You are saying if Rice or Zubimendi would play at City instead of Rodri they wouldn't have won 5 out out 6 championships or wouldn't have won the UCL? or maybe Spain wouldn't win the EUROS if Zubimendi played instead of Rodri? because in the 2nd half they did much batter with Zubimendi.
No they wouldn't have. It is like saying Xhaka could replace Kroos and still we would have won 6 CL. Would've could've talk. Xhaka is a fantastic player and had a world class season but he is still no Kroos. Rice is nowhere near Rodri in pausa, passing , controling the build up , receiving and long shots to save the day. Rice is probably better defender than Rodri thats it. Zubimendi one second half being used against a player like Rodri who has multiple CL , PL , Spain big game performances is laughable. Real won the CL in 22 when Kroos went out for super sub Rodrygo does that mean anything about Kroos? These are the real dumb arguments to come up against Rodri. I like Zubimendi and wants him in Madrid but he doesn't have the defensive ability, tactical thinking, attacking presence like Rodri. Edit; Vinicius deserved the ballondor and this feels like a robbery but let's not wrongly judge a player because of that.
"They" paid a fortune for a marginalized version of him. So i don't believe that. Really. Just look at the level of "discussion" in the past couple pages, and tell me "they" are the problem. The level of debate is absolutely moronic. It's safe to say that by now, @Hendrix22 , and i say that with full confidence, knows more ball than most people here.
With Fernandinho they have won 2 champions in a row under Pep and without Rodri and another 1 with Fernandinho and without Rodri and without Pep. so yes they would have won, no need to make things up. Brining Kross and Xhaka to conversation it's just whataboutism. I guesses you didn't watch Rice play. I really don't understand what are you trying to say here. It's like you didn't watch our 2022 CL league run. You never saw him play, have you? 1.I asked you question and haven't said any argument. 2.The only dumb arguments here are yours and the other Rodri fanboys that came here to cry. Now you are saying it feels like a robbery when all this time you are telling us he should won it. MAKE UP YOUR MIND, dude.
After reading full backs occuppy an "easy" position in the field, I couldn't agree more. I mean, who are we to rate which position is easy on a football pitch? You're telling me that bombing up and down an entire wing is easy? Easier than occupying a midfield position where you are surrounded by CBs, other MFs and even the FBs themselves? Give me a break. Downplaying the importance of a position occupied by legendary players like Roberto Carlos and Maldini to validate a shitty opinion? Some people here need a brain check.
Ironic cuz we didn't start this convo. It's madridistas on here trying to downplay Rodri simply because some of their players had great seasons.
Not easy but not harder than CDM, as simple as that. No position on the pitch is easy everybody knows that.
Why do you keep posting this opinion as a fact? It makes you sound like a mouth-breather. Who are you to tell?
Roberto Carlos was a freak athlete more than a gifted football player. There's the whole issue here. The fullback position is the one where you can get away having somebody who's athletic enough to mirror the opponent. If you think of some of the least gifted players we've signed, the fullbacks are very high on that list. Danilo, Odriozola, i would say that right now pound for pound Mendy is the least talented football player on the roster. A player like Marcelo is a wild exception. The majority of the players in the position are having success in the position by their athletic ability to run the flank for the entire game and not gas out. Also, the are of influence for the fullback is in the vast majority of cases, a straight line. Almost every other position requires an element of both depth and length of the field, fullbacks at the basic level generally track their flank and have a reduced field of influence.
It's funny cuz it comes from a Barca fan that all his message in the forum is in RM forum and the only thing he does is downgrading RM players and making things up.
These players represent 0,05% of the players holding the position in the history of the game. They are outliers in every way of the word. The basic interpretation of the position is very basic. Again, look at who plays for us and has played in the past. Incredibly basic football players with elite athletic ability.
Gravesen, M Diarra, Khedira weren’t fullbacks… Athleticism is also a huge quality in a footballer. Kante is a fantastic footballer and his ability to get around a football pitch is a big part of that. Messi would be half the player without his speed and acceleration.
I like how this post was never answered. As 4x4 said, some massive amount of shitty posts in the last few pages. Rodrifluffers are a sad bunch.
Of course, but there's a element to spacial awareness that simply isn't there, also you basically highlighted some players that had the athleticism but lacked the talent to succeed in midfield basically proving my point.
I'd say there are as many legendary technical FBs out there as there are DMFs. I'd say the legendary FBs on my list were more decisive than Rodri will ever be. For every Rodri and Alonso in your list, there is a Diarra and an Essien, as Umar outlined above. Carvajal had a legendary season for club and country. He won us games just in the same amount as Rodri won City games. Plus he scored in the CL final, making him a much more impactful player than Rodri.
I mean we are used to seeing absolute losers at life visit RMBS but it takes a special level to devote your time so much to something you hate that you make a profile and solely post on their message board.
I consider Essien a better football player than most players in the fullback position on top rosters right now.
Right. They removed the career aspect after 2021. So 2022-2024 looks about the same criteria (individual, collective, fair play). My point about criteria not changing for past 3 editions (including current) still stands. What can change, and this is just speculation, is how much weight they tell journalists should place on each criteria. This is a way in which they could sway votes. And as I mentioned, what has changed is the format (how many journalists vote and on how many candidates). I agree the career and fair play criteria shouldn't be there, but hey, as the video posted in the Vini thread mentioned, they have been criteria's since the award's inception. It's not anything new.