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: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=567260&page=13 i've edited it for you so you don't have to read the whole thread:
"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.
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... https://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).
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.
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
I think he is merely a good player and most of the views regarding him are based more on aesthetics and highlight reels than anything else. I disagree with the 'detractors' comment. No-one is belittling Zidane, simply being realistic and correcting the errors in what others are claiming. The French team point was not ignored (if it was then I am thinking of yet another Zidane discussion...), with it being countered by the other players France missed and the various tactical issues. 1. Usually I would agree but considering the question posed it was appropriate. You need to think about influence and their standing in relation to others in their position. I feel that trio were above their peers and merited inclusion. 2. I see no bias and felt I covered most of the bases in regard to the best players from the specified time period. I also believe AC Milan were the most represented club from my list. If you think positionally then I don't think anyone would do a better job in the time period it took me to think of that list, which was off the top of my head. Considering some of the names you chose to bold (and others you missed out) I need to question how much of some of the players you have seen? Did you do what I asked others to do and create two XI's from that period? It would be interesting to see those sides. As for Van Nistelrooy, are you aware of his record in the CL or at Man Utd? He is the best pure finisher of our generation. The last time I said that about Henry there was an Arsenal fan backlash. I don't completely disagree with your stance but he still merits inclusion. It's good to read what you wrote about Micoud but I doubt anyone who does not watch Die Bundesliga would agree. For Campbell you need to consider his domestic and international pedegree. Take note of how many teams of the tournament he has been included in. Not overrated at all. If anything he is underrated because of his nationality and where he played his football. Sadly that is the case for the majority of the players who have played in England. Of the defenders you mentioned Cannavaro was an omission but Campbell is better than the others I omitted. 1. Many players have won lots of trophies because they were lucky enough to play for a great side. Zidane is lucky in that regard. It's all been detailed in the previous threads. I don't mind if he is remembered but only for aesthetics. 2. I agree but that doesn't mean they were not better.
I am aware of Nistelrooy's records and I rate him highly (would have loved him to come to Bayern). There are just so many great strikers from the nineties that I like better. I guess his place on a list depends on how far back we want to go. Here are my 2 teams for players since 1995. I will use a 4-4-2 for simplicity. First XI: GK: Schmeichel Defense: Maldini, Cannavaro, Matthaeus, Lizarazu Midfield: Zidane, Petit, Viera, Figo Attack: Ronaldo, Bergkamp Second XI: GK: Kahn Defense: Sagnol, Nesta, Sammer, Roberto Carlos Midfield: Scholl, Makalele, Davids, Giggs Attack: Batitstuta, Klinnsmann
The time period I was set was the last decade (1997-2007). If I am being totally honest I would not have included Matthäus if I was doing it again. He retired shortly into the time period but I included him more because of his stature and reputation in the world game, rather than what he did on the pitch during that time. Luckly though, the time period just catches part of pre-injury Ronaldo. Cannavaro was an omission but I feel the other options in my list are better and Zidane was obviously not going to be included. It is curious that you chose to include him on the wing when there are far better options available who could have made your system work better. Having two left-backs is also curious. The majority of names we have no disagreement with but most made my list, as opposed to my team. Klinsmann and Sammer just miss out in the stated time period, as both retired just into it which is why I did not include them in the list. Sagnol and Batistuta were serious omissions on my behalf. See last sentence from last section. Thanks for your two teams. It gives me a better insight into what you are thinking. For what it's worth, my XI would be: Rivaldo - Van Nistelrooy Giggs - Redondo - Keane - Figo Maldini - Nesta - Ayala - Zanetti Schmeichel A few names change all the time, as does almost my entire second XI. The depth in Zidane's position is huge, which makes all of the claims regarding him so staggering to me. Do you like Zidane because you honestly believe he is better than any of his rivals or is is because you liked watching him and how he played the game?
We should change the title to Zidane overated or not? Zidane is the best #10 in recent years. And lets not compare strikers and defenders to CMs
I did not notice that at first, I will have to amend my lineups as a result. Matthaeus still had some good seasons left in him, but you are right he was past his prime. He did make it to the champions league final in 1999,and retired after EURO 2000. I actually was invisioning a midfield w/2 attaking mids who could interchange possitions easily. I should have drawn out the shape of my formation better so that it was not ambiguous. As to the issue of two left backs; I couldn't bring myself to leave Lizza out, and Maldini is equally skilled with both feet so he would have no problem playing on the right. I will fix this when I redo my formations. Because I was using a different time period I included them. Again I will fix this as well. I like your lineup. You are right about the huge list of options during the past decade. We have seen some incredible talents in the late nineties as well as today. My new lineups (I will write them in the proper shape this time). First XI: -------------Schmeichel----------- Maldini--Matthaeus---Cannavaro---Lizzarazu -----------Petit---------Viera -----Zidane-------------------Figo ------------------Bergkamp -----------Ronaldo Second XI: --------------Kahn Sagnol---Nesta---Stam----Roberto Carlos ------------Makalele Scholl-------Davids---------Giggs ------------Rivaldo -----------Batitstuta I like Zidane b/c I think he is better than his rivals (from 1997 to 2007). By that I mean players who play as the no. 10 or as the creative midfielder behind the strikers. There is a long list of players that played that position in previous generations that I think are better, but we are discussing the past decade.
Woow, Zidane overrated !!! what's next?? Kuyt better than Maradona? I've heard stupid arguements before, but this one is just too much.
What a stunning contribution from the newbie. Well done son. Care to actually contribute to the discussion?
ill contribute something since i was quoted in the beggining. i loved roman during his run at villareal. however after the wc and the excuses of the semifinal against arsenal i started to dislike him. he has a great capacity to pass the ball and vision. but he is slow sometime both physically and mentally, there are a large amount of fast breaks that arent created beacuse of his slowness and sometimes i think he thinks about it too much. i personally love zidane much more than riquelme and think that zz is a better player. however ive seen riquelme do some crazy stuff too bad it was against teams like libertad or bandfield, or even a b team usa. and not against brazil or germany. like i said riquelme is pretty good, but the excuses and the overhype from argentine media and fans and lack of reponsability and acceptance when he fails to performe is what gets me to hate riquelme. i personally wouldnt mind seeing aimar instead of riquelme for the nt. and would get season tickets to see the galaxy if zidane is here. very true this is what i thought of after the first 10 comments.
Worldcup & European champion. Won Scudetto, La Liga and Champions League. FIFA player of the year 3 times. This is ridicilous, if Zidane is not the best player in the past 15 years, could you name a few whome you think are better than zizou?
I'll destroy your argument in two words: Roque Júnior. Sorry, let's go for just one word this time: Ronaldo. I hope you get my point. As for your 'question', try reading the entire thread instead of simply jumping into a discussion you clearly know nothing about.
LoL. Ok, I'm not going to get dragged into this silly arguement. Saying Zidane is anything less than a legend is nonesense. Enough said.