Did you forget cr7 in 11/12 +euro 12? I thought I just mention since you said pirlo was unlucky to be up against only 2 players who had all time great performances. By absolutely any definition you choose Ronaldo was at an all time level in 11/12 it was one of cr7s best ever seasons and a candidate for the best season of all time by a European player I find it highly ironic that you could say only a poster who "hates" fc Barcelona would say pirlo shoud've won the 2012 BD but then completely forget to mention that cr7 was demonstrably superior to iniesta in the 11/12 club season and 2012 calendar year. 2012 was the year Ronaldo tormented Barcelona scored in 6 consecutive matches against them scored the goal in the nou camp that won la liga Won the super copa espana vs Barcelona(scoring 3 in 2 games) scored twice against Barcelona in the copa del rey in the qf but real Madrid ended up losing 4-3 and guess what...Messi never scored) Iniesta finishing above Messi/Ronaldo in the platini award(uefa best player 11/12) was a complete farce. It is one of those voting decisions that has baffled me to this day
Hahahahahahaha oh my gosh, do you look at every post on every threadwith a fine-tooth comb to figure out if they subtly downplay Cristiano Ronaldo? I actually agree with you that Cristiano Ronaldo was playing at an "all-time level" in 2012. But this thread truly is not about Cristiano Ronaldo, and it's a bit of a stretch to try to make it about him based on a very subtle perceived attack on him. Yes, Cristiano Ronaldo was an all-time level player in 2012. Let's move on, though. (You know I'm willing to engage in debate about CR7, but this thread is not for that discussion, and I've also objected when people veered the discussion towards Messi as well).
Fair enough but you cannot blame me for finding it slightly odd that you could completely forget cr7 when discussing the 2012 BD However since you have clarified your position I have nothing further to add. Note:did you watch the short comp I posted of the Maradona match in 1991 against Milan in the r9/Romario thread? (You were asking for examples of great/spectacular displays against genuine top club teams.)
@lessthanjake I replied back to you thinking you was leadleader,hence the reason I went on to ask you about the comp I posted on another thread. And please let's not start with silly games like before.I am specifically referring to you telling me and others to not talk about certain players because the title of the thread doesn't include their name. On the old Messi Ronaldo thread you talked about nearly every single player worth mentioning On the r9/Romario thread leadleader has spent more time criticising Maradona/Zidane then talking about the 2 brazilian strikers Like I said I don't want to spend an age discussing small matters I just thought I would be nice to remind him what kind of a player cr7 was in 2012 in case he had forgotten (After all its not like Fans of fc Barcelona are renowned for remembering real Madrid players achievements)
Meh, the Messi/Ronaldo thread was expressly about who was the "GOAT" and therefore lent itself to plenty of discussion of other players as well. As such, it also just became a bit of a catch-all thread. The topic of this particular thread is much more narrow. I understand why you brought up CR7; I just try to police this thread a bit so that it remains on topic. Catch-all threads are perfectly fine (in fact, it can be nice to have somewhere to put random thoughts that maybe aren't worthy of their own thread), but I don't want this thread to become that. As I said, this isn't the first time I've tried to get this thread back on topic, and I've done it when people were discussing Messi too, so it's not specific to you or the topic you brought up.
I never realized that Iniesta was so good in the 2006 final. I have to agree somewhat with @lessthanjake about Xavi and Iniesta's club career being clearly ahead of Zidane, and IMO, it's not even all that debatable.
Pre-assist from Zidane for Juventus (given offside?) - Starts midway in his own half after collecting the ball from his defence and takes out the forwards of the opponent, who are trying to employ pressing tactics, with the drop of a shoulder and a quick dribble. He then takes out the entire opposition midfield with a simple 1-2 and follows this up by pulling out a center back from the opposition defence, before passing the ball to one of his team's two forwards, who now have a very favourable 3v2 situation to work with, about 30 yards from the opponent's goal.
Why was the above information posted in this thread?? Who is Zidane's opponent in that run? What season is that? What competition is that? And what does that prove regarding this particular thread, when a past-his-prime Iniesta could do it even better against PSG 2015 (or Real Madrid 2009-2013)?
I think this is a good example of something that zidane could do a number of times in his juventus days. as zidane being my favorite player, i can say that it should be clear for anyone that iniesta and xavi had a better ball retention percentage. however, in terms of ball retention zidane should be in front of xavi, and iniesta being in front of both. but when you talk about plays of ball retention, or build up plays, leading up to chances for the team, i would put zidane ahead of xavi and iniesta (of course, xavi and iniesta are also playing with a player named messi, so not all things are equal). and it also must be noted that zidane did not have midfielders like busquets, xavi, and iniesta around him. as much as we talk about zidane having a free role that neither iniesta or xavi had, you could make a case that as a midfielder, you could look better playing with a team as good as barcelona was from 2008-2012 than having a free role at juventus from 96-2001. in addition, if i was to evaluate iniesta in a similar role, in terms of the players or rather the team style that he was playing with compared to zidane, then i would point out the years from 2014-2017 for iniesta. unfortunately, for iniesta, he was past his prime, and he still would never have a free role playing next to messi. however, in 2015-2016, Iniesta had a hell of a season!!! unfortunately, we don't really have a season where zidane was as restricted as iniesta, but the closest would be when he went to real madrid. i would say that only in zidane's first 1 or 2 seasons could you really say that he was still in top shape. in 2003, he won the world player of the year award but fortunately for him, messi, ronaldo, suarez, etc. where not in the picture. based on iniesta's season in 2015-2016, i would probably consider it a better season than zidane's season in 2002-2003. and the only reason i say probably is because even though iniesta may have had more standout performances, i think zidane had a lot more goals. and by the way, i'm only speaking in terms of league performances from the both of them. if i did have to put one player ahead of the other, it's extremely difficult for me. but in any case, i would put iniest and zidane above xavi because of the fact that they posed more of a threat offensively. as a pure midfielder, i would probably put xavi as the number 1.
This is an interesting case. You rate Iniesta and Zidane above Xavi as players because they're better offensively, but I guess a question should be asked, 'who is the best of the three at THEIR job?'
that's an almost impossible question to answer because i don't think there so far apart. if i had to answer which player did their role the best for what the team called for them to do, then i would say 'Xavi' at this point in time. however, trying to turn plays into as much end product as possible is the most difficult part of the game, which zidane had more of that role on his teams.
Zidane is faster and bigger than Iniesta. Zidane is better at that specific thing, than Iniesta. On the other hand, Iniesta is better than Zidane, in terms of grabbing the ball in an advanced area, slipping - not with speed, but with 'illusionist' skill - past 2 opponents, and delivering a deadly a deadly assist or a deadly pre-assist. Zidane being the physically bigger player, and not being fast enough to grab the ball in advanced areas AND also leave defenders for dead (using a drop-of-the-shoulder followed by pure speed dribbling), is not as good as Iniesta is in this area. This was my point. Both are equally good at the same ability, but they have to use that ability in different areas of the pitch: physically big Zidane starts from deeper midfield areas (more space available to a big player like Zidane), and physically small Iniesta finds small pockets between-the-lines in advanced areas of the pitch. It's difficult to say which variety of the same ability is better than the other, but both players are extraordinary at that same essential ability. Zidane would almost certainly look less impressive in the same team as Xavi and Messi. Messi will reduce Zidane's dribbling license, Messi will also reduce Zidane's shooting license, and Xavi will greatly reduce Zidane's perceived importance in the midfield tempo areas. In other words: Zidane with a team like Barcelona, would possibly win more trophies, but his perception as an individual would decline as a result of having a lesser license to dribble, to shot, to be lazy, to be the justifiable 'luxury' that he was many times perceived as. At league level, something that hurts Zidane 2002/03, is that Luis Figo and Ronaldo were both clearly better (than Zidane) at league level, despite the fact that Zidane had a better 'creative license' than both Figo or Ronaldo. On the other hand, Iniesta 2015/16 was the best midfielder in his team, in a team that was bad for midfield players, that is, a team where the MSN consumes the creative license, therefore leaving Iniesta with very little to work with in the form of creative license. (And it also doesn't help Zidane 2002/03, that midfield/playmaker Pavel Nedved 2002/03 clearly outclassed him in direct games and also indirectly.) At the moment I would put Xavi as number 1. Xavi's ball retention, stamina, energy, mobility, was the nightmare of any and every team. Unfortunately for Xavi, though, the most successful period of his career began when his physique started to visibly decline. Only in 2008/09 did he still have his prime physique. In 2009/10 he already looked visible slower (less agile) than in the previous year, and perhaps he was 'saving himself' for the 2010 World Cup, but also at the 2010 World Cup he looked a visibly slower and older player, compared to the more agile-and-energetic Xavi of season 2007/08, Euro 2008, and season 2008/09. Modern football already is compartmentalized, and looks like it will only get even more compartmentalized in the years to come. In this context, Xavi's unique set of abilities is a more consistent weapon than either Zidane or Iniesta. Zidane doesn't have the physical ability and also doesn't have the end product, that would convince modern coaches to build teams around him. Same for Iniesta. But Xavi doesn't need entire teams built around him; Xavi only needs for the midfield to be built around him, which makes him a better 'modern player' than either Zidane or Iniesta, in my opinion of course.
i definitely agree with what you said about there tendencies of where to start and produce plays on the pitch. however, i think you are overestimating zidane's speed and underestimating his ability to beat defenders with pure skill. zidane is not recognized as a player with pace, though it was more of an asset for him than iniesta. but of course, Iniesta is a better dribbler of the two. actually, i don't agree with this, rather the question i have is how iniesta would perform on a team where he does have to carry the bulk (or a large part) of the responsibilty for a team as zidane did. but of course, zidane would have been so star player at a team like barcelona as he was at juventus. I don't agree with this. after WC 2002, R9 was already past it. he did good in terms of goal tally but in terms of overall performance, i'm not impressed. figo had some good all round performances but i would not rate them any better than zidane in any case. it's a real shame that xavi was discovered so late in his career. real shame. it's difficult to say now because his true prime was too short for me to put him above zidane or iniesta for his career as a whole. however, he is still more of a pure midfielder, and because of this, in terms of rating all 3 players more so as complete players including a more direct attacking threat, then i put Xavi as the 3rd. however, perhaps if he was regularly putting in performances like he was in Euro 2008 at club level, then maybe i would have a different opinion purely based on his sheer dominance in the midfield. it's true that almost no team would cater to zidane as juventus did then. however, if there was 1 team to do that under a certain manager then it would be at Arsenal. that's as close as it will get to catering to 1 player on any top team as Ozil is a similar case to Zidane. both are very good offensively. very similar traits. neither good at defending. however, i do feel zidane is more aggressive than Ozil from a physical standpoint.
Xavi was already exceptional in 2004/05 and in the first half of 2005/05, but then he tore his knee ligaments in January 2006 and missed Barcelona's CL winning campaign, and arrived half-fit at the World Cup. That was incredibly unlucky.
The other day I watched Barcelona vs. Real Betis, game played at Betis in La Liga 2004/05. Xavi was doing crazy skills in that game. He had FLAIR in 2004/05, which is something that is not typically associated with Xavi.
Zidane was a lot faster than 99.9% of fans give him credit for. He looked slower because he was very physically big, which created the impression that he was running slowly when in fact he could cover the entire length of the pitch with relative ease/quickness. Iniesta at any point in his career is a significantly slower player compared to prime Zidane. Speed is crucial when doing many of the skills that Zidane is known for. Zidane is obviously superior to Iniesta in that regard. But Zidane would not be allowed that much freedom neither at modern Barcelona nor at modern Real Madrid. And that's the bottom line: Iniesta is better than Zidane, if what you want is a player that can play in the same team as Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo; Zidane is better than Iniesta, if what you want is a player that can be the center of attention at Chelsea or Bayern Munich. Zidane requires far too much creative license, which slows the tempo of the entire team so that a player like Zidane - who does not score many goals, who does not produce many assists, and who does not produce many dribbling runs - can look impressive in a 'luxury' role. That worked to a limited degree in Zidane's own time, but that would never work at club level in the modern game. Barcelona wouldn't have it. Real Madrid also wouldn't have it. Zidane would need to make a very strong impression at the World Cup and the Euro, if he was to be perceived as a better player than Iniesta, let alone Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. (Because Chelsea and Bayern Munich cannot compete against Real Madrid and Barcelona.) R9 was amazing in season 2002/03, and miles ahead of Zidane at club level, in my opinion. Yes, R9 in season 2002/03 was stopped by injuries: he only played a couple of minutes of the UCL Semi Final, as a result of an injury, but that didn't stopped him from scoring one goal and creating one PK (that Figo failed to score) in the limited time that he played in that Semi Final. You seriously need to re-watch R9 against AC Milan 2002/03 (the team that won the Champions League), Manchester United 2002/03 (Manchester United was the 2nd best team in the world at the time, in my opinion), Juventus 2002/03 (one of the top clubs in the world at the time), etc. R9 was BY FAR superior to Zidane, in my opinion. (But yes, R9 after season 2002/03 did declined heavily; his weight problems started in 2003/04, and it only got worse from there.) Also Figo was better than Zidane at club level: clearly better in La Liga, and not inferior in the Champions League. (Of course Zidane was perceived as superior to Figo, for reasons not related to what happened on the pitch.) We disagree on this, and that's precisely what makes football so entertaining. Arsenal, Bayern Munich, Manchester City, Chelsea - would all probably be willing to build their teams around Zidane. The problem is that NOT ONE of those clubs can compete against Barcelona or Real Madrid. Perception in the modern age is based on team results, not on the actual performance - that would be a big problem against Zidane's style of play. Ozil is a better passer than Zidane, whereas Zidane is a more talented technician. And I agree, Zidane was physically more aggressive than Ozil is. Furthermore, Zidane also was mentally more aggressive, more ambitious, than Ozil is.
Bayern Munich with Zidane would undoubtedly beat the 2016/17 version of Barcelona, and be 50/50 against the current Real Madrid team. Bayern is the second best team in the world right now. Look at how easily Madrid dispatched of Juventus in the final, and how Juventus beat Barcelona 3-0 in the quarterfinals. Bayern took Madrid to extra time despite getting a man sent off in both games. The 6-3 aggregate scoreline was skewed by the fact that Bayern played 30 minutes of the home leg, and 40 minutes of the away leg with 10 men. That and two offside goals for Real. Whenever it was 11 against 11, Bayern looked at least Real's equals. Lewandowski Ribery - Zidane - Robben Thiago - Vidal Alaba - Hummels - Boateng - Lahm Neuer Thiago moves into a deeper role to make way for Zidane, and an older Xabi Alonso becomes a squad player. I find it hard to believe that the starting XI above would at least not be massive contenders in the CL.
The above is thoroughly irrational, as far as I'm concerned. Bayern Munich attacks - Barcelona will almost always win a game against a team that attacks, particularly when that team is Bayern Munich, a club that plays in a league where they aren't tested by high caliber rivals. Barcelona won vs. Real Madrid. Juventus was easily dominated by Real Madrid. Atletico Madrid won against Bayern Munich. Atletico Madrid did not win a single meaningful game against Barcelona or Real Madrid. Style matters. Barcelona typically struggles against defensive teams like Chelsea 2012, Atletico Madrid 2014, Atletico Madrid 2016, and Juventus 2016. But Barcelona has an extremely good record against teams like Bayern Munich, who attack rather than defend. Totally disagree... Bayern is not the second best team in the world right now; Bayern lost games against both Real Madrid and Atletico Madrid (a weakened version of Atletico Madrid). Bayern plays in a weak one-team-league (where they are never tested). Bayern has a bad record against Spanish clubs as of late: defeat vs. Real Madrid 2014, defeat vs. Barcelona 2015, defeat vs. Atletico Madrid 2016, defeat vs. Atletico Madrid 2017, defeat vs. Real Madrid 2017, etc. What exactly makes you think that MSN would not convincingly outclass an aging Robben-Ribery?? You cannot call yourself the 2nd best team in the world when you get beaten that many times by Real Madrid, Barcelona, and Atletico Madrid. Just over the last 3 seasons, Bayern Munich has been eliminated 3 times by Spanish clubs. That's 3 out of 3 times eliminated by Spanish clubs. No club can have a record like that, and yet be the 2nd best team in the world. You are wrong, and it isn't even open to debate. Furthermore: Juventus beat Barcelona 3-0, but Barcelona failed to score 3 easy goals in the first leg alone. The 3-0 result was extremely misleading. Juventus scored 3 difficult goals. Barcelona failed to score 3 easy goals. Any other day, Barcelona would've scored at least 2 of those 3 easy goals. Any other day, Dybala definitely does not score 2 amazing goals in quick succession. On paper, Zidane's name looks big. In reality, however, Zidane never actually elevated his clubs. Juventus did better without him. Real Madrid did better without him. Why would modern day Bayern Munich improve that much because of Zidane? Bayern would not significantly improve because of Zidane. Not only that, but Zidane was inconsistent at club level, and he would become even more inconsistent as a result of playing in the weak Bundesliga where he wouldn't be tested. Bottom line: Bayern Munich with or without Zidane, is just about good enough to upset Real Madrid or Barcelona, but Bayern Munich cannot consistently compete against Real Madrid or Barcelona. Bayern Munich would be lucky to win 1 out of every 4 games. That was what I meant when I stated that Bayern Munich cannot compete against Real Madrid and Barcelona.
it's true, maybe 99+ percent of people underestimate zidane's speed. but it's also worth noting that iniesta was quicker than zidane and probably had an edge on pace in the first 5 yards relative to zidane. look closely at iniesta pre-11/12 season, especially from 08-10 seasons in barcelona's high time. i 100% agree with everything in this statement. i can see your point about figo. and in champions league, it would be hard for me to make a case that zidane was better than figo in the knockout rounds and the league, although i think that's the case. but if it is, not by a big margin. in addition, because they produce in different ways, it's sometimes difficult to determine the value that each brings if the level is very close. and i must say, as much as i love zidane, i often think that figo was actually the better player in terms of effectiveness. however, both players are capable of creating plays and scoring goals. but you have figo, who mainly does it through dribbling and crossing, and zidane who does it with occasional dribbling and combining with other players. because both players are on a similar level, it's very difficult to choose which player i give the edge. maybe my standards are so high for ronaldo (given his earlier years), that it is hard for me to be impressed with anything he did after the 2002 WC. in any case, i was not impressed with what R9 did at real madrid agree with the zidane and ozil comparison. however, there is no way i could see zidane having a team built around him at manchester city, bayern munich, and even chelsea is a stretch for me. at man city, you already have david silva, who i would hardly say is a level below zidane. you also have sanchez who may be coming in, and you have a coming up sane. with guardiola as coach, there is no way zidane would get a team built around him. if players like robben, ribery, iniesta, and xavi couldn't get teams built around them with guardiola as coach, i see no reason why zidane would get that privilege. as it is, guardiola has said that he would only give a player like Messi such freedom. at bayern munich, with players like robben and lewandowski, i still don't think he would get a free role. even at chelsea, i thinks it's a stretch. as you said before, today's game is about efficiency. zidane's game did have efficiency, but a large part of it was based on how it was pleasing to the eye. unless zidane, was capable of bossing the midfield single handedly, i have no reason to see why he would be given a free role, on any top team outside of arsenal. and even then, sanchez is on the team. and i suppose a lower level team like arsenal and wenger in the picture, may give zidane that chance. however, i could see ronaldinho in his prime getting a free role on an team today except barcelona, arguably.
this is such a true statement, that many people fail to see. and this is coming from a guy that is as big as a zidane fan as anyone, without being blinded from the reality. although zidane did give substance to his teams, his appointment never had as much as an impact as people make it out to be. at best, zidane could at least maintain the level, but he never truly elevated it. i had just forgotten that juventus won the champions league before zidane arrived and arguably could have won the champions league after his replacement nedved came in, had he not been suspended for the final, given that the final went to penalty kicks. of course, that's a little to simple minded. but when zidane scored that champions league goal in 2002 for madrid, they had also one the champions league 2 years earlier without him. and after makelele left, they were so poor. and yes zidane was getting older, so again, it's not that simple. but in terms of effectiveness, i just don't see him even on the level of ronaldinho.
And yet, the same Zidane with the French NT had an entirely different result, in terms of elevating the team, considering that the difference between the results of France in major international tournaments, with and without him, is night and day, in spite of all the stars that they had apart from him, both historically and during his own era. So maybe, there were other issues at his club teams, including the unwillingness to build around him (unlike what the French NT did), unwillingness to maintain or buy quality (Juventus), unwillingness to maintain stability and balance (Real Madrid), etc. This argument is done to death frankly, and it is obvious that a player needs a number of factors to work in his favour, including how his team's rivals are faring and how well his team is managed, in addition to the team actually being setup with that player as its center, for him to elevate a team historically. This is evidenced by the fact of Messi not winning anything beyond the CdR and individual scoring awards this season, unless one wants to suggest that the Messi of this season is another example of a player who is incapable of elevating his team. Or as evidenced by a younger and fitter version of CRonaldo not winning as much historically with his teams apart again form individual scoring awards, unlike his slower and older self.
I think Zidane was a better goal scorer than Eden Hazard - perhaps not a better dribbler than Eden Hazard, but definitely a better goal scorer I would say. Basically, Zidane is like a bigger, faster, defensively lazy version of Iniesta, who can score goals even against the better teams - I think that's good enough for many teams, including both Chelsea and Bayern Munich. That being said, Real Madrid and Barcelona wouldn't have Zidane, in my opinion. About Luis Figo - as of late I've been collecting a lot of rare games of Figo in La Liga 1999/00, and I'm under the impression that Figo (in his prime) is a very underrated player. Figo could play in the right side, or the left side, could pass or shot the ball with either foot, was great at dribbling, was great at every style of ball retention there is, etc. It's true what Barcelona fans say: Figo never played for Real Madrid, the way he played for Barcelona. By the way, I agree about your statement regarding Ronaldinho. Ronaldinho's passing ability was simply something amazing.
It might actually be worse than you think. Juventus without Zidane won the Champions League Final against a very strong Ajax team. Ajax had already won the Champions League Final in 1995, and was perceived as a proven team at the Champions League. Without Zidane, Juventus won the only UCL they have won over the past 25+ years... With Zidane, Juventus arguably never even actually won an elimination round against a truly strong Champions League opponent. Ajax 1994/95 won the league (106 goals scored; 28 goals against). Ajax 1994/95 won the UCL (16 goals scored; 4 goal against). Ajax 1995/96 won the league (97 goals scored; 24 goals against). Ajax 1995/96 was 2nd place at the UCL (22 goals scored; 2 goals against). Ajax 1996/97 was 4th place in the league (55 goals scored; 31 goals against). Ajax 1996/97 was humiliated in the Semi Finals of the UCL (14 goals scored; 13 goals against). Ajax 1997 Semi Finals was for several reasons, a shadow of the team it had been in 1996 and 1995. That was Zidane's greatest performance for Juventus, and Juventus literally won the 19996 Final - without Zidane - against an actually strong Ajax. And it only make matters worse that Ajax 1996 was considered a better team than Borussia Dortmund 1997, the team that totally nullified Zidane. It is essentially the same exact story at Real Madrid - but it might actually be worse at Real Madrid. 1. Juventus Zidane was arguably better than Real Madrid Zidane. 2. Bayer Leverkusen 2001/02 was considered something of an 'inferior' team. I clearly remember the narrators talking about how much inferior Bayer Leverkusen was compared to Real Madrid. Zidane did scored an AMAZING goal in the UCL Final 2002, but he scored that goal against an inferior opponent. Here's the dull reality: Real Madrid without Zidane won UCL Finals against Zidane's Juventus and against Mendieta's Valencia, i.e. Real Madrid without Zidane could definitely win a UCL Final against 'underdog' Bayer Leverkusen. That's a fact, and a fact that is often forgotten. 3. Manchester United 2002/03 and Juventus 2002/03, are the 2 most difficult opponents that Real Madrid 2001-2006 played against, in a Champions League elimination round. Ronaldo and Figo were more crucial than Zidane, against Manchester United 2002/03. Particularly R9 who was MOTM in the second leg, having scored 3 goals at Old Trafford. And Pavel Nedved was the MOTM in the Semi Finals, clearly and directly outclassing Zidane. And R9 again produced more than Zidane in the Semi Finals, R9 having produced one goal and one PK against Juventus (R9 played only 88 minutes, compared to Zidane who played 180 minutes). For a so-called 'big game player', Zidane certainly didn't demonstrated it against the better opponents that Real Madrid faced.
That's just false, for so many obvious reasons. 1. Denmark 1998 was significantly better than all of the opponents that France 2002 faced at the World Cup. Denmark 1998 was better than Senegal 2002, better than Denmark 2002, and better than Uruguay 2002. France 1998 - without Zidane - won their Group Game against Denmark 1998. Why can France 1998 - without Zidane - win a game vs. Denmark 1998. And why did France 2002 - without Zidane - not win a game vs. Senegal 2002?? Do you see how Zidane is not an argument?? France 1998 - without Zidane - won their Group Game against Denmark 1998. Denmark 1998 is the most successful Danish team of all time, at least at WC level. France without Zidane was good enough to win games against the same Danish team that pushed Ronaldo-Rivaldo in the Quarter Finals. Fact. Zidane was not the reason why France could not win games vs. Senegal 2002, vs. Denmark 2002, and vs. Uruguay 2002. 2. France 1998 and France 2006 both played (and both won) their most difficult Group Games without Zidane on the pitch. Zidane was never a factor in the Group Stage of any World Cup. This is a demonstrable fact. Why do you asume that Zidane would have been a factor in the Group Stage at World Cup 2002?? What evidence do you have, that Zidane ever was a factor at the World Cup Group Stage?? Please explain. 3. Thierry Henry played 115 minutes at World Cup 2002. Zinedine Zidane played 90 minutes at World Cup 2002. 4. Zidane at Euro 2004 was nothing special. 5. Zidane at Euro 1996 was also nothing special, in fact, many of Zidane's French teammates were included into the team of the tournament, but Zidane himself was not included into the team of the tournament. 6. France won the Euro Final 2000 - Zidane did nothing in that game. Robert Pires and David Trezeguet were the difference makers for France in that game. Francesco Totti was the obvious MOTM in that game. This is a demonstrable fact. The 'big game' player did nothing in the biggest game of the Euro. Italy failed to score 2 easy goals, in a game that Italy should've won by a margin of 1-2 goals. 7. National teams and clubs are entirely different - why are you making the false equivalence between two entirely different formats?? At club level, Zidane gets to play against the real Ronaldinho. At NT level, Zidane gets to play against a totally broken version of Ronaldinho, because the visibly fat R9 could not use Ronaldinho's passing ability, in the process nullifying Ronaldinho itself, and Brazil itself. Fat R9 killed Brazil's chances of competing at World Cup 2006. Brazil needed a player who could exploit Ronaldinho's passing ability, not a fat out-of-form legend on his way out. The reason why Zidane never was as impressive at club level, is because clubs can buy talent. National teams cannot buy talent, which means that Zidane, playing at one of the most talented 'stacked' national teams ever, was truly blessed at NT level. Why wasn't Zidane outclassing Ronaldinho at club level? Why wasn't Zidane outclassing Figo at club level? Why did Zidane not demonstrated his 'big game' ability against the actual big clubs of his time? Because Zidane is an overrated player, who gets overrated on the basis of NT results, not on the basis of his club form.
zidane had that opportunity at juventus!! i don't know any current player besides messi and ronaldo who was given the same freedom that zidane was given. even ozil at arsenal does not have the same freedom that zidane had at juventus. zidane played with juve from 96-2001 and they were unable to win a champions league. to give him credit he went to the finals twice. but the year before he came and the year after he left is a perfect example of the quality that they had at juventus, given they were capable of winning the champions league both times! how could you say that juventus was unwilling to maintain or buy quality??? don't get me wrong zidane was an excellent player. but in terms of his effectiveness, i find it difficult to clearly put him above iniesta. individually, at the national level, i would put zidane over iniesta, but at club level, iniesta was the more impactful player over the years. this is arguably messi's best season despite how poor barcelona played and has been managed. this is no excuse for zidane, when attempting to mention him in the same breath as messi. the fact that barcelona was only 3 points behind a real madrid team that destroyed everyone in the champions league tells you how great of an accomplishment that is. and please notify me of the last time zidane had a performance against the most dominant club team like messi did this season against real madrid at the bernabau. messi was the top goal scorer in a year that he was the teams best playmaker. how could you even bring messi up in a conversation about zidane. and I'll tell you right now, in terms of carrying a team, CR7 has been far from doing that this season. the closest that CR7 has coming to carrying his team at real madrid would be the 11/12 season. this year, has been the team as a whole playing excellent and building up plays, so that CR7 can get to the end of them and finish the job.