped Spain in winning the World Cup.
Fair enough, I just don't feel Ancelotti is a direct style manager, per se. I think he's actually quite adaptable, which helps explains his tactical variations with Milan. Also, his title-winning Chelsea side was not as direct as other versions of Chelsea in the past decade, at least in the league. Mourinho on the other hand, has played direct football with Porto, Chelsea, Inter, and Real Madrid. It's too early to tell with Man Utd though.
I do actually quite like that team and understand the reasoning behind the differences to what I've come up with (usage of Pele and Di Stefano for example, or Beckenbauer who I do tend to think of as being the 'midfield sweeper' option in an all-time select XI now myself, but maybe having Franco Baresi available for that XI influences that while Neeskens, or Matthaus as mainly an anchor player, feels more of a stretch in an all-time midfield than Baresi, who was superior to Beckenbauer defensively too I suppose, does in defence). Here's my team anyway. I've added the Dutch orange as secondary colour, and left out Puskas and all other Hungarians too, but perhaps the line-up on the other hand would be suited to Gusztav Sebes being the manager/coach, with Cruyff as Player Assistant Coach lol (compensating for Michels' absence) but maybe Bobby Moore as Captain:
I can see where all the ideas come from with that one too, and have had a few mind changes and uncertainties for my effort. Rijkaard in midfield does make most sense probably, but I've stuck him in defence where he played in Euro 88 even though he enjoyed the midfield role better at AC Milan. My alternative might have been to put Scirea in with Baresi in a similar way to I put Beckenbauer in with Moore, and I think that would be ok to signify how well both Scirea and Baresi did and probably it could even work ok with Scirea as libero or in more of a joint partnership but it's tempting for Italian all-time XI's to stick someone else in and leave out Scirea there too I guess unless going with a back 3/5 and sweeper. Gullit could have been fitted in for an example all-star team perhaps and even in a proper midfield role would still have made some sense I think even if he more often played as an AM. Tigana could have gone into the midfield, not necessarily thinking of the defensive side but more for energy and cohesion. In some ways Rummenigge would fit Zico's role better but I feel like Zico should be in; Michael Laudrup perhaps could have taken his role too (I also thought I could put him deeper at LM or something with Platini moving over but generally was at least an AM and unlike Gullit he wouldn't have such an all-round game including on the defensive side I suppose) but while him and Maradona (along with Platini he feels like he can't be left out) would make a great pair of roaming AM/forwards, Zico does have something of Laudrup's vision and playmaking ability, if not the same pace and ability to use the wide areas so well, and he adds a second real top notch goalscorer to the team too. I thought Michel Hidalgo might be a decent choice as coach to fit the type of team it would be, and winning Euro 84 maybe enhances his case. I did give the kit a black trim to reference the stripe on AC Milan's shirts though. Argentina did win two World Cup's as stated in that period, and as a possible pure footballing anchor player maybe Ardiles was nearest to being the second of their players I'd put in potentially. I nearly went with Brian Clough as manager though (just like I nearly did try to fit Laudrup in) - I considered more of a 4-4-2 with him but it might've ended as a 4-2-3-1 moreso with Maradona as false winger and maybe Laudrup too. Hidalgo's team could go into the Magic Square though, with Platini pushing forwards and either Zico or Maradona going more into the attack. Probably my call for captain would be Baresi.
Once I decided that indeed it had to be Guardiola coaching a 4-3-3 team for this one, then my (slight) adjustments probably fell in line with what's been suggested anyway pretty much (maybe thankfully lol although at one point I thought about making the argument that C.Ronaldo and Messi in one team together could be disaster if we're considering compatibility etc as others have been doing, and I wasn't sure if CR7 would fit very well as a LWF for a Pep team or whether they'd be completely at odds and Guardiola would be infuriated with over-shooting or whatever....but then the potential replacement in this system Ronaldinho was ditched by Guardiola anyway). Maybe Wenger could be assistant coach and take over in emergency situations when the shape would go out the window lol! Then Ronaldinho and/or Figo could come on in the WF positions, maybe with Messi dropping into an AM role for Zidane if off form, or replacing Xavi if it was a case of absolute gung-ho mode (or possibly into the false-ish 9 position replacing R9). Maybe Cr7 could then be an option to come off (as with Zidane if having on off day especially) but the Portuguese combo of him and Figo in the WF positions (one as roaming second striker type, the other more traditional wing player/playmaker) might be tried first I guess if this team was a reality. Kaka would be a more attacking option than Xavi too if changing the philosophy and nature of the team, but on the other hand Iniesta could be an obvious option to come in as more of a break the lines player than Xavi, or instead of Zidane to fit the Tika Taka style seamlessly (again an obvious idea if Zidane wasn't shining in such a team I suppose). Vieira is maybe a like-for-like ish option for Redondo, but maybe with better stationary ball retention skills leadleader? But either if just wanting a solid outright DM, or if wanting to close the back door of the midfield a bit if indeed going gung-ho then Busquets for Tika Taka compatibility, or Makelele (who did play well with Zidane, and also in a 4-3-3 at Chelsea) seem obvious options. The Barcelona colours also contain the blue of France and Italy anyway of course.
Some awesome teams there PDG. Nice reasoning also. Not much to argue against. Really liked the Neeskens, Van Basten and Falcao choices. Only a couple of questions: 1. Why Best instead of Garrincha? Could Best defend and play as a midfielder? Is that it? 2. Platini that far behind. Would not it be better to put a real CM there? 3. Why Lizarazu over Carlos? For me, the brazilian was in another level;
Thanks mate - glad to add something to your already very nice thread (and kudos to the person who came up with the teams in the first place and the interesting article he wrote - also the same one who write the piece on Pele as AM I think?). 1 - Yes, Best could defend and play as midfielder and in that formation I have him and Cruyff almost as roaming AM's rather than pure wingers. If I'm honest I might feel Best could have a claim to be a better dribbler and all round player than Garrincha too (but ofc I grew up in Britain and you in Brazil so maybe our experiences and exposure to these players and their reputations differ quite a bit - it's hard to judge players from so long ago and also we all will have slightly different ideas anyway). At his best, Best was really seen as an absolute top level player so it's no disgrace to lose out to him anyway I suppose. I thought about a second team, and probably would have put Garrincha and Dzajic in there, more as proper wingers but with freedom to come infield too (especially in the final third I think, wheras like I say I'd be thinking Best and especially Cruyff - he was placed as outright midfielder in the link ofc - would be coming into the middle of the pitch quite a bit with and without the ball). 2 - Well, I suppose it's partly a matter of not leaving out Platini, Maradona or Zico and still having a proper team (like I said I might've even liked to fit M.Laudrup in too lol!) but I also feel Platini could and did play as centre midfielder more often than the other two, and even when in a relatively free role tended to drop quite deep regularly. Going back to the number 10 conversation re: Pele, I feel Platini is almost between a number 10 and number 8 I suppose, and at times in France he did play in 4-3-3 systems (also for the NT before the Magic Square was introduced when he became one of the AM's, but to be honest all 4 midfielders played all over the midfield then). His long passes are maybe his number 1 trademark ofc so he'd get plenty of opportunities to use them from deep, and defensively I feel he was a bit better than gets suggested at times (making clean tackles etc). Maradona did say they both could have played together if Platini played from deeper than himself, and they did that in the 1987 Rest of the World vs English League match at Wembley (albeit Platini was just retired I think and had ended playing for Juventus as much more of an outright playmaker, scoring much fewer goals than before in his final season - which seems to have been not especially highly rated but it can be seen he did get quite a number of assists still). 3 - Normally I will prefer attacking qualities over defensive ones (often in midfield anyway for example) but maybe on that sort of call I lean the other way, and Lizarazu was a bit more reliable and assured in defence I think even if not as aggressive in tackling as R.Carlos could be. Going forwards though I also feel Lizarazu was very good in his own right - not as spectacular but with a very good touch, good awareness and interaction with team-mates (including Zidane ofc) and maybe to my preference I think he would 'waste' the ball less though to be fair when R.Carlos did waste it he was manly attempting things he showed he could pull off even if they seemed low percentage - anyway he also played well with Zidane I suppose himself, and did get quite a few assists, so very understandable choice and I'd guess the majority one given Maldini will be placed in the prior period by most people.
@PDG1978 As you thought about a second team, who were close-ish to inclusion in your 1st teams? And why or with which thoughts?
Hmm, I mentioned a few in my original posts but I guess there would be some others that I'd probably see as guaranteed second XI players without necessarily being close to the first XI lol (for example Bobby Charlton; and then likewise maybe Gianni Rivera a guaranteed 3rd XI player for me in that AM role but not in contention to displace Charlton probably in the pecking order). If I put two outright wingers in the first team for that 1955-1975 team (maybe Best would still get in rather than both Garrincha and Dzajic for me though) then I guess Di Stefano or Eusebio would have to miss out with Cruyff going into a more central position. For the 1997-today team I didn't even mention Bergkamp but if changing the formation and leaving out C.Ronaldo and Xavi (was wary of doing lol, but while I might even 'like' the team better I don't say it would be categorically better especially if Guardiola was the coach - maybe indeed Wenger taking over is a better idea) maybe he would come straight into pole position as supporting/playmaking forward to partner R9. Messi going to play as an attacking winger, often cutting inside in attacking areas, but that is not a role he's really played or would excel at the very most (ie midfield winger) with I guess more likely Figo than Ronaldinho on the other side, although as it would most likely be the left I'm not 100% sure. Vieira could be with Zidane (or basically playing mainly from behind Zidane; more as an anchor of sorts rather than completely a box to box midfielder). Or maybe instead of using Bergkamp it could be more of a 4-1-3-1-1 with Messi in free role behind R9, and Rivaldo introduced as a left-leaning AM (not outright winger - but that might mean Vieira and the full-backs would play even more disciplined in such a line-up) accompanying probably Figo (rather than Ronaldinho again) and Zidane. For the middle years as said Michael Laudrup was close to contention but I decided there wasn't room if keeping Zico in and trying to keep away from all-star line-up and more towards 'normal' line-up. Gullit too, and actually Ruud Krol might have even partnered Baresi better than Scirea (neither as true sweeper) if using Rijkaard as midfielder or leaving him out (maybe I don't see Rijkaard and Matthaus together as optimal, although I see the logic for sure in the team in the link given the 3 AM setup ahead of the middle of midfield; and even in 4-4-2 teams such as Arsenal late 90's or Man Utd early 90's it's been shown that not only successful but quality footballing and prolific scoring teams can be created using two such box to box players together (although Petit was both slightly more of a sitter, and slightly more of a passer perhaps for Arsenal).
Yes. Same site that placed Pele as an AM. 1To be honest, I dont know much about Best. Thought he was a pure winger. Happy to know that. I understand. In Brazil it would be a sin to live Garrincha out. heheh 2. I understand. It is really tough to leave Platini out. 3. I did think you placed the french for be better in defense. Thx for the reply. I'm actually learning a lot here, about Platini, Best and classic players.
The site also posted B and C teams for eras. The B team from 55-75 looks more balanced than the first team. I could see that work better. 55-75 Team B: Gordon Banks (ENG); Berti Vogts (GER), José Santamaria (URU), Elias Figueroa (CHI) and Giacinto Facchetti (ITA); Zito (BRA), Didi (BRA), Bobby Charlton (ENG) and Rivellino (BRA); Eusébio (POR) and Gerd Müller (GER). Team C: Ladislao Mazurkiewicz (URU); De Sordi (BRA) Cesare Maldini (ITA), Atilio Ancheta (URU) and Karl-Heinz Schnellinger (GER); Clodoaldo (BRA), Gérson (BRA) and Tostão (BRA); Jairzinho (BRA, improvised as right-wigner, position he played in the 1970 World Cup), George Best (NIR) and John Charles (WAL). 76-96 Team B: Schumacher (GER); Jorginho (BRA), Gaetano Scirea (ITA), Ruud Krol (NED) and Júnior (BRA); Falcão (BRA), Ossie Ardiles (ARG) and Michael Laudrup (DEN); Roberto Baggio (ITA), Mario Kempes (ARG) and Marco Van Basten (NED). Team C: Taffarel (BRA), Manuel Amoros (FRA), Aldair (BRA), Giuseppe Bergomi (ITA) and Andreas Bhremme (GER); Breitner (GER), Sócrates (BRA) and Ruud Gullit (NED); Karl-Heinz Rummenigge (GER), Kevin Keegan (ENG) and Paolo Rossi (ITA). 97-2016 Team B: Peter Schmeichel (DEN); Javier Zanetti (ARG), John Terry (ENG), Sérgio Ramos (SPA) and Philip Lahm (GER; he starded his career as a left-back); Fernando Redondo (ARG), Figo (POR), Iniesta (SPA) and Rivaldo (BRA); Raul (SPA) and Henry (FRA). Team C: Oliver Kahn (GER); Lilian Thuram (FRA), Marcel Desailly (FRA), Carles Puyol (SPA) and Ashley Cole (ENG); Patrick Vieira (FRA), Xavi (SPA), Pavel Nedvěd (CZ) and Kaká (BRA); Zlatain Ibrahimovic (SWE) and Gabriel Bastituta (ARG).
Imagine actually putting George Best in a such team, George Best is only 2nd to Johan Cruyff in the "most overrated players of all time"list, most of it obviously come down from him being a United legend and United having a cancer fanbase who overrate their own players almost as much as Brazilians do (hello crazy brazilians who think Rivaldo was better than Zidane or that Roberto Carlos is better than Jordi Alba) Needless to say that none of the 60s,70s or 80s players would start if we made an all time great team because yea CR7 and Messi score in 1 season what Cruyff scores in 6, Neuer is far more athletic with better reflexes and gamesense than Yashin ever had, Beckenbauer wouldn't be able to keep up with the pace and strength of today's players. Really an all time XI should look like this. CR7 R9 Messi Xavi Iniesta Busquets Alba/Godin/Bonucci/Lahm Neuer or Buffon
Personally I disagree mate, but we can't really prove anything I suppose and I think probably too many arguments on the forum end up here so it's best to avoid it maybe.
Let me try with this one, years around 2000-2002 more or less: Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk
Don't know where to put it but this is an interesting World Soccer article from 1965, shortly before the 'boom' started (in 1967 a France Football poll ranked Ajax among the best five teams in Europe). https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwL4ev1QI1K6eHJpd2VkekxRc3M/view?pref=2&pli=1 Reading the first and last section will suffice if it's a too long read. As you know I do agree that George Best and JC14 often receive fairly or unfairly 'bonus points', and this touches on it a little bit. http://www.soccerissue.com/2016/06/05/who-is-footballs-equivalent-to-muhammad-ali/ Cheers, and thanks for your thought above by the way. Yes, based on Ballon d'Or consistency etc. most of those names would be decent inclusion in some way.
Thanks - nice description of Moulijn I noticed there (although not unexpected he'd be picked out pre-Cruyff I don't think). Actually re: my previous answer to you, I wonder whether any idea of putting in Rivaldo would be better with a diamond (Zidane on it's left, Figo on it's right) rather than flatter 4-1-3-1-1 as I suggested. I was thinking pre (or including since it was his year of fame) 1999 really if considering the required form and abilities to be a possibility if the formation was changed (but I did think the Bergkamp idea was more likely as an alternative suggestion to my original line-up). So for example what he shows here: Or perhaps indeed playing more in a left sided role here: I think he was never a really reliable player in terms of form probably, but I think in those days when his mobility (and consistency of technique even consequently) was optimal he might be considered. But even taking away longevity as a factor (I probably didn't mean to focus on it myself, but it is also maybe rare for the very best players to have very bad longevity - even George Best's lack of longevity is probably exaggerated; what is true I suppose is some players have extreme longevity though) then maybe putting Rivaldo in such an XI feels an 'alternative' call if taking out C.Ronaldo, or even changing the balance of a typical Guardiola side, or arguably the balance of any suggested XI, to take out Xavi and re-shuffle. Maybe it could be argued at his best he was better than Xavi (would be disputable I'm sure) but maybe still hard to fit him in the XI instead.
I imagine that from our exchanges, that you probably have a substantial if not a full understanding of what "stationary ball retention" means in my book, but just to clarify (as I found an ideal-and-concise example of it on youtube): ------------------------------------------- (note: starts at 2:59 / ends at 3:11) ------------------------------------------- In a nutshell: that's what "stationary ball retention" is, in my book. It's the range of movement (as related to the actual ball retention ability at that specific type of situation), or the range of ability itself at that specific type of situation, when your body is contained or restrained within a space/situation too small to simply (and purely) run your way out of it. In the video above, Rivaldo clearly used "in-movement ability" (read: non-stationary ability) as well, but it was his stationary ability that finally (and crucially) got him out of that mess. Rivaldo and Riquelme are among the clear minority of "long lower body players" whom I've watched, that are extremely great at that type of ball retention. But for the most part (as far as I've been able to watch, at least), it's players like Francesco Totti, Andrea Pirlo, Carlos Valderrama, who tend to have extraordinary ability in stationary situations; these are players who made it an art, to force you into playing "on the inside" where they can exploit their wealth of (either) mobility or ability or both. But players like Zidane and Laudrup and Hagi and Redondo (whom are amazing when in-movement), to me always looked out of their element when they were forced into stationary situations (albeit, the roles that said players played made it relatively easy for them to largely or substantially "evade" stationary situations altogether, for the most part; well except for Zidane, who actively actually wanted to get into those type of situations, but of course his ability when not stationary was so great that his strengths on the ball, largely compensated for the number of times he would get caught in them stationary situations). Which players do you remember, who consistently and successfully produced stationary ball retention skills (similar to the Rivaldo skill in that video)?