I'm not sure what you mean by ratings. Even if any such "rating" system did exist, the way most of us judge players is by the eye test. As both an Italy and Juventus supporter, I have watched Pirlo as closely as I can recall watching any other player over the last twenty years, and to call Pirlo inconsistent is inaccurate. Players with that quality are not inconsistent. Although I admired Xavi, not even he played with the same class that Pirlo did. It is highly unusual to see players that talented perform inconsistently. The fact that Pirlo was a key figure for major club sides and his NT for over a decade speak toward his consistency and undercuts your point. Regarding Kaka, it is not surprising that he would "overshadow" Pirlo given the fact that Kaka was a trequartista. Attacking players such as he and Messi tend to get more attention than holding MF players do. It does not make Pirlo any less important to the squad. I would also note that while Kaka had that half-decade or so where he was arguably the best player in the world, his performances significantly dropped after the switch to Real. Conversely, Pirlo was brilliant throughout his entire career. I would bet that I follow Juve more closely than basically anyone here. I don't just watch Champions League games. I watched away fixtures to the Empolis of the world. If you don't think that he was critical to Juve's resurgence, you don't know what you are talking about. If you disagree, take a look at what Conte and Marrotta have said. Even Berlusconi and Galliani admitted it was a huge mistake to let Pirlo go on a Bosman (and it probably had more to do with finances than anything else). Under Conte, Juve went out the one year against Bayern because they were clearly the superior side. That had nothing to do with Pirlo. Do you even recall who Juve's strikers were that year? Again the following year, they went out in group stage because of an inability to score; again, not on Pirlo. Last season Pirlo was crucial to a side that was a game away from a treble. To allege that he failed to perform in a game or two and how that somehow translates into inconsistency is blatantly false.
Extremely talented players often are decidedly inconsistent performers; have you watched Zinedine Zidane or Roberto Baggio? The fact is that right after the Cacliopoli scandal, the Serie A was considerably weakened, and Pirlo didn't reveled on that did he? The truth is that Pirlo was given away on a free transfer after 3 consecutive seasons of looking like he was well past his better days. Talented players can perform inconsistently; Pirlo is almost a textbook example of that, even if nowhere near as great a textbook example as Zidane is. Pirlo was brilliant throughout his entire career, except when he failed miserably at Inter Milan, and when he was given away on a free transfer by AC Milan, of course. Obviously, a player like Kaka will tend to overshadow players like Pirlo or Xavi. The difference is that Xavi dominated Champions League Finals (and general club football), to an effect that Pirlo never really did. Just imagine Pirlo playing on the same team as Messi and Iniesta?? His creative license would go down from his AC Milan role, and he'd become even more overshadowed (and by better players than Kaka, at that). Not to mention, again, that Xavi has two Euro titles in his pocket. One of them as the player of the tournament. And I'd bet that I've been closer to hitting the lottery than basically anyone here -- but that's not much of an argument is it? Pirlo didn't peformed anywhere near his best in the 2012-13 and the 2013-14 Champions League. He had an excellent away performance vs Celtic in 2012-13. That was it, as far as I'm concerned. And Pirlo looked well past his better days after Euro'12.
I wonder how you characterize consistency where the examples you use to illustrate your point include three of the best players ever to play in Zidane, Baggio, and Pirlo. You also ignore the fact that all three had careers spanning over a decade. How do inconsistent players manage to play 15-odd seasons at the highest level? I don't want to keep arguing this point. I disagree that Pirlo was inconsistent just as I would disagree with Zidane or Baggio having been inconsistent. Calciopoli had nothing to do with Pirlo's prominence. He was already a great player before that occurred. By way of example, he was a member of two CL winning squads and a World Cup winning side before that happened. That Calciopoli had anything to do with Pirlo's prominence is just silly. Again, by pointing to Pirlo's Bosman move, you are causing me to wonder if you actually followed what was happening. Everyone involved in that move has been on record as saying it was a massive mistake. It also coincided with Milan's moves toward cutting wages. Were Ibrahimovic and Thiago Silva poor because Milan let them go during the same time? You also claim he "looked as if he was past his prime?" So let's get this straight. He was past his prime at Milan for three seasons and then in his old age he goes to Juve into a side that had gone on to win four straight scudettos and nearly a Treble last season. What, he suddenly wasn't past his prime anymore? That makes no sense whatsoever. His time at Inter was likewise irrelevant. He was played out of position as a trequartista. When Inter comically transferred him to Milan, he became a world class player when he was utilized properly as a deep-lying playmaker under Ancelotti. This is the same Inter side that has made numerous mistakes on the transfer market. Pirlo was arguably the biggest; but I can also recall them selling Juve Cannavaro for a pittance when he was arguably the best defender on the planet. If you are going to argue that Inter's decision to let him go somehow speaks as to his quality, you picked the wrong club to illustrate your point. Your argument that he looked past it after Euro 2012 again ignores the evidence. Pirlo was on the Champions League Team of the Season last year; a pretty impressive feat for a guy that you say hasn't had it for the last three years. Regarding Xavi, you used the word "dominated." He was never dominant; just an important cog in the Barca/Spain systems. He was never the best player on his side and was largely a beneficiary of playing for one of the great club sides/systems in history. He never was "the" reason Barca would win games in the same way that you could say of a Messi or Ronaldinho.
This is all calculated and due to sheer talent, mhm. No coincidence can be invoked here at all, mhm. Pfff...
He was ********ing old. When he was in his prime he beat the hell out of your xavi and messi and all made-up footballers. Give the man a rest. He's carried AC Milan to high success, you Italian hater.
as far as I'm concerned you can't stand pirlo, and if that's the case you shouldn't be allowed to talk, as people who can't stand pirlo know squat about football. I allow you to keep quiet and let pros do the talk (if they say good things about my beloved andrea pirlo). Otherwise, I don't want to hear anything else on this thread. Just begone pirlo haters!
@ gumbacicc don't bother with these guys dude! They are clueless and/or pirlo/italian football haters. That's all. Probably they think that football started with messi, and 2005-upwards barcelona, and guardiola (I've seen this trend more than I'd like to admin). Besides, even Ronaldinho (the freakin one and ONLY RONALDINHO) bowed before Pirlo, not to mention what gatusso said about Pirlo: "when I see what Pirlo does with the ball I wonder if I'm a footballer" And I'll end my post with something that I just remembered and which is illustrative for the 2000-2007 UCL years, when AC Milan and Juve would constantly meet Barca and RM in the CL and would thrash them both. Sorry that I don't remember which year this was, or who the clubs involved were, but I do remember this: one time during the draw for the UCL knockout phases one of Barca's, or RM's officials that were attending the draw saw AC Milan's, or Juve's name (I am really sorry that I don't remember the clubs exactly, but what I'm saying here is 100% true). So... during the draw one of Barca's or RM's officials facepalmed when they saw their club's name drawn up against AC Milan or Juve. As an early 2000 Italian football fan I got an orgasm (well, matter-of-speaking ) when I saw that guy's reaction. To me, this spelled: "Damn, not them!" That's how much the "great" Barca and RM feared the italians back then, when Berlusconi (as corrupt as he was) really knew how to manage a club (or whatever his contribution to the club was). With a few exceptions (Deportivo La Coruna overturning a 4-1 loss at San Siro with a 4-0 win at El Riazor, in 2002, or 2003, don't remember when exactly, and the famous 2005 UCL final between AC Milan - Livepool that was decided at penalities after 3-3 during regulation time, and with AC Milan leading 3-0 at HT), well, with these 2 exceptions I remember a time when AC Milan would absolutely destroy teams like Man Utd, RM, Bayern, or Chelsea both home and away. I Mean, for God's Sake they had only VIPs in nearly any key positions (Maldini, Nesta, Cafu, Serginho Jankulovski in the back, Rui Costa, Seedorf, Kaka, Pirlo, Gattuso in the middle, and Shevchenko, Inzaghi in the front). Milan's players have won 2 Balon D'or back then (Sheva 2004, Kaka 2007), and at least 2 of their players (Maldini, Seedord, and/or Pirlo) deserved to win again, but I think FIFA thought - back then - that it is too much for a club to win that many trophies so often, so they didn't award another one. But anyway... that's not the point I was trying to make. I just got a little carried away by nostalgia ... What I really wanted to say was the facepalm that Barca, or RM's official did when he saw who his club got drawn up against in the knockout phase. Needless to say that the Italians advanced to the next round. That good Italian football was back then, that good players AC Milan and Juve had back then. So, please, if you (talking to leadleader now) have only watched football starting with boring guardiola and his boring team of 11 midfielders who were more preoccupied with completing 800 passes per game then attacking the freakin goal, well, if you've only started watching football in 2005 then please, stop commenting about something you don't know. Pirlo is a god (OK, maybe not anymore because he's old now), but when he could play he really played. He wasn't only responsible with only make an assist or keeping the ball, although he could do that easily, too if he wanted. He was much more than xavi will ever be.
And I wonder how you characterize consistency, seeing how you clearly don't seem to grasp the fact that Zidane was in fact an inconsistent club player throughout his entire career. You can disagree all you want, but it is a well established fact that Zidane was never a consistent club player. And it's pretty obvious imo, that within the context of this discussion, Xavi being obviously more consistent than Pirlo ever was *is* in fact a big factor. Again putting words in my mouth. It's all you seem to do. I never stated that Pirlo's prominence is defined by Calciopoli. I stated that when a rather unimpressive Juventus team, such as Juve 2011-12, wins the league, that it pretty much is further evidence of the fact that the Serie A was weakened by the Calciopoli scandal. That being said, Pirlo was already a legend by 2011... And so the Calciopoli certainly doesn't take much, if anything, away from Pirlo, as much as it does take away from the team achievement by Juventus 2011-12. You seem very keen on wanting to create this depiction of a "Pirlo hater" around me, when in fact, at no point have I been anywhere near as disrespectful (towards Pirlo) as your misleading depictions so heavily imply. Yeah, but no. It's easy to say "I told you it was a mistake" after everything happened the way it did. Had Pirlo been a disappointment at Juve, it would've been the other way around; "We wanted to keep Pirlo, but it was clear that he was well past it, so we thought a change of environment might've been a good thing for him, unfortunately, it didn't worked out for him as we hoped it would." Your statement above is entirely based on hindsight, and as such, proves yet again how aggravatingly redundant your style of argument is. Bullshit. Ibrahimovic was still a top player. Pirlo clearly was far from his better days. Past his prime or out of form, however you prefer to put it: Pirlo wasn't delivering for Milan. The change of environment was for the best. This is not the first nor the last time that such a thing happens. Riquelme's career with Barcelona wasn't a success; one year later he was an immediate success with Villarreal (i.e. a team that actually played a Champions League Semi Final thanks to Riquelme; as compared to Juventus 2012-13 and 2013-14 going out early despite having "oh so great" Pilro on it). In Pirlo's case, given his age at the time, the assumption was that he was past his better playing days. And the fact that Euro'12 really was his last hurrah in top form, I'd say that said assumption was largely accurate. Talented players whom are clearly past their primes can still play a very important role for competitive teams. Look at Ryan Giggs at 34+ years of age -- clearly well past his prime, but still very important to Manchester United. Pirlo suddenly wasn't past his prime anymore... instead, Pirlo was still past his prime, but the change of teams obviously was a very positive change. Bullshit. You stated that Pirlo was a success wherever he went, from beginning to end. But Pirlo failed miserably at Inter. Which proves that your claim was/is false. You can't just act as though whatever disproves you must by default be "likewise redundant." It isn't redundant in the slightest. You stated that Pirlo always was a success, but he clearly wasn't a success at Inter, because just like Riquelme at Barcelona, Pirlo was played out of position at Inter. That's relevant given the fact that you casually made a blatantly FALSE claim. Good for you. Your opinion is not a fact though. And it just so happens that a lot of fans agree with my take on this argument -- Xavi was dominant, and certainly considerably more so than Pirlo ever was, and definitely not just another "cog" in the Barca/Spain systems. The fundamental premise of your argument is as disingenuous as your attempts at creating misleading depictions around me. Please try harder.
I think it's fair to say that Pirlo did more long balls than Xavi. But Xavi made more long balls than people remember. When you make 100 passes a game, having a handful of impressive long balls can get lost in the shuffle a bit, I guess. It really wasn't that uncommon for Xavi to make lots of long balls like that. But yes, Pirlo did pass more long balls than Xavi. WhoScored tells us Xavi averaged roughly 7 a game, while Pirlo averaged roughly 10. But my point wasn't that Xavi was exactly the same in every way. Obviously he had a different style. But the general point was that Pirlo got praise for being super mistake-free and impossible to take the ball from in that match against England. And Xavi was like that virtually every match. It's not just about sheer pass completion rates. It's about not getting dispossessed. It's about not sending passes that are weighted too heavy, so that the recipient can't properly control it (which would be a "completed" pass, but basically has the same effect as an incomplete pass). It's about not taking bad first touches. Those other guys you mentioned just weren't quite up to par at all that stuff. Xavi really was the most mistake-free player I've ever seen. I challenge you to find footage of a mistake-ridden match of Xavi's. I've legitimately tried to find one and failed.
Conversely, I've recently watched four games of Pirlo at the 2012-13 Champions League, and Pirlo made quite a few sloppy mistakes (and by "sloppy" I mean exactly that). He was a great classy/elegant midfielder, but as a "mistake-free" type player he was a good distance below Xavi imo.
Pirlo was a player that could transcend the diagrams in a way which Xavi could not do. The clearest example is the WC06 semifinal and that gorgeous slithering move followed by a perfectly weighted pass for Grosso to score, Pirlo combining the beauty of the play with the gravity of the situation as the real legends do.
If Pirlo delivered for Juve after the move away from Milan (and he did), then he most certainly could deliver for Milan. It's just that a player of his quality wants a big salary, something that Milan couldn't afford after Berlusconi got his hands off the club. That's why they sold Kaka, that's why they sold Pirlo, that's why they later on sold Ibra and Thiago Silva. Besides, Pirlo wrote in his autobiography book that he never actually wanted to play for AC Milan (ouch! this hit me right in the feelings, but I overlooked this aspect out of too much respect for the player, and for what he's done for the club), and that he has always wanted to play for.... Real Madrid, but Berlusconi didn't let him go. Again (and for the nth time) please only stick to what you know: Barca, Guardiola, Messi, Xavi, Spain. You only seem to have started watching football in 2005 (or whatever the year was that Barca started playing the boring tiki-taka).
... against cordoba, almeria, elche, granada, rayo, and the alikes. I could win Balon D'or myself against these no-names. Let's see what your "mistake-free" Xavi can do against Milan/Juve, Inter, Roma, Fiorentina and the alikes, that Pirlo had to play against. Besides, you can't possibly compare La Liga with Serie A. It's one thing to make no mistakes against defenseless teams (La Liga), and it's a totally different thing to make no mistakes against defensive teams (Serie A).
Want me to find some vids for you of Pirlo when he was in his prime? Or are you afraid that your argument might fall?
How about being mistake-free in the Euro Finals against Italy? Does that count enough for you? What about being mistake free consistently against Real Madrid, a team that is unambiguously superior to any team Pirlo was playing against in Serie A? Or what about being mistake-free in Champions League finals? I could go on. Xavi's performances against top level teams is actually a giant strength that Pirlo cannot match, not vice versa. Again, I really like Pirlo. In fact, I've made very positive posts about him on this forum. For instance: http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads...alk-into-a-bar.2008532/page-552#post-32369541 I think he's fantastic. I just don't think he's as good as Xavi.
Let's see now. Pirlo just happens to do Xavi's work, AND Busquets' work at the same time. Yep, he's not as good as Xavi. He's better than xavi + busquets altogther. Nice try...
He doesn't do Busquets' work. He has virtually always played alongside a midfield destroyer who did the dirty work. How is Gattuso any different from Busquets in this regard? And even when he hasn't quite had a dedicated midfield destroyer, he has played alongside midfielders who really did the dirty work. For instance, Arturo Vidal is not exactly a DM, but he functioned as a destroyer. Furthermore, he has most often played in a 4-man midfield. This cuts down on the defensive work required of each midfielder, compared to what midfielders in a 4-3-3 must do. Meanwhile, Xavi ran more than anyone else on the pitch most matches. He was incredibly good at pressing, and that is Barcelona's primary defense. You press players so that they make bad decisions and bad passes that are easily snuffed out by the guy behind you (in this case, Busquets). That's the defense, and Xavi was tremendously good at it.
Why is it a "well established" fact that Zidane was an inconsistent club player? Because you say he was? I vehemently disagree and have never heard anyone else say that. One look at the individual honors he has received shows that statement is both wrong. It has about as much support as your statement that Xavi was "obviously" a more consistent player than Pirlo. If it were so obvious, why do a significant majority of the posters who responded to this poll say that Pirlo was the better player? Regarding Calciopoli, your claim was that Pirlo benefitted from the fact that Serie A was weakened. You brought up Calciopoli. I did not put any words in your mouth. I pointed out that it was silly to use this Calciopoli argument given the fact that Pirlo was already a world class player before it happened. That he was a key member for Champions League winning sides and a World Cup champion side before 2006 is proof. You would have us believe that Pirlo was not a great player before 2006, which is clearly false, although you seemed to be backing away from this above (hopefully because you're realizing how foolish a claim this is). I'm not sure where you get the sense that I am trying to depict you as a Pirlo hater. I certainly never said that; nor would I have anything to gain from that. I'm not sure that I can say that you have any bias against Pirlo. However, I do get the sense that you are somewhat of a Xavi fanboy, and that may influence your views regarding the two players. You keep doubling down on the argument that Pirlo was a lesser player or was inconsistent given the fact that Milan let him go. I'm not sure how you can't grasp that this argument fails given the fact that the very people who made that decision conceded it was big mistake. Take from their decision what you will. Their admission of error shows that your argument holds no weight. You keep saying that Pirlo's Euro 2012 was his "last hurrah" as if that is somehow fact. Again, that ignores the evidence. You ignore, most egregiously, that he was named Serie A Player of the Season in the two successive seasons after that tournament occurred; and was a key player for last season's squad that got to the CL Final. I'm not going to belabor your Inter argument. By your logic, if Messi was played out of position as a defender and did not perform, I take it you would assume he was a massive failure. I'm not sure you can take anything from Pirlo's time at a faltering club as evidence of his quality. I now await your response which I will presume will be more of your redundant opinions couched as empirical fact.
Take a look at his DBS Calcio ratings. These amalgamate the ratings of the various different newspapers that give players ratings each match. It started in Italy a while ago, and there's DBS Calcio ratings in Spain from 2004-2005 onwards. So we have ratings for lots of Zidane's career. And here's where he's ranked amongst players who played the same position as him in his league: 1996-1997: 10th 1997-1998: 6th 1998-1999: 14th 1999-2000: 5th 2000-2001: 3rd 2004-2005: 21st 2005-2006: 22nd http://www.dbscalcio.it/schedaCalci...ognomePlayer=Zidane&dataNascitaPlayer=23-06-1 Realize that there's not many players who play the exact same position as you, so being like 10th-15th is really just average (at best) and being ranked worse than 20th is legitimately bad. What can we take from this? Well, we know that Zidane is actually a great player. Yet his ratings don't look that good. He has more years that are legitimately average or bad than years that look good. And even the relatively good years aren't that great. After all, we wouldn't exactly expect a player of Zidane's caliber to be only the 5th best player of his position in his league. The obvious explanation for this is that Zidane is inconsistent. This is a rating system based on giving you a rating each match and then averaging those ratings. If you are a fantastic player but inconsistent (which is what @leadleader is saying about Zidane), you'll have a lot of low ratings alongside a few very high ratings. The end result will be a low average rating. And that is exactly what we see with Zidane.
As a sidenote, compare Pirlo's DBS Calcio ratings amongst players of his position to Xavi's. Note that they don't rate players who haven't played enough matches, so some years will be missing for these guys: Pirlo: 1997-1998: 15th 1999-2000: 9th 2002-2003: 9th 2003-2004: 1st 2004-2005: 7th 2005-2006: 4th 2006-2007: 24th 2007-2008: 5th 2008-2009: 17th 2009-2010: 9th 2011-2012: 1st 2012-2013: 2nd 2013-2014: 3rd 2014-2015: 4th What do we see here? Well, we certainly see evidence that @leadleader is right that Pirlo was inconsistent in his later years with AC Milan. He was a highly talented player who got very mediocre average match ratings. That's highly indicative of inconsistency. Meanwhile, take a look at Xavi's DBS Calcio ratings amongst players of his position: Xavi: 2004-2005: 1st 2006-2007: 2nd 2007-2008: 17th 2008-2009: 2nd 2009-2010: 2nd 2010-2011: 1st 2011-2012: 1st 2012-2013: 1st 2013-2014: 2nd 2014-2015: 5th Aside from one inconsistent season, Xavi was very clearly incredibly good and incredibly consistent. Pirlo's record just does not match that.
They conceded it was a big mistake because Pirlo proceeded to be incredibly good with Juventus afterwards. They surely had thought that his inconsistency in his later Milan years indicated he had permanently declined. Upon finding out that he did, in fact, have a few great years left in him, of course they would concede that letting him go was a big mistake. That doesn't mean he wasn't inconsistent his last few years at Milan.
You have to wonder about these rating where in the years covering when he won the Ballon d'or (1998) they have him ranked as the 6th and 14th best at his position. Hence, my argument about "ratings" not telling you much in football.
He won the Ballon D'or because he scored 2 goals in the World Cup final. The Ballon D'or is always about the World Cup in years where it is held.