In PSG he is not really a left winger/forward, not in the tradicional way like he was in this Barcelona's time at least, in Santos he had a free-role and could play right, center or left, more on the left, but he wasn't limited like in the 2014-2017 period. 2014 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...10s-inspire-win-lionel-messi-s-argentina.html La Liga heatmaps 2016/2017 Barcelona vs PSG Heatmaps https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/6tnla5/neymar_heatmap_comparison_guingamp_game_above_and/ https://totalfootballanalysis.com/p...201819-scout-report-tactical-analysis-tactics I would say the biggest mismatch in my XI would be Messi and not Cristiano Ronaldo. Neymar could play as attacking midfielder (that is perhaps his best position), he is a elite dribbler/ball carrier in central area https://www.optasportspro.com/news-analysis/blog-identifying-progressive-ball-carriers/ good passing range and scoring threat outside of the box too. Btw, a 4-4-2 diamond is also possible, and eventually he could save energy for Messi too. ---------- Cristiano -- Messi ----------- ----------------- Neymar ----------------- ----------- Iniesta --- Modric ----------- ---------------- Busquets ---------------- Marcelo ----Ramos--Silva---- Alves ----------------- Neuer ------------------- With a legit offensive threat in Marcelo and Alves.
It is almost the same as my suggestion with the exception that my team included Modric instead of Thiago Silva and that Neymar placed more towards the band, playing Cristiano more focused. But I am very happy with the coincidence
Thiago Silva has no business being here. He always played in the 4th or 5th best league in Europe and never played in a CL semi final, or a World Cup semi final. Typical Tropeiro. Typical Brazil bonus. Typical free passes and free rides (in the same way the complete snubbing of dutch players for the XI or bench - or arguing against them in Dearman's thread - is typical for Titanlux and the internet in general as shown by the BS vote for the 2000s team). Both Pique and Hummels are superior, as footballing center backs. One might maybe argue Silva played about as many good tournaments as Hummels, but he had more attempts for it (three in four is better as two/three in five) and his peak wasn't higher. It is a joke. What has he ever done in CL KO stages? Thiago Silva always played in the 4th or 5th best league. https://www.theblizzard.co.uk/news/mediocrity-and-beast-blizzard-podcast-119
From 2010 to 2019 per peak performance I'd go for: Manuel Neuer (GER) Gerard Piqué (SPA) --- Thiago Silva (BRA) Philipp Lahm (GER) -----------------------.-------------------------------------- Marcelo (BRA)-- Sergio Busquets (SPA) ------- Xavi (SPA) --------------- Andrés Iniesta (SPA) -- Lionel Messi (ARG) ------------------------------------------------- Cristiano Ronaldo (POR) Zlatan Ibrahimovic (SWE) Sergio Ramos would be my first option as right centre-back taking into account the total impact of his career in the whole decade, but based on the highest level of his abilities I don't rate him so stellar. The left centre-back position would be very disputed for me among Thiago Silva, Mats Hummels and Diego Godín. I could not decided with certainty just for one of them in general terms, I feel that the Brazilian and German were more "spectacular" in their own styles, but the Uruguayan a solid rock in everything he faced. Just for peak performance I think N'Golo Kanté could dispute a position (although maybe in another tactical system), but he doesn't have the consistency of Sergio Busquets and the latter seems ideal in that kind of midfield. I think Xavi in his prime (2010-2012) is at least one step ahead of any other, but according to the consistency of the whole decade I think that Arturo Vidal and Luka Modric could be the most clear options. I suppose Arjen Robben and Neymar would be the obvious replacement options for Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. A step behind Eden Hazard. The centre-forward position I think it would be very disputed among Zlatan Ibrahimovic and Luis Suárez. I'm not so sure about who reached the highest peak of performance, they're 2 somewhat different attackers in that regard, and a step behind Robert Lewandowski.
I think in such XI, it really shouldn't just be about trying to fit the best players into the side. Surely, the formation needs to be taken into account. Is there any doubt whatsoever that the 433 was THE formation of the 2010s? I don't think you can argue for any other formation.
But isn't that judging the individual by the team's performance? In the Champions League KO stage, the game that comes to mind is his winning goal in extra time against a Chelsea side, which would go on to win the EPL that season. If nothing else, Silva's skillset is easily one of the best, if not the best in this decade. He had similar ball-playing ability to a Pique and Hummels, but also the athleticism that they do not. Defensively, I don't see any real weakness either. A lot of people considered him the best CB in the world during his final years in Milan and early years in PSG.
Thiago Silva - despite the obvious Brazil bonus - has only four ESM team of the month selections in his career and none of them came at the business end of a season. His best and only Ballon d'Or finish is only 21th in 2013, courtesy of the latin voting block (e.g. Messi voted for him). If he was Dutch he would be swathed aside with ease by the likes of Peru FC, just as various multiple CL topscorers (most CL goals of the 2000s decade), EPL topscorers are swathed aside or don't even make his top 100 players of a season (Hasselbaink, who topped the assists and goals chart in 1999, is not in the top 100 for 1999). For countries as 'Holland' there is the double handicap (regardless of how many CLs, topscorer titles), for the latin liar circles there is a second chance, a second opportunity... Thiago Silva is a case in point. No, because he wasn't playing for poor teams and Thiago Silva was there during the various PSG meltdowns. All that athleticism is nice but it didn't translate into adequate performances when it was needed, and he is not a great organizer or leader (at Milan he had Nesta next to him). Positionally he has his flaws. PSG is stacked and also Milan when they won the league had by DBScalcio the #3 striker (Ibrahimovic), the #2 midfielder (Seedorf - typically ignored by the likes of Peru FC), the #3 attacking midfielder (KP Boateng), the #1 defensive midfielder (Gattuso), the #1 ball playing center back (Nesta) and #2 left back (Abate) in the team. Then there was also Van Bommel (he was good in the half year), Pirlo (out of form) and Robinho (#8 in his position - ofc a borderline 23 inclusion in Peru FCs book!). That makes the inability to play major semi finals (in 10 seasons) extra damning and it is also not like he was rock solid at the 2014 World Cup for instance (needed many fouls, too, which eventually saw him suspended for the semi final; then he returned in the 3rd place match and caused a penalty within two minutes, with the Brazil bonus making sure he wasn't sent off). PSG, Juventus, Bayern are teams whose performances are defined by going deep in the Champions League. Likewise, those players have to be judged by their performance ratio in the KO stages. The elimination of PSG was surely not only his fault, but often he didn't look too great. Thiago Silva played 0 semi finals, while e.g. Hummels was part of two semi final campaigns in his career. This goal is the exception, it's the only thing you can find: https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/thiago-silva/alletore/spieler/29241 The only major goals in his career came against Barcelona (group stage), Chelsea and Colombia in the 2014 World Cup. He isn't a prolific goalscorer for a center back. This goal vs Chelsea isn't representative for his career or strengths.
Xavi doesn't belong here for his two years and Modric his peak wasn't so much lower. It is a trainwreck, by the master snubber. Dani Alves is better than Lahm by the way.
If Xavi is in this for two great years then why not Van Dijk? He has already featured in as many CL semi finals as Hummels and Silva combined and scored or created many big goals the last number of years for club and country. This illustrates exactly what I mean with the double handicaps and second chances for guys like Thiago Silva.
Yes, without a doubt it is a somewhat wrong spinning of ideas because one thing is to evaluate the individual level of a player and another the success of his team and/or the average level of the league in which it plays (there is a certain relationship and coincidence, but not one so direct or blind that does not allow establishing that a player may be above the average level of his own team and may be better than others more fortunate/successful in that regard). At least between 2010 and 2013 I think Thiago Silva was the best central defender in the world pound for pound (with the great Hummels competition) beyond having reached only a quarterfinal stage of the UEFA Champions League in that period and playing in a Serie A with some decline regardind the best of Europe.
I just hope this personal crusade does not appear meaningless in every discussion that includes a Dutch player (or that can include it).
Of course there is not a direct relationship but that in so many years he never went past the quarter finals poses a legit question mark - that is beyond your comprehension. Same applies to the national team scene, except for that 'Bolsonaro tournament' on home soil. Despite playing for Brazil, he never played a World Cup semi final and his own suspensions and fouling made sure of this. Also beyond your comprehension is he actually played with other 'stars' at Milan and PSG (those Milan players did play many semi finals and finals for club and country...), so he was not above the level of his team. Not at all. A further rough but imperfect indication for that (not performing above the level of the team) are things like this - relative to his team and league: http://www.goalimpact.com/blog//2015/04/top50-football-players-april-2015.html http://www.goalimpact.com/blog//2014/07/brazil-vs-netherlands-goalimpact-of.html It is not me spinning wrong ideas, it is you not understanding the odds and that 'zero in a decade' is in fact a powerful statistic. This is further bolstered by his Ballon d'Or rankings and ESM team of the month selections, and his relative lack of 'big' goals. But for him there are second chances, for others there are double handicaps.
First of all, notice the clarification: per peak performance. Once cleared I guess you can also notice that by believing that Modric had a (slightly) lower peak performance, basically, you agree with that assessment. Then, the clarification of the terms of longevity during the whole decade are in the paragraph below (about Vidal and Modric), and that bypassing that, unless you disagree with his peak period, between 2010 and 2012 there are no 2, but 3 years. It's just a matter of reading the message well. Based on...? I think it's debatable, but I'd rate rate Lahm's level slightly better than the best of Dani Alves this decade, especially between 2013 and 2014. That probably relates the palate with him because Dani Alves in 2010-11 was more spectacular as an offensive player, but it is obvious that his balance is different.
Because it is so damn obvious. The Premier League topscorer and top assister not among the first 100 really proves your colors (again). This is not the case for all the other topscorers in surrounding years - none of them combining it with the assists. You'd never do that with an Englishman, German or Uruguayan... and you never did. By that token several defenders (including a dutchman yes - vastly outperforming southampton) had a higher peak than Pique over two or three years period.
Here are what I think are the problems of your question: 1. Because Xavi and van Dijk are players from different positions with different competition to face for a place in an ideal XI. The reasons about one presence do not have a direct consequence on the other. 2. As in a previous response, I think it is clear that the number of times they reached this or that instance of the UEFA Champions League (which allow them to feature) does not have an absolutely direct relationship with their average game level. I think that illustrates how you can relate objective ideas/facts, but in a too subjective way if you started from a clear biased position.
Oh yes, a defender creating more CL KO stage goals than his strikers (Salah, Mane) was merely a passenger those campaigns. It's getting worse and worse! You're impossible, you're systematically biased, you are unable to comprehend what it means to not reach the later stages in any year of the past decade, for super stacked teams. Thiago Silva didn't outperform or elevate the level of his teams. Again: only four ESM team of the month selections, 21st in BdO, so yes he falls in the 'second chance' trope. Second chances for him and his pals, your brainless downgrade machinery for others. Tomorrow I will make mince meat of your Dani Alves claim.
Interestingly, what you establish in this way is that it is not a fact, but that it is a situation that can generate doubts (I guess you understand that a legit question mark it is not a legitime fact), but at the same time you establish it as a certainty to "correct". That's a contradiction. How can you dissolve the doubt? Watching them (which is possible). There is no objective answer, but each one can establish by his own perception how good a player is beyond the results of his team. Obviously, it's not as if Thiago Silva had been exempt from a great European competition. What's the Bolsonaro tournament?
Then, before the emphasis was on the level of their teams (suggesting not high), but now it is emphasized on how full of "stars" they were? A team that is full of "stars" that have won many trophies and played many advanced instances before does not mean that they will continue success from what was done before and yes, the results in a tournament simply can be favorable or unfavorably due to various factors, so it is not really so directly related to the potential of the team (while also obvious the potential of the rivals). It seems to me that you get stuck just trying to judge them only by indirect elements (and somewhat guided) instead of direct, start of the level of the players themselves to then relate the adjacent data, not the other way around.
Going per peak performance like you. ---------------Ronaldo ---------------------Messi Neymar-----------------------Robben ------------Xavi--------Kante Marcelo--Van Dijk----Pique--Alves ------------------------Neuer I sacrifice the little midfielders for Kante to bring some semblance of balance. I also like Robben and Neymar in any 2010s fantasy XI especially for peak performance. ------------Suarez/Lewa/Ibra Cristiano----------------------------Messi ---------------Iniesta-------Xavi -------------------------Pirlo Marcelo--VanDijk---Pique--Alves ------------------------Neuer Why not risk Pirlo there? He wasn't so bad defensively under Conte and the defense will be primarily a high press. So probably Ibra gets sacrificed
As a Juventus fan i was shocked to not see Pirlo in ur initial XI Pirlo of 2012 was something else...
I can understand why Kante is needed in there for balance, and I'd even agree that Kante's peak is perhaps the highest of any DM in EPL's history. However, I think Busquets easily beats him in consistency (obviously) but also in peak. He was already among the best DMs in the world by the start of 2010, but I think once Xavi declined (post EURO 2012) I thought Busquets became the best player in that midfield. In fact, in a world without Messi and Ronaldo, he would actually have been in contention for world's best player (performance wise, not popularity contest).
He was so good! 2011-12 through to the Euros Maybe across the whole decade there are better option, but @Perú FC gave the perfect conditions to include him lol
For a while ( 2012 until MSN clicked ) Busquets IMO was the 2nd best player at Barca. He was really good and in a different setting, I'd have him in there. Kanye's mobility and aggression is better if we include the front 4, at times it would be a 4-2-4 really.
Yeah, that's why I agreed Kante was the better fit. Still, I stand by my assertion that in this XI: 1. It has to be 433 as that was the dominant formation of this decade, by far. 2. Ronaldo and Messi should play in their preferred position, not moved around to accommodate perhaps the 4th or 5th best talent. I'd rather have them in their position, and play a 10th best talent who brings out the best in these two, than the 4th or 5th best talent who clogs ups what these two do.