Often you see that Baresi is ranked higher than Scirea. But why is this such a clear cut case? Baresi's club and international career only took off in 1987. His top form lasted until 1993 or 1994. Scirea had a top-form level that lasted for 10 years if not more. Baresi has two Champions League's more, but Scirea has a World Cup and also a fourth place finish. Scirea has also a UEFA Cup win in a time when it was a prestigious competition to win. Both played for wealthy sides (Agnelli, Berlusconi), no difference there. But the lowest position of Juve during Scirea's time was fifth in 1985 (when they won the European Cup) and third in 1979. A way more consistent record than the one of Baresi. Furthermore: Scirea wasn't as flashy perhaps but he was a very complete defender. The Italian coach actually tried to fit both Scirea and Baresi in one team. Baresi, not Scirea, played in midfield. In terms of defensive skills, I can't really see why Baresi is superior. Scirea was able to win a duel in the air, to begin with. So why is Baresi almost unanimously seen as a better player? Is it the youtube-era we live in (the flashy drives into midfield of Baresi is memorised more than solid defending and distribution of Scirea)? Or the mythical status of Sacchi's Milan? Or sour grapes from English journalists (Heysel 1985)?
Baresi was probably more highly regarded in his own time. Scirea received one 4th place vote in 1982. Baresi got votes in 5 different years, including his second place in 89. What the hell does this have to do with any sensible conversation?
There you have a point: Baresi was the first Italian, in terms of quality, in Sacchi's side. Also a good euro88 tournament helped him in 1988. For Juventus Zoff, Causio, Bettega, Cabrini, Brady, Boniek, Rossi, Platini, Scirea himself, Tardelli, Laudrup had seen votes during Scireas reign at the back. For Milan between 1987 and 1994 you had: Gullit, Van Basten, Rijkaard, Baresi himself, Maldini, Papin, Desailly, Savicevic, Boban as names in the list. Apart from Maldini and Desailly in later years, all names are attacking players, whereas Tardelli, Zoff and Cabrini were great defensive players in themselves. That might also be a factor. On the other hand, Ancelotti was a great midfielder too for Sachi's Milan. It is how it works: painful losses can either react a inflation of someone's status (Hidegkuti) or downplay it.
Also take a look at this man's consistency: http://www.myjuve.it/players-juventus/gaetano-scirea-1.aspx Note that Italy played with 16 clubs at that time. So 30 appearances was the max.
Here is a nice compilation of the man: [ame="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6mxz1_gaetano-scirea_sport"]Dailymotion - Gaetano Scirea - Sports et Extrême@@AMEPARAM@@http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/video@@AMEPARAM@@video[/ame] Unfortunately predominantly filled with offensive actions.
Baresi was often regarded as TOP3 best CB in history along with Beckenbauer, and (maybe) Bobby Moore - higher than Scirea. However I don't think it's a CLEAR CUT win but more due to the "convention" or cliche' There 2 main reasons that Baresi was regarded higher (in CB): - He was a greatest legend in MIlan 85-94 during the club best ever era (with the 3 Holland Muskerteers) and most people were adamant of that great team (among the 10 greatest teams of history) - As strictly as a sweeper *(CB) Baresi was the most solid one and very much consistent over his long career - His shirt was retired in Milan. Plus, his WC90 and 94 did show his greatness ... ============================================== Scirea in other hand was more skillful player (more comfortable with the ball than Baresi) in both roles libero or in fullback attacking (if playing 3 DF). He had similar style of Beckenbauer (with lesser flashy): clean tackles, reading games and good in attack. BUT ... a BIG BUT for his career was at both WC82, 86 he did not really shine (he was still very good but not up to his best) - that's again, as a FINAL SEAL in his reputation in front of the whole world! So it leaves Scirea as a 2nd or 3rd man in Italy defender category ... with Maldini and Fachetti as competitor, all behind Baresi as #1. ================================================= IMO, I still prefer Scirea than both Baresi or Maldini: as he was right in between (can do best of both quality). But that's style and preference. During rating, more things are to consider, unfortunately! Another similar example: was like Ronaldo vs Zico. In style, Zico was more complete, but in ratings many did put Ronaldo higher!
Interesting debate. Has anyone ever seen or heard of Paul Mcgrath - couldnt train due to knee injuries and one of the great CB's in the world.
Talking about a cliche, Bobby Moore is the number one cliche at centre-back. Yes but Scirea played for a legendary side too. And both played with gifted back-lines. The one of Baresi was of course revolutionary (for Italians) and the one of Scirea more conservative. Baresi actually names the Juventus back-line as the greatest back-line (behind his own back-line?): http://fourfourtwo.com/interviews/one-on-one/337/article.aspx This is, I believe, correct. Not only finished Juventus in almost all seasons first or second, for over 10 years, also a very few goals were conceded. In 1982, when Scirea received his only Golden Ball votes, Juventus conceded just 14 goals. Also Scirea's goalscoring record is impressive. If you compare this with Beckenbauer, Beckenbauer scored in the Bundesliga 44 goals in 396 games. Scirea scored 24 goals in 377 games. BUT: Beckenbauer played in a average goals against per game league of 3+ (between 3 and 3.5) whereas Scirea played in a 2- league (goals against per game between 1.5 and 2.0). So Scirea's goalscoring record is really good. The retiring of his shirt was also part of Berlusconi's campaign to wash Rivera away in the club's history. But how are you certain he was the most solid one? Baresi appeared to be faster, with more fighting spirit and more theatrics but Scirea was a taller guy so he appeared also somewhat slower on the pitch. And had less theatrics. And as said before: his header was a big plus defensively. He did not shine at WC82? Why? His sole Ballon D'or nomination came in that year. In the second group stage, he was flawless. In the final he gave a assist to Tardelli. Why are you so sure he did not shine? In the first group stage the back-line was imo the best part of the team.
First, not sure Moore was a "cliche' " as #1 CB, but 90% Beckenbauer got it. Even I would rate Baresi higher than Moore (who was a bit overhyped with his WC66 and 70) Second, Baresi was the most solid CB in Milan and also SerieA history (yes more so than Scirea - who was also great but he also involved in attack and left his spot sometimes) Last, Italy82 was arguably the BEST team in WC history (if not ever) in term of defense zone with Scirea,Tardelli, Bergomi, Gentille, Collovati and Cabrini I said Scirea had good to very good WC, but it was NOT his best form in those tournament to SHINE above the rest (of back line like Gentille Bergomi or Collovati) IF he did play up to his best, I am sure he would be ranked above Baresi and Moore. He might not win the ballon D'or that year but at least just behind the demon Rossi (unfairly as in the past FIFA often overlooked DF quality but more like who scores more goals in WC GOLDEN SHOES) For example, baresi vs Scirea is like Desailly vs Blanc of France. Most often, people would pick (or think) Desailly as a better (more solid and reliable) than Blanc (or equivalent to Scirea) who was more skillful on ball and a clean DF! Anyhow, I ONLY tried to explain the FACT WHY Baresi was regarded higher (more solid and reliable) than Scirea. I had already said, I myself prefer a Scirea (just like Bearzot prefered Scirea over Baresi in WC86)
I think it comes down to innovation, AC Milan's backline, led by Baresi, is seen as one that revolutionized the game, a thing of beauty and the defensive counterpart to Ajax's total football offense. I regard both Scirea and Baresi at about the same level, top six centerbacks of all times, with Pasarella, Moore and Figueroa, all behind Beckenbauer, of course.
Well, with Moore I get sometimes the impression that non-football related matters contributed to his status. He was for example a very kind person towards team-mates and opponents alike. That contributes towards your status and the nice words they say about you. Beckenbauer at #1 as a centre-back something I had always problems with. To me, he was a natural midfielder who happened to play at the back. Defensively he wasn't world class, for sure (on top of that: people often mix the two versions of Beckenbauer together in one image: the young, spectacular and adventurous but unsuccessful Beckenbauer and the older, more boring, conservative, possession-loving successful Beckenbauer). Indeed, but Baresi did it too isn't it? But why are you so sure he had not his top form? I would pick Blanc too. Very solid and you know what you get with him whereas Desailly had sometimes some nasty surprises (his defensive mistakes are often forgotten; Blanc was more or less always of the same level). I see.
Why you have that problem? INDEED Beckenbauer won both Euro72 and WC74 as a CB (libero + captain). He started out as a CM (WC66) and moved to DM (WC70), he was very good in those position as well ... but his PEAK FORM was in CB/libero ! What made Beckenbauer so special in CB position for he was a true talent in ball skills (control, dribble and passing) and he (arguably) invented the libero role in a 4 prongs DF at time! Up to now, not many could have simulated as good - M.Sammer was the closest form in his Euro96, and the others were Edmilson WC02, Maeschareno Barca, Lucio Copa11 ... to name a few Baresi made some run to midfield as well, but MUCH LESS than a Scirea. Again, I did not mean Scirea made many holes/mistakes, I only MEANT Baresi's style was "more solid" (for the team) and he was! For example, Maldini was great in both FB and CB, but as a "pure CB" position, Nesta was (a bit) more SOLID than Maldini! Read again, I said Scirea had a good WC82 (more so than 78 and 86 was his so-so) but in that tournament Gentille stole the limelight from Scirea in defense zone, and Collovati were (seemingly) having "better" tournament! Scirea was of course a better talent than both in normal games
Nah, Scirea was great in WC82. Anyways, his position is like a bass player in a band, the great ones don't steal the limelight. And you're comparing Lucio with Beckenbauer? Now I know you're not to be taken seriously, thanks.
Here is one among good flash back on Scirea: http://www.goal.com/en/news/1717/editorial/2009/09/01/1472366/calcio-champion-gaetano-scirea-1953-1989-the-impossible Editorial Calcio Champion: Gaetano Scirea 1953-1989 - The Impossible Genius Of Italian Football’s Immaculate Immortal This week marks the 20th anniversary of the tragic death of the legendary Juventus and Italy libero Gaetano Scirea. Goal.com's Gil Gillespie celebrates the life and achievements of arguably the greatest defender the game has ever seen... Even in a land famous for producing the most complete defenders in the history of world football, Gaetano Scirea stands almost alone. The Juventus and Italy libero is one of only five players who have won every single club trophy dreamt up by FIFA and UEFA, as well as the World Cup. Usually positioned behind the defence in a sweeper role that has sadly become extinct in the modern age, Scirea was the ultimate reader of the game - Franz Beckenbauer, Daniel Passarella and Franco Baresi are the only other central defenders who even come close in terms of greatness ... "
That was his position but in my opinion he was still a midfielder in nature. Rijkaard also played sometimes as a centre-back (and could with his physical strength and posture mark someone out of the game) but he was still there a midfielder in role and nature. His dribbling was something special for a CB position, true, but when doing his runs, he had also the space to do so. The opposition initially didn't know how to deal with a attack-minded libero. He became more conservative later on, when he began to accumulate prizes. Also, the assertion that he invented the libero role is imo false. I think that it was a natural development of that era and not of his. Velibor Vasovic was in the mid-60s also a libero for Partizan Belgrade. Apolzon did the same slightly before him (at the end of his career). It was just a natural tactical development that took place at that time. Beckenbauer was great though in selling himself towards the outside world, thanks to his brilliant manager. Also unprecedented were indeed his dribbling skills (but when I see Gregoriak implying it was just as good as the dribbling of Cruyff I can only laugh), his typical German energy (in his younger years) and his passing. Also very rare is that he could made the transition from a high-energy form of game towards a smart ball-retention style of play. You don't see it often happening in that extent. Regarding Baresi I have to disagree. He often stormed forward. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqDZn-SLSNo"]Franco Baresi vs Benfica - Finale Coppa dei Campioni 1989-90 - Commento di Bruno Pizzul - YouTube[/ame] You can also see it in other compilations. Sorry, Scirea was imo very good in the final. Also take into account the opposition he had to face: the second best Brazilian side ever and primary favourites Argentina. Scirea was indeed a bit conservative in his approach than for his club, but that underpins his versatility and flexibility (and defensive solidness). For me he was almost the defensive counterpart of Di Stefano (in terms of versatility). Yes, even ahead of Beckenbauer. Scirea was defensively better and also comfortable on the flanks (with good crossing). On xtratime someone (not myself) had a theory why Scirea was never chosen in a All Star World Cup team despite two good performances in WC1982 and WC1978 (in dutch books about these World Cups, the Dutch journalists did include him in a 'all star team'). A very interesting one.
This is a very interesting debate indeed. I've also wondered why Baresi is more highly regarded than Scirea. From what I've seen of WC 82 I think Scirea was amazing in it. Yes, Gentile and Collovati made more impression because they had man-marking assignments and completed them. But Gaetano was the glue that held it all together and organized that defense. As pointed already, he also assisted for Tardelli's goal in the final. Baresi had a great WC90 but not so much in 94, especially considering he missed most of it due to injury and missed a PK in the final. While Scirea was alive, Baresi was behind him, sort of in his shadow. Who knows if Gaetano lived longer and played a little more if Baresi would've replaced him for the NT and shined like he did for a period of time. Overall, there is no doubt that both of them where great defenders, both in Top 5 of all time. But for me Scirea was better...by a little bit. Thus my Top 5 would be Beckenbauer, Scirea, Baresi, Pasarella, Moore.
Yes, this is one of the most questionable topics in history forums. I watched Scirea for a few games not enough to be sure if he was really better than Baresi but I have heard for so many times in Xtratime.org and Soccerpulse.com that Scirea is at least very close to Baresi and some even rate him higher. He could be the most underrated footballer of all-time if consider his individual acheivement but it is partly due to unavialability of Italian footballer of the year in his time. For me, I always re-consider if he is good enough to be considered in top 50 best footballer ever as I rank Baresi at 31st. When I compare Scirea to Passarella, I select Passarella prior to him due to overall abilities. Passarella scored so many goals and it is advantage enough to compensate being inferiro to Scirea in technical ability. At least, if I could get Guerin Sportivo rating of top Italian players in Series A, rating will be a bit easier.
And given the fact that Beckenbauer was not a pure defender and even mediocre in defending (just watch some videos, like his performance in the 1976 EC final) I think Scirea is the number one central defender of all-time. He was definitely the most all-round one and I like that. Passarella scored more goals, true, but also played for Fiorentina whose attacking nature is in their DNA. Scirea had simply a somewhat different role. Goals alone cannot settle this because R. Koeman has scored even more goals than Passarella (but had also the privilege to play for attacking sides).
It is not just number of goals but method to do scores is considered. Koeman just use his effective shooting to score in long distance while Passarella went attacking to midfield line to be fulfilled his vision ability. He could score in aerial game also.
There was a compilation on youtube, now unavailable, where you saw Koeman scoring a lot of goals in the penalty box, really. It was not just his free kicks and penalty kicks. No doubt Passarella was a better defender with fewer weak spots by the way, it was just to illustrate the relativeness of the goals scored (which is not the primary responsibility of a libero/centre-back anyway). Same with Scirea versus Beckenbauer, see previous posts in this thread.
Agree with you that Koeman was good in shooting longshot to score (on top of his Freekick, pk). Also agree that NOT because he could score a lot that makes him 'better' than some others... Passaeralla over all was a better DF in every sense, leadership of team, commanding well the back 4, organize good defense and participating in attack - so well rounded ... a la Beckenbauer, Scirea ...
Scirea retired in 87, so had he lived would not have had any effect on Baresi's position in the Italian NT since Euro88. Speaking of Scirea, I cannot find online a detailed narration of what happened the day of his death. I know it was a car accident in Poland but apparently it was a minor accident, don't understand how the gas tank exploded, killing him and two other passengers, though I believe the driver survived. Baresi is no doubt an all-timer, but I think he is too overrated as everyone puts him just behind Beckenbauer in a list of all-time centerbacks. At the very least, it should be debatable with Passarella (whom I ranked higher), Scirea, Santamaria, Moore, Figueroa and Koeman. Beckenbauer was not mediocre at defending, LOL. Yes but Koeman did score the game winner in the CL final of 92, and what a free-kick it was, literally in the last second to give Barcelona its long-awaited first title. Koeman was also a superb commander of the defense, for both the Dutch (winning Euro 88) and Barcelona (winning numerous league titles and CL 92).
That's why I said "if Scirea had played a little longer". I agree, it shouldn't be so clear cut about Baresi's position right behind Beckenbauer. But I will not put Koeman on that list. He certainly had his valuable attributes, but he lacked pace and his tackling wasn't one of the best, surely not on par with Beckenbauer, Scirea, Baresi, Pasarella and Figueroa.
If you mind I will search for defensive lapses of Beckenbauer. Frankly, he had a different role for Bayern. He was the playmaker for them but some people see him as a super-human, he wasn't.
Beckenbauer was also not an assured tackler. He lacked the physique to do so. Also, his laid-back, relaxed attitude on the pitch, as if he avoided sweating, was criticized at times. To give just one example: [ame="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2ts15_saint-etienne-bayern-de-munich-1976_sport"]Saint Etienne - Bayern de Munich 1976 - Vidéo Dailymotion@@AMEPARAM@@http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/video@@AMEPARAM@@video[/ame] (about 3:20; he does not win the ball) An he had many of them. He wasn't a God in defending, which is not bad because his strengths and role laid elsewhere.