Is Luka Modric the greatest midfielder of the 21st century?

When was his first world class season in your opinion?

It's important we establish this before we start comparing his longevity to others

 

Probably Kimmich have the same (or even higher) degree of combined offensive and defensive output in volume of contribution to build-up, playmaking and defensive work-rate (of course not for so long time because he is younger)

 

He was top 3 during his last season in the PL(2011/12)


The worst player in la liga 2012/13
https://www.marca.com/2012/12/31/en/football/spanish_football/1356978303.html

And then arguably world class every season since 2013/14 (except 2018/19 I'd argue)

8 world class seasons give or take

I'd say iniesta had half this number in terms of world class seasons

2008/09
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13


Zidane probably slightly more(5 seasons)

1997/98
1999/00
2000/01
2001/01
2002/03

Xavi probably slightly more than him but less then Modric

2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13

Even though Im being generous with Modric
If I'm being perfectly honest I don't think he was a world class performer In la liga 2017/18 nor the 2017/18 CL


Modric gets away with doing less then a Zidane yet is perceived as being equally as great as Zidane
I did penalise Zidane for his performances in his latter Madrid seasons but if Modric had the statistics of Zidane 2004/05 or even 2005/06 he would absolutely be talked about as World class

 

@carlito86 In fact, in 11/12 Modrić was not 3rd best in the Premier League. He wasn't even better than Bale.
I think Pirlo were worldclass from 03 to 07 at Milan and from 12 to 14 at Juve. So, there are 8 seasons in which he were worldclass

 

If you don't consider Zidane as from this century, it's a possible opinion. There will never be consensus. But Modric is on the short list (xavi, iniesta, pirlo etc)

I see similarity with Pirlo. Dynamic midfield, very technical, good in defense and attack, control the flow of the game. Pirlo in World Cup 06 is better than any version of Modric (3 man on the match in 7 games, including semifinal and final). But Modric has 5 UCls and a Ballon d'Or.

Maybe Modric performs better in clubs and Pirlo in the national team.

 

I don't pay too much attention to media awards if they are not corroborated by objective data

If you were referring to the whoscored infographic.
It was accurate until Gareth bale overtook Modric in late April 2012 with 3 goals in 2 games against relegated Blackburn and Bolton

By which time of course the season was practically done at that end of the table

There was no conceivable way Blackburn were going to remaining in the division at that point anyways
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/gareth-bale/leistungsdaten/spieler/39381/plus/0?saison=2011
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011–12_Premier_League

 

I think Kroos was better at Bayern than Modrić at Tottenham. And at Real Madrid in general Kroos was better than Modrić. Even in the year when Modrić won the Ballon d'Or Kroos he was better than him for Real Madrid. And the WC from Kroos in 2014 were better than Modrić in 2018 (although has played for a far superior NT)

 

the answer is: nope

 

I would categorize midfielders into central, attacking, and defensive midfielders and then try and rank players within these categories. And within these categories, I would be reluctant to call a player the best without having looked at the data carefully. Thus, while not calling Modric or anyone else the absolute best, based on what Modric has shown and has achieved over such a long career, I think he easily ranks as one of the best midfielders of this century. Without looking at the data, I can rank central midfielders based on who I would like to watch play. In such a ranking, Zidane would be my pick, followed by Iniesta, and then Modric (while acknowledging that Modric has a higher work rate and is better defensively).

 

Using individual honors is truly the worst way to compare players. I can't understand the logic behind those who do so.

Football is played on the pitch not in the voting ballot of journalists.

@Al Gabiru As players Modric and Pirlo are as similar as Banana's are to Meatballs, they dont play the same position as one's a regista while the other is an advanced playmaker. Modric impacts the game primarily by his ball retention/ball carrying, while Pirlo was a pass first midfielder with a style more similar to Real Madrid's Toni Kroos.

To answer the question, no he is not. His prime is slightly longer than an Iniesta, but he is not as good as the spaniard. While i think their passing ability is comparable, Iniesta has a much better close control and was a lot more agile. His superior skillset allowed him to take over big games in a way Modric simply cant. Without mentioning the obvious WC final and chelsea goals, there are a lot more instances where Iniesta could outshine even Messi on the pitch, like in the 4-0 win against Madrid in 2015, the 2006 Champions league final (Modric was still playing in Croatia at the time), the 2015 Champions league final, 2015 solo run against PSG...

Modric is absolutely fantastic and I think i would have him as second best advanced playmakers this century provided I'm not forgetting anyone.

Also as a disclaimer, I dont think it's fair to compare them (Iniesta, Modric and the likes) to other types of Attacking midfielders like Ozil, KDB or to registas like Xavi and Pirlo, since essentially, they have different roles on the pitch.

 

I'll have to second this, especially since the title is "best" and not "greatest." With the latter, at least the titles and accolades matter. If we wanna talk best, nothing except their on-field product matters.

Obviously the roles are different, but it wouldn't surprise me if all these players see themselves as a "Central midfielder."

It is very difficult to compare players across roles, especially in a position that has so many variety of roles.

The best method is probably to ask the simple yet very difficult question "who was the best at executing their roles?" You can't really compare a Bergkamp to a Ruud, but who was better at their job? That sort of things.

Even then, it is not easy to do at all, but I do think it is a start, as opposed to trying to compare players' resume.

 

As the poetgooner says, I think there is a confusion between position and roles.

All these midfielders (Xavi, Iniesta, Modric, Pirlo, Kroos, Zidane) have the role of playmaker, controlling the flow of the game, distributing passes.

The position is different. One can play more advanced, another more to the side, another closer to the defense, etc.

So, the topic's question is if Modric was the best pure playmaker, if in the 21st century someone performed better the tasks of distributing passes, controlling the pace of the match, etc. I think Zidane would be the winner in a popular vote. Among others, there will never be consensus. But Modric is on the short list (xavi, iniesta, pirlo etc)

 

My bad, Idk why I genuinely read the title as "best"

 

Luca Modric isn't my favourite midfielder but this is what happens when you prop someone against completely fictional standards

Iniestas dribbling and agility was never the reason he produced the winning goal in the 2010 World cup final
It was a half volley in the box(well assisted by Cesc Fabregas)
He didn't take over that game by any stretch of definition either

Nor(was his overrated dribbling ability) the reason he produced the match winning goal vs Chelsea in 2009

In that 2015 CL final you referenced Iniesta completed 1 dribble
Lionel Messi completed 10
https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/9...Champions-League-2014-2015-Juventus-Barcelona



In the 2010/11 champions league final vs Manchester United iniesta completed 1 dribble
Lionel Messi completed 10
https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/5...-League-2010-2011-Barcelona-Manchester-United

In the 2012 European championship final iniesta completed 1 dribble

Pirlo on the losing team had 2 dribbles and Pirlo was never an elite let alone world class dribbler (let alone even average IMO)
https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/6...tional-European-Championship-2012-Spain-Italy
The players rated above him in that match from his team were
Xavi
Iker Cassilas
Fernando Torres
Xabi Alonso
Sergio Ramos
Sergio busquets
David Silva
Jordi alba
Cesc Fabregas
Alvaro arbeloa


Where is this out of the world dribbling ability you talk in big games
A random league match vs Real Madrid in the first half of la liga 2015/16 with 4 dribbles
Neymar had 7 and he wasn't even trying
(He had almost double this 2 years later)


You are completely mocking Modric if you think this is a standard he didn't reach

That dribbling run vs PSG was the only world class dribbling run iniesta produced between 2013/14 up until he left Barcelona
Im willing to be corrected on this if you have any other examples of iniesta successfully taking on 2+ players in the same move at any point between 2013 and 2018

 

I think this might just be a problem with the way dribbles are counted by WS though. His ball retention skills and ability to craft open spaces were pretty good in that final:

 

I have a question, do you watch football? Because all you did here was look at numbers on a sheet and draw conclusions from it.

If you go by Whoscored rating, then Thiago Alcantara is the GOAT midfielder and Iniesta isn't better than Santi Cazorla.

The arguments you presents are pointless to the discussion, How does Iniesta completing less dribble than Neymar and Messi makes him worse compared to Modric.
If you want to use Whoscored since you seem to love it so much, you will notice than on average Iniesta completes one more dribble a game than Modric.

But focusing on this would be derailing the discussion, as i said in my previous post, its clear that Iniesta is the superior player when it comes to ball control and agility.

Then you went on to show that a lot of Iniesta's iconic moments did not involve his dribbling skills. And tell me we should care about that because? I said Iniesta could shine in those moments because he has a superior skillset, if you want to invalidate this argument you should either show me how Modric was equally decisive for his teams both in terms of quantity and quality, not tell me that some of those moments do not involve dribbling.

Either you wrote your post in bad faith or you genuinely struggle to understand the beautiful game. Perhaps it's a bit of both.

 

His superior skillset being what?
Can't be his passing because you just said it was equal to modric
Can't be his scoring because you didn't even deem it worthy of a mention

You pinpointed his dribbling and agility as being something he possessed that allowed him to dominate games in ways Modric couldn't
Don't backtrack please
We know you Barcelona fanboys believe this fantasy so let's look at it

The legacy defining matches of iniesta were never defined by his dribbling output
Never

He has across 3 major finals
Champions final 2011
Euro championship final 2012
Champion's league final 2015

3 measly dribbles in total

Probably didn't dribble passed more then one player in the 2010 world cup final either

EDIT
He actually only completed 1 dribble in the 2010 world cup final(5 attempts)
https://www.sofascore.com/player/andres-iniesta/3595

So that's 4 dribbles completed across 4 major finals
The ones in which he supposedly dominated

Its Funny the guys who say Iniesta shouldn't be judged by goals or assists are the exact same ones who reference games in which he scored or assisted and was an obsolete dribbling threat as evidence of games he dominated


And what about santi cazorla(You mentioned him)
He was too injury prone and spent too long of his prime on a very good but not exactly great arsenal team
On his day he was a way more impactful player then that fraud

GRAPHIC: Arsenal with and without Santi Cazorla starting in the Premier League since August 2015 pic.twitter.com/gnLMIfJdkL

— WhoScored.com (@WhoScored) July 6, 2017

 

For longevity, it would be interesting to a make a definitive criteria as to what makes a ""world class" season. I have been pondering this, trying to emulate Kicker style ratings. It's not entirely clear how they decide what is a world class season, but we could begin making a criteria.

For instance, you commonly hear that if a player could make a 23-man squad of the best very players in the world, they would be considered world class.
Or, if a player could walk into a starting position on any club in the world, they would be considered world class.

These aren't perfect metrics, because obviously even a world class player wouldn't have started over Messi at Barcelona or Cristiano at Real. And there is the possibility of there being multiple world class players in one position (ex. CF) but none at another position (ex. RB).

I think individual awards and being shortlisted for the Ballon D'Or can often be a good indicator, but its not always the case. Politics influences it a lot at this level.

We can also look at media and fan perception, ranking lists, TOTYs, etc... and the statistical ranking scores of WhoScored and Sofascore and whatnot.

I tend to lean towards a pretty high bar for the definition of world class.

When it comes to Modric, may I ask somebody who has watched his La Liga play consistently to weigh in on his league contribution over the last few seasons? It's been my perception that Modric has been good but not great in league play for a while, but really shining on the big stage in UCL and International torunaments. I don't watch a ton of La Liga, however, so I could be mistaken. Would somebody else like to weigh in?

 

I think the answer here is Xavi. He was totally dominant in world football for a 5-year span in a way that other midfielders simply haven’t been—consistently completely dominating opposing teams’ midfields, including being legitimately great in a shocking number of the biggest matches (for instance: CL finals 2009, CL finals 2011, Euro 2008 semifinals, Euro 2008 finals, Euro 2012 finals, WC 2010 semifinals, and WC 2010 finals were all vintage performances from Xavi). And it wasn’t just the big matches, as prime Xavi was a picture of consistency in all games, in a way that many of the contenders for this were not. Ultimately, his presence allowed his club team to become a top contender for the greatest club team of all time, and his presence allowed his national team to become a top contender for the greatest national team of all time. Both teams certainly had other great players, but neither of them achieved all that much after he retired, despite still having those other great players. And ultimately, for me, my eye test also tells me that Xavi is the best.

On Modric, he’s certainly got a good resume and is up near the top of any ranking of the best midfielder of the last couple decades. I like him a lot. My eye test doesn’t put him at Xavi’s level though. But leaving Xavi and a few others (Iniesta, Pirlo, Zidane) aside, I’m actually not really sure Modric is better than Toni Kroos. I’ve generally found that Kroos has looked better to me. I find him to be a bit more consistent, have better range of passing, and he tends to create more chances and get more assists (part of that is being the set-piece taker, but being better at that is a skill). And if we want to talk about team achievements, they’re essentially indistinguishable at club level, and I think Kroos has usually been better for Real Madrid in their Champions League runs. Meanwhile, at NT level, Kroos has actually won the World Cup, and he was probably the best midfielder in the tournament when he won. Of course, he played for Germany not Croatia, so one could argue making the finals with Croatia is more impressive than winning with Germany, but I’m really not convinced Modric has an advantage here, especially since Kroos genuinely performed really well in 2014.

In general, though, I also echo other people saying it’s probably best to rank by more narrow classifications. For instance, N’Golo Kante and Kevin De Bruyne are both midfielders, but it’s hard to compare them since their roles are completely different.