PBP: Xavi Vs Pirlo

Discussion in 'Players & Legends' started by the one and only, Jul 13, 2012.

?

So who's better???

  1. Xavi

    18 vote(s)
    34.0%
  2. Pirlo

    31 vote(s)
    58.5%
  3. Both overrated

    1 vote(s)
    1.9%
  4. Iniesta will always steal the spotlight from them

    3 vote(s)
    5.7%
  1. monere

    monere Guest

    why the ******** are you constantly referencing only aged Pirlo ffs? You never mention anything good that Pirlo did, only the bad things which, naturally, started coming as he got old. You only see what you like, you never talk about the no-name xavi of 2000-2008 when nobody would even mention his name with so many greats around (Raul, Del Piero, Nedved, Kaka, Ronaaldinho, Zidane, etc.... xavi? what xavi?) Yeah, it's convenient - as a xavi a$$ licker - to bash Pirlo for a few bad games that he might have had because of his age, while completely ignoring the non-existence of the catalan for 8 years. You're losing credibility (if you ever had one anyway)
     
    Pipiolo repped this.
  2. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Zidane was not a greater player than hazard is today(on form) pre world cup 1998
    Zidane until world cup 98 age 26
    Once ligue 1 best young player 1994
    Once ligue 1 best player 1996
    Once serie a best foreign player (1997)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zinedine_Zidane
    Hazard 24 years old
    twice ligue 1 best young player 08/09 09/10
    Twice ligue 1 best player 10/11 ,11/12
    once premier league best young player 13/14
    Once premier league best player 14/15
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eden_Hazard
    In fact it looks like hazard(not this season) has a case for being definitely superior to Zidane pre world cup 98.
    yet 2 headers(from corners) vs brazil in the eyes of alot of people would make people think that Zidane by 1998 was on a whole different planet of greatness compared to hazard(on form)
    also his 1998 wpoty(overrated) despite being CLEARLY outclassed by fenomeno in the 97/98 season and the 98 worldcup (overall bar the final)
    etc...
     
  3. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Because that type of skill, is precisely the type of skill that an older-more-experienced player should by all means be better at. If Pirlo was so consistently sloppy at those types of passes when he was wiser, older, and more experienced; why should anybody believe that his younger self was somehow considerably (if at all) more reliable or consistent in that area?

    Geez. Take a chill-pill dude,
     
  4. monere

    monere Guest

    because he actually was better while he was younger (duh!). Even at this age Pirlo still has the ball control, vision and precision that made him the best player ever in his position; only his reflexes, and probably shot power got diluted. It's just that you refuse to admit he is better than xavi and I dare say it's because you are a Pirlo and/or Italian football hater, on top of a xavi and/or barca a$$-licker.

    And no, I don't need a chill-pill. I am allergic to bullshit, and that's a normal reaction of me. You should take a anti-hate pill, because for some reason you can't stand how awesome Pirlo is. It just bothers you a lot that he's accomplished things your xavi only dreams of :)

    And speaking of this xavi of yours... I have seen Barca playing without xavi (it didn't happen in many games I admit, but I did watch them play without your god xavi), and I couldn't spot the difference. But then, I also watched Barca play without Messi, and it looked like Cordoba, or Almeria, or... you get the point. A dull team that is. So yeah, Messi is responsible for Barca's success in the last decade (and to some extent guardiola), not Xavi, not Puyol, not any other crappy catalan no-name you want to imply.

    Over and out!
     
    Pipiolo repped this.
  5. Pipiolo

    Pipiolo Member+

    Jul 19, 2008
    Nat'l Team:
    Argentina
    Zidane is clearly better than Hazard, even before the final against Brazil.

    @Estel @ko242 @Puskas 1988
     
    gumbacicc and Puskas 1988 repped this.
  6. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Dear lord. You don't get it, do you?

    Players by and large get better as passers the older they get. You're telling me 25 year old Pirlo was a better and a more reliable passer than 33 year old Pirlo??

    If so, Pirlo very much is the Benjamin Button (in-reverse) of football players.

    Furthermore, considering that you're now clearly arguing the case that 33 year old Pirlo not only was a physically lesser player, but also a lesser passer, than his 25 year old self... How in the hell can you even begin to argue that 33 year old Pirlo was better than 33 year old Xavi??
     
  7. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    About one day ago,

    Today,

    And that explains why Spain at World Cup 2010 and Euro 2012, looked like Barcelona minus Messi: that is, like a great team who could beat just about anybody on any given day. And why Argentina at World Cup 2010 and World Cup 2014 and Copa America 2015, looked like they looked.

    Also, is Monere still just "in trolling mood" or did he just went full retard (i.e. full Pipiolo)??
     
  8. Estel

    Estel Member+

    May 5, 2010
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    #208 Estel, Feb 12, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2016
    Zidane was 3rd in the Balon d'Or an year before winning it.

    He played a huge role as his team reached a 3rd consecutive CL final, thus personally winning the UEFA club best midfielder award and also helped them win a second consecutive Serie A title while featuring in with 5 appearances in the ESM monthly best XI.

    So I think he was kind of a big deal even before the World Cup, attested to by the fact that Cesare Maldini (Italian manager during WC 98) had this to say about him, before France's game vs Italy in WC 98 QF -" I would give up five players to have Zidane in my squad".

    I think the World Cup simply pushed him to full super stardom outside of the Serie A and CL watching crowd, considering its bigger audience.


    I don't think all opinions involving hyperboles qualify for a serious response. Also, most such opinions are due to lack of knowledge, since people are unaware of Zidane's exploits with Juventus and also in France with Bordeaux as well as with the French NT before WC 98.

    Furthermore, I see no point in putting down Hazard who is a great player in his own right. Something that is really important, especially for the current era which has been facing a dearth in footballing talent.



    EDIT:

    On topic - It would have been great to see an aged Xavi make deep runs into international club competitions like the Champions League or even the Europa Cup with a relative non-superteam, like Pirlo did in 2013/14 or 2014/15 (also winning the Serie A four times in a row, with one time remaining unbeaten and another with what was probably a record points total) with a great but in no way shape or form superteam, in Juventus of the early 2010s. That would have really put the matter to bed regarding Xavi's abilites vs Pirlo's abilities.
     
    gumbacicc and Pipiolo repped this.
  9. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    #209 leadleader, Feb 13, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2016
    Zidane ranked in 28th place (tied with 4 other players) for the 1996 Ballon d'Or; and didn't make the shortlist for the FIFA award (1996).

    Zidane ranked in 3rd place for the 1997 Ballon d'Or; and 4th place place in the FIFA award (1997).

    Where exactly do you see a long-established precedent that Zidane was a Top 5 superstar before 1999?? I could easily argue that without WC'98, Zidane's name could've easily stayed in 3rd place. And I can easily argue such a thing, particularly, because Davor Suker finished in 2nd place for the 1998 Ballon d'Or, and any remotely informed fan is well-aware of the fact that R9 was exponentially better than Suker was, in the 1998 calendar year.

    Without the World Cup, what would've been Zidane's argument against R9?

    I find that highly ironic coming from you... I mean, Zidane was just 31 years old in June 2004. And yet, in terms of "deep runs into international club competitions like the Champions League..." Zidane was eliminated in the Quarter Final in 2003-04, eliminated in the Round of 16 in 2004-05, and again eliminated in the Round of 16 in 2005-06. That's not great is it?? And Zidane was 30 years old (relatively "prime" in midfield years) in the 2003-04 season.

    Now let us compare with Xavi... Xavi was 32 years old in January 2012. This means that at 31 years of age (the same age Zidane had when he was eliminated as early as in the Round of 16) Xavi dominated a CL Final in 2011. Followed by a Semi Final in 2012. Followed by another Semi Final in 2013. Followed by a Quarter Final in 2014. Not to mention another CL Final in 2010. And another Semi Final in 2009 (when Xavi was 30 years old; that is, the same age that Zidane had when he couldn't make it past the Quarter Final). Plus also including whatever minutes he played in the 2014-15 Champions League.

    Now let us look at Pirlo... Pirlo was 33 years old in May 2012. In 2008-09 Milan was eliminated in the Round of 16 (Pirlo played every minute of the Round of 16). In 2009-10 Milan was again eliminated in the Round of 16 (7-2 aggregate thrashing vs Man Utd, and Pirlo played every single minute of it; and indeed, Xavi would go on to dominate the Man Utd team that thrashed Pirlo's Milan). In 2010-11 Milan was yet again eliminated in the Round of 16 (Pirlo played not a single minute, though, in the Round of 16; though, it isn't exactly a good thing that with or without Pirlo, Milan wasn't making it past the Round of 16). Juventus 2011-12 played no international club competition. Juventus 2012-13 was eliminated in the Quarter Final (4-0 thrashing; Pirlo played every minute of it). Juventus 2013-14 failed to make it out of the group. Juventus 2014-15 made it all the way to the Final, in what was arguably Pirlo's weakest Champions League campaign/delivery.

    So considering the facts above, I just have to ask: how come Xavi doesn't adequately satisfies said criteria, but Pirlo or Zidane somehow apparently do adequately satisfy said criteria??

    Furthermore: two Euro titles (one as the player of the tournament) added to two dominant CL Finals aren't quite as great as whatever Pirlo did in the Europa Cup 2013-14 (because he really didn't do much, if anything, in the Champions League 2013-14) and whatever Pirlo did in the 2014-15 Champions League (where Pirlo wasn't close to being Juve's 2nd best performer)??

    Champions League 2014-15,

    GROUP STAGE
    Pirlo didn't played,
    Pirlo didn't played,
    Pirlo played until the 57th,
    Pirlo played,
    Pirlo played,
    Pirlo played,
    ROUND OF 16
    Pirlo played until the 37th,
    Pirlo didn't played,
    QUARTER FINAL
    Pirlo played until the 74th,
    Pirlo played,
    SEMI FINAL
    Pirlo played,
    Pirlo played until the 79th,
    FINAL
    Pirlo played,

    Pirlo played basically 57% of the group stage; almost entirely missed the Round of 16; and then was clearly not even Juventus' 2nd best player in *any* of the remaining games, was he? That's not to say that what Pirlo added to his team was completely negligible, but I certainly fail to understand how the 2014-15 Champions League can become a good argument against Xavi.

    Interesting... The current era has been facing a dearth in football talent in your opinion, yet you have absolutely no problem with using the 2013-14 Europa League against Xavi... Sums up how woefully biased/wrong you typically are.
     
    lessthanjake repped this.
  10. leadleader

    leadleader Member+

    Aug 19, 2009
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    #210 leadleader, Feb 13, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2016
    EDIT

    I was arguably fairly generous towards Pirlo. The Man Utd team that thrashed Pirlo's Milan 7 goals to 2, was the 2009-10 edition (and not the 2008-09 edition), that is, the version that no longer contained Cristiano Ronaldo.

    Xavi Hernandez dominated Man Utd in 2008-09 (with Cronaldo) and again in 2010-11 (without Cronaldo). In contrast, Pirlo's Milan was thrashed 7-2 by Man Utd 2009-10 (without Cronaldo). For the Pirlo fans who love bringing up Barcelona's 2012-13 debacle...

    Xavi played the fill 90 minutes in the first leg vs Bayern 2012-13, but Xavi played until the 55th minute in the second leg. In a nutshell: with Xavi on the pitch, the aggregate score was a 5-0 thrashing (Milan ended up scoring another 2 goals in the 35+ minutes that Xavi was out of it).

    As compared to Pirlo playing every minute of every leg vs Man Utd 2009-10: the aggregate score was a 7-2 thrashing, and Man Utd 2009-10 was a weakened version of the team that Xavi Hernandez had bossed at the CL Final in 2009. And the fact that Xavi again bossed Man Utd at the CL Final in 2011, doesn't help Pirlo's case in the slightest.

    Overall: both players suffered their heavy defeats... The difference is that Pirlo was 30 years old when he suffered his vs a Man Utd team that Xavi dominated in 2009 and 2011. Whereas Xavi was 33 years old when he suffered his vs a Bayern Munich team that also steamrolled Pirlo's Juve. It's pretty self-explanatory which of the two "heavy defeats" is MUCH WORSE given the particular conditions of this debate.

    EDIT

    With Pirlo on the pitch: 4-0 aggregate defeat vs Bayern Munich 2012-13 (and Pirlo literally assisted Bayern's first goal; and Juve had Chiellini as a central defender, instead of Shakira-land-Pique).

    With Xavi on the pitch: 5-0 aggregate defeat vs Bayern Munich 2012-13 (and this was with Pique in Shakira-land).

    Pirlo directly-assisted Bayern Munich's first goal, it was very much an "auto-assist" by Pirlo. And so I'd argue that that somewhat cancels-out whatever slight difference the 5-0 defeat had over the 4-0 defeat. Xavi didn't assisted any of Bayern's goal. Pirlo did assisted the first goal by Bayern.

    Can somebody explain to me how Pirlo 2012-13 (against Bayern) was so much better than Xavi 2012-13 was (against Bayern)??

    EDIT

    Now let us compare with Xavi... Xavi was 32 years old in January 2012. This means that at 31 years of age (the same age Zidane had when he was eliminated as early as in the Round of 16) Xavi dominated a CL Final in 2011. Followed by a Semi Final in 2012. Followed by another Semi Final in 2013. Followed by a Quarter Final in 2014. Not to mention another CL Final in 2009 (6 months into 2009). And another Semi Final in 2010 (when Xavi was 30 years old; that is, the same age that Zidane had when he couldn't make it past the Quarter Final). Plus also including whatever minutes he played in the 2014-15 Champions League.
     
  11. lessthanjake

    lessthanjake Member+

    May 9, 2015
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Hard to really say. He had been on the Ballon D'or podium the year before and was considered the star player of a club that had made two consecutive CL finals, though. And, in the WC, he was playing for the host team, whose best players always get more hyped in the lead up than they otherwise would (for instance, Neymar certainly got more hype going into WC 2014 than he otherwise would have IMO). And I think Zidane was already a marketing force.

    Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "established," because he hadn't been a star for long at that point. But he was considered enough of a star to be thought of as clearly France's best player. And my point was that, when there's a star who is thought of as a team's best player, he will get accolades if they win because people just assume it was because of him. And when he actually turns in a good performance in the final and scores two goals, then that's pretty much set in stone. Especially when it comes to journalists voting, many of whom very likely didn't watch every match but certainly watched the finals.
     
    leadleader repped this.
  12. lessthanjake

    lessthanjake Member+

    May 9, 2015
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Playing your way out of trouble in a risky way as a CM is almost never good. You really don't want to lose the ball in the position CM's have it in, even if you're not playing tiki-taka. So there'd better be a huge amount of benefit to that riskier approach to playing out of trouble, otherwise I think it's just a negative. And I don't really see some huge added benefit from the "riskier approach" to playing out of trouble of those guys you mentioned. I just see players who lose the ball in bad spots more.

    And honestly, I'm not sure it's a style thing as much as a deficiency of concentration, anticipation, and technical ability compared to Xavi. Xavi always seemed to know where pressure was coming from and be able to either take a touch away from the pressure send a perfect one-touch pass away if the pressure couldn't be evaded. I think other CM's would like to be able to do that. But they don't always have the concentration and anticipation to know at all times when and where pressure will come from. And even if they do, they don't always have the technical ability to make difficult one-touch passes (which can sometimes involve one-touch passing the ball when it has bounced in the air) or to take a great touch away from the pressing defender. The result is that they get in tougher situations. That may look like they are just taking a riskier approach, but I think, more than anything, it's more just not having Xavi's supernatural ability in this regard.

    Riskier passing is a different issue. I don't so much fault a player for trying to go for longer passes and having a lower pass completion rate than Xavi. So when I talk about mistakes, I'm more talking about losing possession in bad spots, missing easy passes, and weighting the ball too hard for teammates to control on simple passes.
     
  13. lessthanjake

    lessthanjake Member+

    May 9, 2015
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Then you haven't watched this era's Barca enough. The midfield was MUCH calmer with Xavi. A good case study in that was the 2014-2015 season, in which Xavi was largely used as a sub. He'd sub in in matches where Barcelona's midfield was having problems, and suddenly the midfield would start dominating and having no problem keeping possession.
     
    leadleader repped this.
  14. Edhardy

    Edhardy Member+

    Sep 4, 2013
    Nairobi, Kenya
    Club:
    Juventus FC
    I know what you mean, but Xavi is the kind of player that stylistically never seems to have a bad game, take that Bayern game and the 3-1 loss to Ancelotti's Madrid, we know Barca was overrun in midfield but Xavi did what he usually does, he circulated the ball, was rarely dispossessed and Barcelona still had better possession stats. His style of play progressively became super safe and possibly IMO to Barca's detriment. Coincidentally, Iniesta caught slack for both performances.

    That was when Milan had Leonardo as manager and played a 4-2-fantasy? Suicide tactics for any midfielder let alone a slow, not so energetic one like Pirlo.
     
    ko242 and gumbacicc repped this.
  15. lessthanjake

    lessthanjake Member+

    May 9, 2015
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    #215 lessthanjake, Feb 13, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2016
    Barcelona didn't get crushed because Xavi played it safe. They got crushed because they were destroyed on the counterattack and exposed in the air. Playing it not as safe surely would've made them even more vulnerable to counterattacks, don't you think? Meanwhile, Xavi's not exactly a guy you'd expect to defend against headers, and he wasn't one of the people beaten to a header when Bayern scored anyways (basically, Dani Alves got exposed). So I wouldn't say he was actually at fault for how that tie went.

    The only critique of Xavi is that, once you go behind by a bunch, perhaps you should play it "less safe." That's easy to say in retrospect. But Barcelona scored a ton with that playing-it-safe style. This is a team that scored over 3 goals a match in La Liga that season playing like that (Barcelona's most of this era). And playing it less safe would have opened them up to the counterattacks that were killing them in the first place. I think, at the time, it's perfectly reasonable to think that your normal game is definitely capable of getting a bunch of goals and that getting more desperate than that would probably just result in letting up more goals, which is precisely what you couldn't do. So I don't think playing Barcelona's normal game was necessarily the wrong move (in fact they successfully did exactly that after going behind multiple goals to AC Milan earlier that season). Obviously it didn't work out against Bayern, but things typically don't work out when you quickly go behind by a bunch of goals.
     
  16. monere

    monere Guest

    I haven't indeed, and I'm glad I didn't (when I want to be entertained I watch UCL, EPL, and Bundesliga, on the other side, when I wanna fall asleep I usually watch La Liga). As for the calming midfield I can only say 2 things: 1) I never said xavi is not good, or useful for barca's game (he really is/was/whatever), I only said that he's not better than pirlo (he is'nt and will never be, case closed), and...2) midfield is always calm against cordoba, hercules, almeria, elche, rayo, and the alikes. You would be totally dumb to be named barcelona and have troubles with these filler clubs.

    I watched some 2-3 years ago (the year that osasuna relegated to segunda division) the last 5-6 games of the clubs fighting for survival and what I saw in those games has only reinforced my opinion that La Liga is the shittiest of the biggest European leagues. Take Real and Barca out of it and La Liga would tie Ligue 1 in terms of boredom.

    Anyways, back to the topic... as I was saying, I have watched the last 5-6 games of the teams fighting to remain in Primera Division some 2-3 years ago (one of those clubs was Osasuna Pamplona, a somehow traditional club and a regular of PD), mainly because I wanted to see with my own eyes how it's possible in an allegedly competitive and awesome (awesome my arse) league that traditional team fight for survival, and secondly, because I am a keen online better and during that time I constantly bet on Osasuna because I knew they were a pedigree club and I just found it hard for them to relegate. Now, while I don't remember the clubs they faced during those trying times (they relegated at the end of that season by the way), and while I don't remember the results, I do remember having getting furious during Osasuna's games (and the other team that I would watch closely, sorry don't remember who they were, probably rayo, or zaragoza, or something like that) when they had 2-3 games at home with other clubs fighting for survival, and when osasuna would have saved themselves with at least 6 points in those 3 home games. Guess what! They didn't give a shit. At 0-0 they wouldn't attack, they wouldn't even bother to tackle, they would literally watch the ball. The opposition took the lead. "Cool" I said to myself, now the great osasuna will have to start playing cause at this score they are relegated. What did osasuna do? Yeah, you've guessed it: they continued to sleep on the pitch. Osasuna's players didn't give a damn about that score, or about their situation, and what really infuriated me even more is that the fans were calm and cheerful as well. They wouldn't boo the opponents, they wouldn't boo their own players for their situation, they would simply cheer and sing on the road to perdition. And the reason this really is important is because their salvation depended entirely on them. 2 or 3 games of their last 5 were being played against other clubs that were fighting for surival, and while osasuna were the clear favorites, they calmly didn't give a rat's ass about their situation. It's not like they couldn't. They simply didn't want to. Get those games if you can find them and watch them and see how complacent Osasuna has been in those games.

    Based on this fact (in conjunction with other bull$hit I have seen) I concluded that La Liga is a pos of a league, if not totally corrupt and manipulated by the betting mafia. Basically, in Spain nobody is allowed to trouble Barca and RM.

    Also, during that same very time I have watched Bundesliga games. Comparable to La Liga in Bundesliga every club that I watched (especially those fighting for survival) would die on the pitch for 1 single point. I have seen clubs fighting for survival going to Allianz Arena and making the life a living hell for Bayern Munchen, on their own ground. The fact that those clubs (Augsburg if I'm not wrong, but it doesn't matter, because in Bundesliga every club fighting for survival really fights for it) couldn't get away with points from Allianz Arena (or other tough away games) is another story, and something that didn't depend entirely on them (no matter how good you are in Bundesliga you don't just go to Allianz Arena and expect to come home with points). But the fact that in Bundesliga (probably in other leagues as well) the clubs fight for survival really fight for those points, while in La Liga most clubs don't give a $hit remains.

    So don't give me crap excuses with how amazing xavi is in a league where only 2 teams are allowed to be good (and every now and then a third one creates some competition to throw dust in the eyes of the naive) cause I'm not buying it. Xavi is a good player indeed, but he's only good in that toxic environment called La Liga.
     
  17. Puskas 1988

    Puskas 1988 Member

    Dec 9, 2014
    Club:
    Juventus FC
    Definitely. And he was seen as a greater talent.
     
    Pipiolo repped this.
  18. monere

    monere Guest

    I'm telling you that a 18-40 year old Pirlo has the same pass accuracy, ever since he played for Brescia, and later on for Inter, Milan, and Juve. Pass accuracy doesn't get lost with aging. Only his reflexes had to suffer due to his age, and like I said shot power as well. I have seen this in the last 3-4 years when his shots didn't have the same strength and could be easily blocked by goalies.

    But other than that he's the same ********ing amazing player. Talent doesn't disappear with age. Only reflexes. But... you will still only believe what you want..
     
    Pipiolo repped this.
  19. monere

    monere Guest

    Uhm... what??
     
  20. monere

    monere Guest

    Spain's success (both at club level and national level) coincided with Italian football's downfall. Not just a coincidence, but... let's keep it like that :)
     
  21. monere

    monere Guest

    I am still in trolling mood, yes :D ... But all the replies I gave are honest
     
    LegendarySunrise repped this.
  22. LegendarySunrise

    Jan 26, 2016
    New York
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    #222 LegendarySunrise, Feb 13, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2016
    Alonso? Lmao! Do you even understand the basics of football? Pirlo and Alonso are totally different players, Pirlo is an attacking classic No.10 put in the DM position, Alonso is a pure DM. Alonso is better defensively but he is/was no where near the technical ability of Pirlo. Pirlo has many technical attributes that Alonso will NEVER be capable of.

    Xavi superior to Zidane? Wowwww, this thread is getting outrageous! It is not even close, Xavi was one of the best CMs no doubt, but Zidane is at least a level higher. Given Xavi's ability, there is no way he can pull a performance against Spain or 3R's Brazil like Zidane(even at the age 34) has had. Even against a much weaker Brazil in confer 2013 led by Neymar when surrounded by your world class teammates Alonso, Busquets, Iniesta, Fabregas, Silva, Torres, Xavi couldn't control the game.
     
    gumbacicc repped this.
  23. LegendarySunrise

    Jan 26, 2016
    New York
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    Xavi and Iniesta are brilliant technically, but let us not overrate their abilities. There is no way Xavi, Iniesta, Busquests, Alonso, Fabregas, Silva would have been as dominant when facing the following:

    1. Prime Zidane+Vieira+Makelele
    2. Prime Pirlo+Totti+Gattuso+Camorensi
     
  24. LegendarySunrise

    Jan 26, 2016
    New York
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    #224 LegendarySunrise, Feb 13, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2016
    So what? Xavi was in prime Barcelona. La Liga was/has been the focal point of the world in recent years, whereas Serie A was no longer the league it was before. Xavi will always get more media attention than Pirlo, no doubt or surprise about that.
    Dare I say that in 2013, Ribery should have won the golden ball. But just because he was in Bundesliga, there was no way he could have won the golden ball from Messi and CR.
    In 2010, if you have watched the football, you know how brilliant Sneijder was. But because he was in Serie A, he didn't even made into Top 3 in the Golden ball ranking. In recent years, Golden ball has been really a commercial prize, who ever gets the media attention, who will rank higher than others in the vote.
    However, going back to the past, do you know why midfielders like Zidane and Matthaus could win the Golden ball while Xavi can't. It is because, their individual abilities were so strong that can not only allow them to dictate the game but they can individually DECIDE the game themselves. Their individual abilities were strong to a point that made them much less reliant on the system created for them and the teammates surrounding them.
     
    Pipiolo and Estel repped this.
  25. LegendarySunrise

    Jan 26, 2016
    New York
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany

    Pirlo at his prime in 2006 World Cup or 2003-07 has had countless this level of performance, may not be possession wise but influence wise. While Xavi is a brilliant player, if you are surrounded by the likes of Messi, Iniesta , Busquests, Fabregas, Silva, villa, Alonso, Torres, you are supposed to perform at this level or otherwise you don't deserve to be in the team.
     
    gumbacicc repped this.

Share This Page