Topic: Lionel Messi

[Iska]

I didn’t realise Thuram also left Juventus in 2006, for Barcelona - which means him, Ronaldinho, Messi, Xavi and Iniesta were all there at the same time:

October 22, 2006: Real Madrid 2-0 Barcelona
Those five started for Barcelona, Cannavaro started for Madrid.  Raul and van Nistelrooy scored.  The crucial assist for the opener came from Sergio Ramos, naturally.

[Xabi Gerrard]

I didn’t realise Thuram also left Juventus in 2006, for Barcelona - which means him, Ronaldinho, Messi, Xavi and Iniesta were all there at the same time:

October 22, 2006: Real Madrid 2-0 Barcelona
Those five started for Barcelona, Cannavaro started for Madrid.  Raul and van Nistelrooy scored.  The crucial assist for the opener came from Sergio Ramos, naturally.

Back when we used to beat those two little Spanish shits for fun. Back when, despite 5 of Jookie's boys playing, our boy was still the best player on the pitch. I miss those days

[Jookie]

Back when we used to beat those two little Spanish shits for fun. Back when, despite 5 of Jookie's boys playing, our boy was still the best player on the pitch. I miss those days

To be honest, I was very close to putting Gerrard on the subs bench of my all time team. John Barnes too. The John Barnes between 1987-1990 was up there with the best players in the World. He was definitely the best player not playing in Serie A during that period. Probably only some of the Marseille players at the time (Papin, Waddle etc..) and maybe Augenthaler get close as players who excelled but didn't play in Serie A during that late 80's period.

For as good a teams and players I've seen at Liverpool (and I'd have Gerrard, Barnes and Suarez as the best 3 individual players), none of them come close to Messi, Maradona and C.Ronaldo. That's not a criticism. It's just to highlight how good those 3 players are. The fact we have 2 of the very best players playing at the same time is relatively unique. Beyond these 2 players I think we are looking at a period where there may not be an best player(s) in the World. I think we'll go back the situation in the late 90's and up to the mid 00's where there are a number of very good players who share around the individual accolades such as the Ballon d'Or.

[LallanaInPyjamas]

Iniesta is the single most overrated footballer of all time.

Absolutely crazy talk, this.

Especially in the context of using scoring goals as a measurement to determine who is better out of Zidane and Iniesta.

You know Zizou hit double figures once in the league in his entire career, right? And that was in 1993 with Bordeaux. Hardly the elite of European football. He ended up with about twice as many goals as Iniesta has now, helped by penalties no doubt, but he was generally 1 in 6.

Neither were/are goalscorers. They're controllers, aided by their brilliant touch, vision and passing abilities. And yet the proportion of their goals scored on the big occasion is testament to the sheer quality of both players. It's similar to De Bruyne and Silva at City right now; neither will end up in double figures in the league but De Bruyne already has a winner against Chelsea and an opener against Arsenal to his name. I'd bet good money on Silva bagging a big goal or two before the end of the season. They control most games effortlessly and, when their side needs them most, the cream generally rises to the top. See also: that Gerrard fella.

FWIW I'd completely agree that Iniesta was more consistent than Zidane, both through a season and during 90 minutes of football, and if I was picking a side to win me a league title I'd have him all day. Just think he's more of a team player.

[Phil M]

Absolutely crazy talk, this.

You did see the username who posted that right?

[Anywhichwayicant]

Absolutely crazy talk, this.

Especially in the context of using scoring goals as a measurement to determine who is better out of Zidane and Iniesta.

You know Zizou hit double figures once in the league in his entire career, right? And that was in 1993 with Bordeaux. Hardly the elite of European football. He ended up with about twice as many goals as Iniesta has now, helped by penalties no doubt, but he was generally 1 in 6.

Neither were/are goalscorers. They're controllers, aided by their brilliant touch, vision and passing abilities. And yet the proportion of their goals scored on the big occasion is testament to the sheer quality of both players. It's similar to De Bruyne and Silva at City right now; neither will end up in double figures in the league but De Bruyne already has a winner against Chelsea and an opener against Arsenal to his name. I'd bet good money on Silva bagging a big goal or two before the end of the season. They control most games effortlessly and, when their side needs them most, the cream generally rises to the top. See also: that Gerrard fella.

FWIW I'd completely agree that Iniesta was more consistent than Zidane, both through a season and during 90 minutes of football, and if I was picking a side to win me a league title I'd have him all day. Just think he's more of a team player.

Iniesta is 33 and hasn't had a great season in years. For a player that never relied on pace, hasn't had any catastrophic injuries, that's not very good.

Zidane carried a dismal French team to a World Cup final and would probably have won it only for he nutted that wanker in the chest. He was the star of the tournament.

He won the World Cup for them in 98. He won the Champions League for Madrid in 2002.

He was the ultimate big game player.

Iniesta is definitely more of a team player, because he relies on his teammates to win things. Look at Barcelona over the years without Messi, they were mere mortals.

[Xabi Gerrard]

Look at Barcelona over the years without Messi, they were mere mortals.

1 World Cup & 2 European Championships is pretty good going for mere mortals.

[LallanaInPyjamas]

Iniesta is 33 and hasn't had a great season in years. For a player that never relied on pace, hasn't had any catastrophic injuries, that's not very good.

Zidane carried a dismal French team to a World Cup final and would probably have won it only for he nutted that wanker in the chest. He was the star of the tournament.

He won the World Cup for them in 98. He won the Champions League for Madrid in 2002.

He was the ultimate big game player.

Iniesta is definitely more of a team player, because he relies on his teammates to win things. Look at Barcelona over the years without Messi, they were mere mortals.

In the same way Iniesta had his own Gerrard/Olympiakos moment for Barca against Chelsea in the CL semi-final of 2009, won the World Cup for Spain in 2010, and was then the stand-out man of the match in the Euro 2012 final?

I genuinely think you must have been watching a different player to the rest of us all these years.

The Zidane/1998 thing is a massive myth as well btw. He got sent off in the second group game and was criticised for going missing by the French media. He then scored two headers and history was rewritten.

[Max_powers]

Iniesta is 33 and hasn't had a great season in years. For a player that never relied on pace, hasn't had any catastrophic injuries, that's not very good.

Zidane carried a dismal French team to a World Cup final and would probably have won it only for he nutted that wanker in the chest. He was the star of the tournament.

He won the World Cup for them in 98. He won the Champions League for Madrid in 2002.

He was the ultimate big game player.

Iniesta is definitely more of a team player, because he relies on his teammates to win things. Look at Barcelona over the years without Messi, they were mere mortals.

I know that you are trolling but just read through that French squad. They had Desailly, Thuram, Lizarazu in defense, Deschamps, Petit, Djorkaeff, Viera in midfield. Hardly dismal. They just lacked a great striker.

[deFacto please, you bastards]

Dismal French team? Hahhahaha a come on

[deFacto please, you bastards]

I know that you are trolling but just read through that French squad. They had Desailly, Thuram, Lizarazu in defense, Deschamps, Petit, Djorkaeff, Viera in midfield. Hardly dismal. They just lacked a great striker.

Thierry Henry wasn't a great striker? Trezeguet wasn't a good striker?

[Xabi Gerrard]

I know that you are trolling but just read through that French squad. They had Desailly, Thuram, Lizarazu in defense, Deschamps, Petit, Djorkaeff, Viera in midfield. Hardly dismal. They just lacked a great striker.

The fool's talking about the 2006 WC squad in the bit you've quoted, not the 1998 squad which is who you've listed. 2006 squad wasn't exactly shit but it was a lot worse than the 98 squad and it was a big achievement by ZZ to drag them to that final.

Thierry Henry wasn't a great striker? Trezeguet wasn't a good striker?

Both were fringe members of the squad in 98 and neither were 'great' back then. Henry only became great once Wenger got hold of him. France's main strikers in 98 were Guivarch and Duggary.

[Max_powers]

Thierry Henry wasn't a great striker? Trezeguet wasn't a good striker?

Both were very good strikers but I won't say they were great at that point in time. In that tournament certainly compared to Brazil they lacked in this department.

[J_Kopite]

Despite his two final goals, it was really the defence that won France that World Cup, not Zidane (Euro 2000 however...).

[deFacto please, you bastards]

The fool's talking about the 2006 WC squad in the bit you've quoted, not the 1998 squad which is who you've listed. 2006 squad wasn't exactly shit but it was a lot worse than the 98 squad and it was a big achievement by ZZ to drag them to that final.

Both were fringe members of the squad in 98 and neither were 'great' back then. Henry only became great once Wenger got hold of him. France's main strikers in 98 were Guivarch and Duggary.

I was talking about 2006 not 98. But for all of Zidane's heroics, they were fortunate as fuck against Croatia in the semi-final, the two goals Thuram scored out of all people.

[Xabi Gerrard]

I was talking about 2006 not 98. But for all of Zidane's heroics, they were fortunate as fuck against Croatia in the semi-final, the two goals Thuram scored out of all people.

Ah Ok, fair enough. The post you were replying to though was about the 98 squad. By the by I always found Henry to be really disappointing in the big international tournaments and wouldn't say he was ever a great international striker, even at his peak. I'd love watching him destroy Charlton or Barnsley, hype him up to non-football fans during the world cup and, without fail, he'd be anonymous.

Re: the 1998 semi, yeah that game by Thuram really was one of the great all time footballing performances. I remember gushing about it on here years ago. Still gives me goose pimples nearly 20 years later.

[Anywhichwayicant]

I know that you are trolling but just read through that French squad. They had Desailly, Thuram, Lizarazu in defense, Deschamps, Petit, Djorkaeff, Viera in midfield. Hardly dismal. They just lacked a great striker.

I'm talking about 2006.

[deFacto please, you bastards]

Ah Ok, fair enough. The post you were replying to though was about the 98 squad. By the by I always found Henry to be really disappointing in the big international tournaments and wouldn't say he was ever a great international striker, even at his peak. I'd love watching him destroy Charlton or Barnsley, hype him up to non-football fans during the world cup and, without fail, he'd be anonymous.

Re: the 1998 semi, yeah that game by Thuram really was one of the great all time footballing performances. I remember gushing about it on here years ago. Still gives me goose pimples nearly 20 years later.

Thuram crushed my heart then, Croatia was doing the unthinkable, to give context, it was only 3 years before that there was a civil war in the Balkans, and Croatia were on the verge of being in a World Cup final. I lived in Bosnia, but I had family in croatia, and wanted them to do well regardless, it was guttening.

[Xxavi]

Zidane was great, and his international tournament heights are arguably higher than that of Iniesta. However, in terms of what has been won, Iniesta edges it (2 EC and 1 WC).

Crucially though, if you look at their club careers, Zidane was capable of heights that eclipse that of Iniesta, but also lows far below Iniesta's. That original Galactico's team was littered with stars but often times, Zidane and co were underwhelming. They had some embarrassing European and domestic defeats. All in all, they didn't win a lot. Zidane didn't play with nobodies either, he had Raul, Ronaldo, Beckham, Figo etc. as his teammates.

Put it this way, that kind of consistency is criticized these days. Somebody like Hazard has unplayable games and games where he is utterly invisible. Back in those days, this was a lot more regular.

[El Lobo]

If Iniesta had been around at his best when Zidane was at his best, they might be very close. But then Iniesta probably wouldn't be seen as that level anyway as he wouldn't have had Messi finishing what he created.....

I'd still go Iniesta though

[BazC]

He didn’t have Messi when he won all those international trophies to be fair.

[Iska]

Crucially though, if you look at their club careers, Zidane was capable of heights that eclipse that of Iniesta, but also lows far below Iniesta's.

When it’s all over though, you only remember the highs.  Nobody would have Lampard on a list like this.  Zidane’s highs are up there with anyone’s.

[Anywhichwayicant]

When it’s all over though, you only remember the highs.  Nobody would have Lampard on a list like this.  Zidane’s highs are up there with anyone’s.

Exactly.

[Xabi Gerrard]

When it’s all over though, you only remember the highs.  Nobody would have Lampard on a list like this.  Zidane’s highs are up there with anyone’s.

Yeah exactly. Apart from his CL final goal, captaining his club to 2 European trophies, a screamer to win an FA Cup final, scoring the goals that secured his team's first league title in 50 years and three times being named his club's player of the year in seasons they won the league. But apart from that, Fat Frank's a great example of a player who didn't have massive footballing highs.

[RedSince86]

Zidane>Iniesta.

On the account i enjoyed watching Zidane more and he was so much more a clutch player in more big games and tournaments.

France 98 final.
Euro 2000.
Champions league final 2002.
2006 world cup.

Where does the great Michael Laudrup come in the argument for the better barca playmaker between him and Iniesta,i know Iniesta copies that trick of Laudrup's hallmark skill where he used to drag the ball onto the other foot when beating a player.

Laudrup>Iniesta for me.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/ftu3OFoSAVs" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/ftu3OFoSAVs</a>

[Xxavi]

When it’s all over though, you only remember the highs.  Nobody would have Lampard on a list like this.  Zidane’s highs are up there with anyone’s.

I agree, and I don't mind people saying Zidane is better than Iniesta if they just talk about peak performances. But it all depends on criteria.

This way, you can come to some skewed understanding of who is "better" in such discussions. Zidane had legendary moments (in CL vs Bayern, in WC98, in WC2006 etc.), but there were other legendary players in that position like Rivaldo. Was Rivaldo a worse player than Zidane? They had roughly similar roles. The debate gets extremely subjective.

Regarding Lampard, he did well what he was good at, shooting from distance (deflected or not). And he had great numbers, he'd be a statisticians dream. However, football, especially in midfield, is much more than that. The other day Lineker, Shearer, Wright and Murphy were selecting the best team of the PL era. It should be on youtube if you want to watch. And these guys still came up with Lampard-Gerrard midfield, with a general idea that a different coach/manager would do better than what they have actually shown when they played together for England NT. That's probably correct except many truly great managers wouldn't actually play these 2 together (not as two CMs anyway). Players like Zidane, Iniesta and Xavi would have elevated and become focal points of their teams, would have been conductors. The limitations of Lampard has been all clear to see for England, that without a platform, he looks like an individual player trying to do it by himself. Other great players made their teams tick.

Interestingly, I thought I'd come up with 3 different teams that would perhaps beat the selection of those pundits. England would have performed far better with Alonso, Cesc Fabregas, Essien, Makelele etc., yet in England, nobody (among the pundits) would consider these to be better than Lampard. Says it all really.

[Xabi Gerrard]

Interestingly, I thought I'd come up with 3 different teams that would perhaps beat the selection of those pundits. England would have performed far better with Alonso, Cesc Fabregas, Essien, Makelele etc., yet in England, nobody (among the pundits) would consider these to be better than Lampard. Says it all really.

Mate, even Carrick or Hargreaves plus one of Gerrard or Lampard would have been better than Gerrard + Lampard, the team would have had much better balance. I'm surprised those BBC pundits still say Gerrard & Lampard could have worked, it seems a pretty well established fact these days that they were too similar to work effectively together. I'd put their selection down to ex-footballer pundits cozying up to their mates rather than properly criticising them - happens all the time in football coverage over here unfortunately

[Xxavi]

Mate, even Carrick or Hargreaves plus one of Gerrard or Lampard would have been better than Gerrard + Lampard, the team would have had much better balance. I'm surprised those BBC pundits still say Gerrard & Lampard could have worked, it seems a pretty well established fact these days that they were too similar to work effectively together. I'd put their selection down to ex-footballer pundits cozying up to their mates rather than properly criticising them - happens all the time in football coverage over here unfortunately

Both Lampard and Gerrard were "free spirits". And I agree, Carrick should have been played instead of one of them.

Had Lampard been a bench player for England NT, he wouldn't be rated nearly as high. Not that he has done remarkable things for England, but at the moment, the coaches are blamed for it. The coaches deserve some blame for starting him actually.

Gerrard is a better version of Lampard. I would have gone with Carrick-Scholes-Gerrard in midfield. Even Carrick-Gerrard is a bit light in midfield as Gerrard roams a lot leaving behind one midfielder.

[Coolie High]

I agree, and I don't mind people saying Zidane is better than Iniesta if they just talk about peak performances. But it all depends on criteria.

This way, you can come to some skewed understanding of who is "better" in such discussions. Zidane had legendary moments (in CL vs Bayern, in WC98, in WC2006 etc.), but there were other legendary players in that position like Rivaldo. Was Rivaldo a worse player than Zidane? They had roughly similar roles. The debate gets extremely subjective.

Regarding Lampard, he did well what he was good at, shooting from distance (deflected or not). And he had great numbers, he'd be a statisticians dream. However, football, especially in midfield, is much more than that. The other day Lineker, Shearer, Wright and Murphy were selecting the best team of the PL era. It should be on youtube if you want to watch. And these guys still came up with Lampard-Gerrard midfield, with a general idea that a different coach/manager would do better than what they have actually shown when they played together for England NT. That's probably correct except many truly great managers wouldn't actually play these 2 together (not as two CMs anyway). Players like Zidane, Iniesta and Xavi would have elevated and become focal points of their teams, would have been conductors. The limitations of Lampard has been all clear to see for England, that without a platform, he looks like an individual player trying to do it by himself. Other great players made their teams tick.

Interestingly, I thought I'd come up with 3 different teams that would perhaps beat the selection of those pundits. England would have performed far better with Alonso, Cesc Fabregas, Essien, Makelele etc., yet in England, nobody (among the pundits) would consider these to be better than Lampard. Says it all really.

What does it say, we don't have good pundits?

[Shaved Crossbar]

flawed logic anyway, just because they aren't a good fit together doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't the 2 best PL midfielders (I disagree, but in this type of dream team, player fit doesn't matter at all)

[Xxavi]

flawed logic anyway, just because they aren't a good fit together doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't the 2 best PL midfielders (I disagree, but in this type of dream team, player fit doesn't matter at all)

But that's the issue, if they aren't good fit, it probably means there are serious limitations to their games.

And Lampard did  have serious limitations.

[markmywords]

This would have meant dropping Owen and lampard

Nice lads popular with fans and players, not a very sven like move.

In 2004, may have meant dropping Rooney as well

[Max_powers]

This is the perfect place to discuss all of this btw. We all knew already that Micheal Carrick is really the Lionel Messi of English Midfielders.   

[Xabi Gerrard]

This is the perfect place to discuss all of this btw. We all knew already that Micheal Carrick is really the Lionel Messi of English Midfielders.   

Makes you realise how lucky we were to twice play Man Utd's famous 'Super Sixers' last season - The White Pele, The English Messi, Jones is The New Duncan Edwards, Martial's The New Henry, all in one team. 

[TepidT2O]

Still not signed his contract has he???

[SMASHerano]

Argentina are a mess without him. I wonder how far he'll manage to take them in the next World Cup. Not too far I reckon

[Shaved Crossbar]

But that's the issue, if they aren't good fit, it probably means there are serious limitations to their games.

And Lampard did  have serious limitations.

Not really... in a similar PL team you could put in, say, Makelele and Essien - attacking limitations, or Scholes and Alonso - work rate limitations, just two other examples of overlapping skillsets like Stevie and Fat Frank. The 'best PL XI' is designed around finding 11 players that excelled most from a particular position. If the position is CM then you find the two best CMs, not the best hypothetical pairing of CMs. It's just the flawed, non-realistic nature of a dream XI that has 2 CMs and not AM/DM.

[Lastrador]

But that's the issue, if they aren't good fit, it probably means there are serious limitations to their games.

And Lampard did  have serious limitations.

What were those? He was an incredible complete player. He wasn't a physical freak as Gerrard but his stamina and durability were second to none, coupled with a great tactical nous. His passing game and set pieces were very good, not elite but certainly better than most of his peers. His finishing and shooting in general were elite, the numbers speak for themselves. His touch and dribbling weren't world class, but he was very efficient on possession. I can't think of any "serious limitations" as you put it, maybe not being spanish.

[Xxavi]

What were those? He was an incredible complete player. He wasn't a physical freak as Gerrard but his stamina and durability were second to none, coupled with a great tactical nous. His passing game and set pieces were very good, not elite but certainly better than most of his peers. His finishing and shooting in general were elite, the numbers speak for themselves. His touch and dribbling weren't world class, but he was very efficient on possession. I can't think of any "serious limitations" as you put it, maybe not being spanish.

For one, couldn’t run a game to save his life. And yes, that’s the most important thing for a midfielder. Especially CM.

[Xxavi]

Tell you what, I’d take all of these above Lampard in their respective peaks:
Essien
Alonso
Fabregas
Scholes
Gerrard
Toure
Keane
Vieira
Modric
May have forgotten others