All-Decade Teams

00's
---------------------Buffon-------------------

Cafu----------Nesta-------Edmilson--------Lahm

--------Kaka--------Zidane----Ronaldinho------

---------------------Totti---------------------

------------Shevchenko-----Henry-------------
A very attack minded-side including closest thing to a recent libero Edmilson and two full-backs who can get forward but would be slightly conservative to allow the front 6 to play.Subs:Kahn, Carvalho, Canavarro, Vieira, Nedved, Beckham, Pires, Messi, Larsson.

90's
--------------------Schmeichel-----------------

Jorginho------Sammer---------Hierro----------Maldini

-------Figo---------Redondo------M.Laudrup-------

-------------------Savicevic-------------------

--------------Ronaldo--------Bergkamp------------
Similar idea with Sammer as attacking centre-back and Hierro restricted to occasional forays at set pieces. Redondo anchors the midfield with the other 3 probing for the fenomeno Ronaldo and the technically brilliant Bergkamp. Subs: Preud'homme, Aldair, Lizarazu, Veron, Giggs, B.Laudrup, R.Baggio, Weah, Klinsmann.

80's
---------------------Dasayev------------------------

Amoros--------Rijkaard--------Baresi-------van Tiggelen

--------------Matthaus-------Platini------------------

--------K-H.Rummenigge-------------Maradona-------
----------------------Zico---------------------------
---------------------van Basten----------------------
Matthuas would be the dynamo and Platini the maestro in midfield with 3 in free attacking midfield roles in support of van Basten. Subs: Southall, Scirea, Brehme, Socrates, Hoddle, Barnes, Gullit, Dalglish, Lineker.

70's
---------------------Shilton------------------------

Kaltz--------Beckenbauer------Figueroa----------Krol

Jairzinho-----Neeskens--------Cruyff----------Rensenbrink

-------------Muller-----------Kempes----------------
Basically a 4-4-2 with Cruyff the playmaker joining the forwards whenever possible, aided by his Dutch colleague Neeskens as a box-to-box player. Subs: Zoff, Suurbier, Breitner, Gemmill, Deyna, Susic, Ceulemans, Cubillas, Lubanski.

60's
----------------------Banks---------------------------

C.Alberto------Facchetti------Moore----------N.Santos

Garrincha-----B.Charlton-------Rivelino-------------Best

--------------Eusebio--------Pele---------------------
Plenty of Brazilian influence and with a couple of master dribblers playing wide. Subs: Gilmar, Israel, Cohen, Masopust, Gerson, Rivera, Dzajic, Tostao, Greaves.

50's
---------------------Yashin--------------------------

------D.Santos------Charles-------V.Andrade---------

Kopa------Didi------Liedholm----Edwards--------Finney

---------------Di Stefano----Puskas------------------
The wide players would be expected to join the forwards at every opportunity while the midfield trio alternated between covering defensively and instigating attacks. I've included Finney but several others I decided conclusively belonged before the 50's including Stanley Matthews. It's deliberately not too attacking in comparison to the other decades' teams but could go more so with the substitution of a midfielder or two. Subs: Grosics, Varela, Ocwirk, Kubala, Julinho, Schiaffino, Hidegkuti, Fontaine, Kocsis.

I think:
Defence - the 70's then the 60's
Midfield - the 80's then the 60's
Attack - the 60's then the 50's
Subs - the 90's then the 80's
So overall I think the 60's just edges it ahead of the 80's.

 

My choices:

00's
-----------------------Buffon

Thuram----------Nesta-------Maldini--------R. Carlos

---------Nedved-------Zidane----Ronaldinho

-----------------------Kaka

------------Shevchenko-----Henry




90's
---------------------Schmeichel

Cafú-----------Baresi---------Maldini---------R. Carlos

-----------------------Redondo

-------Baggio--------Stoitchkov--------Bergkamp

-----------------Ronaldo--------Romário




80's
-----------------------Dasaev

Leandro--------Scirea--------Baresi-------Junior

----------------------Matthaus

--------Platini----------Zico-----------Maradona

------------van Basten--------Rummenigge




70's
-------------------------------Zoff

C. Alberto--------Beckenbauer------Figueroa----------Breitner

Jairzinho-------------Netzer-----------Cruijff----------Rivelino

----------------------Muller-----------Kempes




60's
------------------------Yashin

C.Alberto--------Moore------Perfumo-------Facchetti

---------------B.Charlton-------Beckenbauer

Garrincha--------Eusebio--------Pelé---------Best





50's
---------------------Yashin

------D.Santos------Santamaria-------N. Santos

---------------Bozsik------O. Varela

---------------Didi-------------Kopa

------Garrincha-------Di Stefano-------Puskas

 

I tend to rate full-backs not just on how solid they are defensively but on their attacking skills, passing and crossing ability and these areas are where Jorginho is better than Thuram. Savicevic was a more fluent dribbler than Rivaldo (who could also be a tricky player admitedly) and more likely to come up with a piece of magic to provide a great assist IMO. I suppose with Figo and Michael Laudrup already in the side it could be said there's no need for Savicevic but I think all 3 could be brilliant together. Rivaldo was better with long-range shooting (although Savicevic scored a great lob-volley from 30 yards in his most famous game - the 1994 Champions League Final) and also inventive/acrobatic finishes from inside the box but not as quick or smooth as Savicevic. Again Kaltz was an attacking full-back, very good at crossing so I tend to rate that attribute highly and perhaps it's more to my taste to have an attacking balance. Breitner normally played left-back I think but would be capable of right-back too and Vogts was less talented on the ball - he was most famous for marking Cruyff in the 1974 World Cup Final - to do so he'd have had to play less as a full-back and assuming the teams would be assessed on the basis of matches with each other but with modern rules etc I think he'd be vulnerable to a sending-off by playing the way he did in the 74 Final although he wasn't a dirty or violent player. Having said I favour attacking tactics I did feel that to meet the criteria of playing the other era's sides the 50's should start with a 5-man midfield - all of whom would be all-round players (especially the central players). Kocsis and also Fontaine would be centre-forwards and to play an extra one Di Stefano would have to drop back although I'd favour Hidegkuti in that role and Di Stefano still alongside Puskas if I added an extra attacker. Kubala and Schiaffino are on the bench too. Tom Finney was a star before the 50's - see a youtube clip from 1949 of an England game that can be found by typing Finney England as a Google or Youtube search. He could play on both wings and at inside-forward and is considered to be a great in England - I felt he would be ahead of Czibor and also Gento or Schiaffino at left-midfield assuming Kopa plays right midfield. Edwards would definately make the team and could probably play in the back 3 too.

 

I'll have a go at a pre-50's (not just 30's) team. I'm including Tom Finney so in my 50's team I might bring in Schiaffino at left midfield and Hidegkuti as a deep-lying forward, with Liedholm dropping to sub. Czibor might be added to the subs as he's more versatile than Gento. Some of the players in the following team might have been playing into the 50's at their peak too, and a lot are picked on general reputation:
Pre-50's
--------------------------Zamora---------------------

-----------J.Andrade------Da Guia------Sarosi---------

Matthews---------Gren------------V.Mazzola------Finney

--------------Bican-------Lawton------Meazza---------
Subs:Combi, Franklin, Nasazzi, Zizinho, Ademir, Zsengeller or Schlosser, Nejedly or Friedenreich, Leonidas or Sindelar, Nordahl. I think I've included too many forwards on the bench really but this is my best effort!

 

I think Fritz Walter would make the subs bench actually plus Leonidas and Sindelar and not Zsengeller, Schlosser, Nejedly or Friedenreich, maybe???

 

2000's

-------------------------------------------- Gianluigi Buffon ---------------------------------------------
-- Javier Zanetti ---- Alessandro Nesta ---- Fabio Cannavaro ---- Roberto Carlos --
--------------------------- Claude Makélélé ---------- Andrea Pirlo -------------------------------
------------------- Kaká ---------------- Zinedine Zidane ------------- Ronaldinho --------------
---------------------------------------------- Thierry Henry -----------------------------------------------

Substitutes: Oliver Kahn; Lilian Thuram, Rio Ferdinand, Cafú, Ashley Cole; Patrick Vieira, Xavi, Steven Gerrard, Pavel Nedved; Lionel Messi, Andriy Shevchenko.

90's

------------------------------------------- Peter Schmeichel -------------------------------------------
-- Lilian Thuram ----- Matthias Sammer ----- Franco Baresi ------ Paolo Maldini ---
--------------------------------------------- Lothar Matthäus --------------------------------------------
----------- Roberto Baggio ---------- Zinedine Zidane --------------- Rivaldo ------------------
-------------------------------------- Ronaldo ------------- Romário ------------------------------------

Substitutes: Oliver Kahn; Ronald Koeman, Marcel Desailly, Cafú, Roberto Carlos; Fernando Redondo, Michael Laudrup, Luís Figo, Ryan Giggs; Dennis Bergkamp, Gabriel Batistuta.

 

Aside from your continued infatuation with Zidane, a player who merits a bench place on the 2000 team at most, the rest of your attacking unit is weak. You have him flanked by two players who have three years of peak form this decade each and Henry in the unfamiliar lone striker role you insist on forcing him into. Pirlo was very good at the start of the decade but his form has stuttered and I think you could make the case that he has been usurped by Xavi. I'm not sure if Cannavaro has done enough for me to start in an all-decade team because I do not rate his spell at Real Madrid highly nor his bogus WPOTY award. As for Nesta it is a very close call between him and Ferdinand when you take into account the time they have missed from the game. While you could put them together I would prefer a more complementary partnership. I'm also baffled by your complete exclusion of Ronaldo. Still at least you put your team up for scrutiny. I'll go away and have a think about my own.

 

Teso I know your not a fan of Zidane, but could you remind me what you don't like about his play? And more importantly why you prefer other other midfield orchestrators to him?

 

For an attacking midfielder his overall influence and end product was questionable while his discipline record was frankly abysmal. Unlike others I am not swayed by aesthetics so I simply do not care if he was elegant or not. He is fortunate that his career is remembered for his style of play and a few good incidents/goals in big games. Unfortunately the rest of his career simply does not meet the legend that surrounds him and he has often been carried by the great teams has been fortunate to be in. One good Euro 2000 and a couple of peak years at Real Madrid simply does not cut it for me. Over the time period there have been far superior players who are more deserving of a place in an all-decade team. However let's not let his inclusion sidetrack the thread. If someone wants to include him then that is their prerogative. It just means their team does not stand up to scrutiny.

---

Just so it does not seem as if I am being too negative towards Perú FC his team from this decade at least has a bit of balance in midfield as it includes Makelele to help win possession back and shield the defense while Pirlo would naturally play deep which gives his attacking options the freedom to do their jobs further forward. Those before him fell into the trap of creating teams without balance that would struggle in reality because they tried to force too many attacking options into midfield.

 

Heavy comments !, obviously doesn't surprise me after the numerous discussions we have had about Zidane, by the same I won't discuss again about him, evidently your position hasn't changed neither mine.

Personally, I feel you try to underrating him extremely because you consider he is overrated frequently, as a common desire to execute justice, what far from balancing your opinion causes mistakes you exaggerating any criticism.

 

It's curious how that sounds as a criticism , any player with supposed 3 great years in the decade is possibly deserving to be mentioned, especially when none of them was mediocre aside from those years.

You can base your criterion of two forms, by the best regularity or the highest peak, the form which you could mix these criteria is quite subjective, but if you're trying to find a player with a very high peak (as the level of the best Kaká or Ronaldinho) and have mantained regularly during all the decade, you'll fail. Not even the cited by many as the best (Henry) could mantain it.

Evidently, Kaká and Ronaldinho have had more than 3 very good years, if you don't believe thus, you can check again the career of each one, the first from his debut in Sao Paulo, the second with Gremio, passing by Paris Saint-Germain after their best performances in AC Milan and Barcelona respectively, definitely, two solid options in an all-decade team.

 

Will have to take some time and think about this one, but after reviewing the posts so far - the one glaring omission in my opinion is Kenny Dalglish. Not one person has him in the 70's team, yet Keegan appears a couple of times....Kenny Dal was twice the player Keegan was.

 

From the other thread, I'm still unsure why do you continue maintaining such affirmation, especially when it's easy remember how he played in Arsenal in its different systems with Bergkamp, Wiltord, Pires or Ljungberg.

Another thing that seems me wrong is the so squared form that you interpret the technical drawing, the "lone striker role" isn't the same by the different players behind him. Henry seems me perfect in that attacking system, the drawing is a reference that doesn't refer about stationary positions, especially when you mention players of so much mobility like Kaká, Ronaldinho and Henry.

 

Van Tiggelen ???

What is he doing in a team of the decade ??

he doesnt even belong to the subs...

Decent player but sure not world-class..

BTW ,he's a Central defender not a leftback...

 

You've an interesting point there, I feel the comparison between Pirlo and Xavi is very close, actually, I put first Xavi, lately I changed my mind and replace him for Pirlo moving the Spanish to the bench.

I believe there are small differences, Xavi would go a little more forward because his gifts of organizer and more offensive with them, while Pirlo could stay more in the first line of midfielders as a great long launcher, especially being Zidane, a better complement. In spite of that, I feel Xavi could be there easily also, the best two central midfielders of the decade surely.

 

His performance in Real Madrid was near to be mediocre, it's evident that his prize derived from the great 2006 World Cup he did, but what he did before that for Juventus, Inter Milan and especially Parma, seems me enough to be considered about the decade.

I rate better Nesta than Ferdinand in spite his inactivity during the last semester of 2008 and the first of 2009, still solid and regular since 2000 to the first semester of 2008, his inactive time is really short about the decade... around:

Nesta: 310 matches playing at club level since 2000-2001 season.
Ferdinand: 391 matches playing at club level since 2000-2001 season.

Not a huge difference and I think the Italian has a little advantage in spite has less games.

 

Which Ronaldo?, in spite I believe that I should interpret you refer the Brazilian (great striker, but about the decade I'd consider first Henry, Shevchenko, van Nistelrooy and Eto'o, definitely in my 90's team considering his higher peak playing for Barcelona and first year with Inter Milan), I feel you're referring to Cristiano Ronaldo because your predilection about the Portuguese.

I can't deny he could be easily in the team, has been one of the better players of the decade, but in the poll are also other great and Cristiano Ronaldo isn't clearly above them, debatable at most. There are Kaká and Ronaldinho, also Nedved and Messi, including Gerrard... isn't like to be surprised he wasn't in as an option, in spite he could from a different points of view.

 

It isn't a problem, any criticism will be always welcome and answered, as I have done point by point right now. Feel free to continuing any point of discussion about the teams I chose, isn't rare we've differences being the soccer so subjective for individual analysis (except the case about Zidane please, I believe both we know would be a battle without end mate ).

About the other, it's easy to fall in the temptation choosing offensive players of great level, falling in love with the idea to see all them playing together showing their bright talents, but I agree it does the systems be unstable generally and evidence the little appreciation of the defensive abilities.

 

I like to think I am rating him correctly because I am not falling for the myth that surrounds him nor am I being swayed by his style of play. If I was simply criticising him I would focus on his erratic influence, end product and abysmal discipline but I presented a balanced view by refering to the things he genuinely merits credit for such as his good incidents/goals in big games, Euro 2000 tournament and two year peak at Real Madrid.

You have been indoctrinated so you are a lost cause.

It is a criticism. If you are selecting an all-decade team then some standards must apply. I do not consider three years at most to be enough to merit a place in the team particularly when the players in question have erratic form even within their peak period. While we might not agree on the exact term to use both Kaka and Ronaldinho have had pretty poor periods of form while their respective peak years do not do enough to distinguise them from their peers and their direct rivals for a place in the team. I am not using years outside of the top leagues in my selection criteria because I do not consider it to be a fair method of rating players. I also find it to be a bit disingenuous when we are discussing all-decade teams. I do agree that a judgment call needs to be made in regard to peak versus longevity.

Henry has performed at his best when he has been able to operate from the left. The different systems he has played in and his different teammates have all recognised this. With the way you have utilised him I simply do not see him being able to replicate the form that has prompted you to select him as your starter. In your team he has direct competition from Ronaldinho in the areas he likes to operate with cannot be said of his teammates you listed.

I think Xavi has had a higher peak and if you want the best out of Pirlo then you need to pair him with a Gattuso type of defensive midfielder instead of the more static Makelele type. While I agree that Xavi would get more forward Pirlo is not going to sit back. He will almost always be behind the rest of your attack but he will move forward to provide an outlet and to be able to distribute closer to the goal and stretch the play. It is why I am not sure with pairing him with Makelele. The role of a sitting defensive midfielder and a deep-lying playmaker when the team has possession is similar. Similar enough to be a potential problem. Plus once possession is lost I do not see the attacking component of your midfield pressing the opposition in order to win the ball back which puts a lot of pressure on Makelele and the rest of your defense.

I have no problem with Cannavaro being in the all-decade team I am just not sure if he would make it off the bench for me. Since I am undecided on the rest of the central defense he might still start in my team so it is not that big an issue. With Nesta I think it is similar to the Pirlo versus Xavi discussion. I think Nesta was clearly the best central defender in the world for the start of the decade but Ferdinand then proceeded to usurp him. The difference in games played you listed is two seasons which is significant in my mind. It highlights the difficulty of doing these teams because there are few players who have been at their best for the entire decade. Usually the decade is split pretty evenly and you need to decide between the old guard and the new challengers.

I think Ronaldo, the Portuguese one, has the highest peak of any player this decade and a period of consecutive form that is up there with the rest. I also consider his overall attacking game to be one that few this decade can match which is why I am baffled to find him not included at all.

I'm glad you responded. To the rest of you I am working from the latest team back...

 

I believe your exaggeration stems from the fact to expose the better moments of the French as few, understanding tacitly that the others during his career are insufficient, sometimes showing them as mediocre, underrating his influence in the teams and games that he played.

In spite he certainly has been overrated many times by contemporary supporters that have Zidane as the first great player they have ever seen, elevating him at the level of Pelé or Maradona erroneously, his talent and the achievements he acquired being great protagonist are enough to consider him not so far. At this point, I feel his current popularity and the facility with anyone could fall in love with his skills play him in against in the criterion of critics that prefer the controversial and elaborate arguments, as I consider you .

 

Joining the first and last part of your comment, actually, isn't a standard in the criterion to consider the size of the impact of a player during the decade between the longevity of his regularity and the height of his maximum peak. Each one could consider any form as his own standard, but anyone could say one form was better than another, so, establishing an equilibrium as standard seems complicated.

That's the reason I'm not agree about the presumption are better players than Kaká and Ronaldinho to put there clearly, I feel it's more than enough because my own standard is different than yours.

Also don't use years outside the top leagues seems me could cut great part of the career of some noticeable players to consider, especially when the competence is so closed.