2 pictures to sum up Iniesta

gosplan

Zonal Marking had a comment the other day the Iniesta is the best big tournament player since Zidane.

I think that's fair to say.

LuckyLloyd

gosplan wrote: »

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking him here. On his day, Keane would be a match for anyone.

I'm just wondering aloud how many players exist like Keane that we mightn't rate as highly because we haven't been as exposed to them.

Personally, i think 'best of all time lists' are rediculous. At HIS time Keane was as good as anyone he played against and I think that's all you can really argue for sure.

Agree with the last paragraph.

As for your question somebody like Marc Wilmots fits nicely here...

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Gbear wrote: »

Beyond a certain point "best player" is meaningless.

And "best" is vague.
Best technically? I doubt it.
Most effective? Maybe in the discussion - he doesn't score very many or get many assists but he scores at important times and produces alot of important key passes that result in assists and goals.
Most influential? You only have to look at how Spain or Barca fare without Xavi playing to see that Iniesta's not even the most influential in the teams he plays in, never mind ever.
Most successful? Not by a long shot, I suspect.


Iniesta has more technical ability in his arse than Keane had. That doesn't mean he was better. They're so different that they cannot be compared.

I think most of the outlandish praise Iniesta gets is down to a kind of hipsterish mentality of not wanting to go along with saying Messi's the best in the world.


Ultimately, I think Iniesta is a luxury kind of player. Most of the time he's another link in the chain for Barca and Spain and he contributes little more than any other link in that chain. Without Xavi, the entire tempo and effectiveness of their game would be hindered. Against most teams, not having Iniesta might make the difference between only winning 3-0 rather than 4-0.
Where I think he shines is in the tighter games. His ability to create chances or score goals that other players can't is where I think his value lies. The goal machines like Messi and the way Xavi makes Barca or Spain play are what win you leagues. Iniesta is the anti-flat-track bully. He wins you champions leagues, world cups and european championships by doing what other players can't when the pressure and the calibre of opposition are at their highest.

If then, he can't claim to be the most skilled technically and if he doesn't score the most goals or truly shape how his team plays than I don't see how he has a claim to be anywhere near the best if he occupies such a small niche.

Excellent post. A lot of my friends and indeed plenty of people on here, who don't watch Barca play regularly, seem to think that Iniesta is more important than Xavi to Spain/Barca. This is simply not true, Xavi is the heartbeat, he sets the tempo, he dictates the play, and when he doesn't play it's painfully obvious how much of a difference he actually makes. Both Spain and Barca miss Xavi a lot more when he doesn't play in comparison to Iniesta. That shouldn't take away from Iniesta, he's still a fantastic player, but he's not the best midf in the world right now, never mind of all time.

Guy:Incognito

Skylinehead wrote: »

Mattaus was much, much better than Keane. Think we're all being just a teensy bit biased here!

Is tend to think the opposite is true. I doubt there's many on here that remember matthaus in his prime and actually watched him in full games . He's viewed now in the way that many top level ex pros are , mythical creatures that have been built up to more than they were by rose tints specs. Most will have firat hand knowledge of Keane though.

Of them, a percentage will downgrade him because of issue like the wc. Lots of others just plain don't see and /or understand what he contributed to games . He wasn't fancy enough for them.

ThunbergsAreGo

kryogen wrote: »

Keane is the only Irish player on the FIFA 100 list, does that not show he was rated outside the UK and Ireland whatever you may think of those lists overall.

Wasnt Diouf on this "list"?

Also didnt it contain 127 players? or am i thinking of another list

Seaneh

naughtb4 wrote: »

kryogen wrote: »

Keane is the only Irish player on the FIFA 100 list, does that not show he was rated outside the UK and Ireland whatever you may think of those lists overall.

Wasnt Diouf on this "list"?

Also didnt it contain 127 players? or am i thinking of another list

i think you are thinking of Pele's list of the best currently active players from a few years back.

ThunbergsAreGo

Seaneh wrote: »

i think you are thinking of Pele's list of the best currently active players from a few years back.

I am, but which list is being talked of above? as Peles list is "Fifas 100"

kryogen

Seaneh wrote: »

i think you are thinking of Pele's list of the best currently active players from a few years back.

The FIFA 100 one is the one from 2004, I also think Pele chose it, but it was from greatest living players not just active?

The relevance of the list I have already said is miniscule, it just demonstrates the point that Keane was clearly respected outside the UK and Ireland.

General Relativity

Ever, no. Not as good as; Maradona, Best, Cruyff, Zico, Zidane, Di Stefano.

G.K.

Cruyff, if no-one else.

Smegball

Don't even think Iniesta would escape the man marking of Djemba Djemba tbh.

kryogen

Smegball wrote: »

Don't even think Iniesta would escape the man marking of Djemba Djemba tbh.

Ah the man, the myth, the legend that is *whispers* Djemba-Djemba

You know he can slam a revolving door

Bodhisopha

Better than Zidane but best ever? I don't think he's even better than Xavi, more spectacular, certainly.

Duff

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Better than Zidane but best ever? I don't think he's even better than Xavi, more spectacular, certainly.

:eek:

paddy kerins

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Better than Zidane but best ever? I don't think he's even better than Xavi, more spectacular, certainly.

This is a mad thread.

JaMarcus Hustle

He's pretty awesome, but Zidane, Redondo and Xavi were better than him in my lifetime anyway.

G.K.

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

He's pretty awesome, but Zidane, Redondo and Xavi were better than him in my lifetime anyway.

Class player. What a shame injuries blighted him.

Seaneh

G.K. wrote: »

Class player. What a shame injuries blighted him.

Best DM of the Champions League Era.

tdv123

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

He's pretty awesome, but Zidane, Redondo and Xavi were better than him in my lifetime anyway.

Now theres a player who took Roy Keane to the cleaners.

Pro. F

tdv123 wrote: »

Now theres a player who took Roy Keane to the cleaners.

Yeah because games are one on one competitions.

Seaneh

Pro. F wrote: »

Yeah because games are one on one competitions.

Well, in a battle to control the midfield, Redondo did.

The man was the best in the world in his position of his generation.
Diego Maradona called him the best player he ever played with, said playing with Redondo was like playing with a someone who was telepathic and could read everyone around him's minds, he would be 5 steps ahead of everyone else on the pitch.

Real fans rioted when he was sold!


“What does this player have in his boots? A magnet?” – Sir Alex Ferguson

“A tactically perfect player” – Fabio Capello.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

monkey9

darkman2 wrote: »

Well no one has disproved he is the best. One character said (try to accept this without breaking your bollox laughing) that


Keane > Iniesta:D


Now Keane was better than most - but Iniesta? - eh no.

You're the one who came on here saying Iniesta is the best midfielder of all time in yet another darkman2 started thread. It's not up to anyone else to prove he isn't, it's up to you to prove he is.

Go ahead, the stage is yours.

Mr.Nice Guy

Gbear wrote: »

Most influential? You only have to look at how Spain or Barca fare without Xavi playing to see that Iniesta's not even the most influential in the teams he plays in, never mind ever.
Most successful? Not by a long shot, I suspect.

Ultimately, I think Iniesta is a luxury kind of player. Most of the time he's another link in the chain for Barca and Spain and he contributes little more than any other link in that chain. Without Xavi, the entire tempo and effectiveness of their game would be hindered. Against most teams, not having Iniesta might make the difference between only winning 3-0 rather than 4-0.

Where I think he shines is in the tighter games. His ability to create chances or score goals that other players can't is where I think his value lies. The goal machines like Messi and the way Xavi makes Barca or Spain play are what win you leagues. Iniesta is the anti-flat-track bully. He wins you champions leagues, world cups and european championships by doing what other players can't when the pressure and the calibre of opposition are at their highest.

If then, he can't claim to be the most skilled technically and if he doesn't score the most goals or truly shape how his team plays than I don't see how he has a claim to be anywhere near the best if he occupies such a small niche.

THFC wrote: »

Excellent post. A lot of my friends and indeed plenty of people on here, who don't watch Barca play regularly, seem to think that Iniesta is more important than Xavi to Spain/Barca. This is simply not true, Xavi is the heartbeat, he sets the tempo, he dictates the play, and when he doesn't play it's painfully obvious how much of a difference he actually makes. Both Spain and Barca miss Xavi a lot more when he doesn't play in comparison to Iniesta. That shouldn't take away from Iniesta, he's still a fantastic player, but he's not the best midf in the world right now, never mind of all time.

I'm astonished by these opinions coming so soon after the Euros where Xavi was very ordinary (by his high standards) and where Iniesta was - imo - quite clearly head and shoulders above him and most everyone else.

Iniesta was far more important to Spain at Euro 2012 than Xavi was. I'm not saying he is better than Xavi. Normally I rate Xavi higher, but Spain's most recent success owed more to Iniesta and I think that needs to be clarified.

Pro. F

Seaneh wrote: »

Well, in a battle to control the midfield, Redondo did.

Even just the battle to control midfield is waged by more than one player though. To reduce the game down to Redondo being better than Keane is very wrong imo. Redondo was a magnificent player and I wouldn't like to try and decide which of him or Keane were better players all things considered. But if I was to say one way or the other, I wouldn't be basing it on just those games.

All the quotes are cool, but they can never prove much in these types of discussions. There are no doubt oodles of complimentary quotes about Keane too.

Samich

Some amount of gifs and vids in the first page

event

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'm astonished by these opinions coming so soon after the Euros where Xavi was very ordinary (by his high standards) and where Iniesta was - imo - quite clearly head and shoulders above him and most everyone else.

Iniesta was far more important to Spain at Euro 2012 than Xavi was. I'm not saying he is better than Xavi. Normally I rate Xavi higher, but Spain's most recent success owed more to Iniesta and I think that needs to be clarified.

the only reason Xavi had a quieter tournament was due to the fact spain didnt play with a striker.
he is mainly noticed with spain as he slides balls through for the striker(s) to run onto. this didnt happen this year, so he didnt look as good.

watch barca this year, he'll be back to his best and the key man again

kryogen

Xavi's ball to Fabregas was still pretty sexy though

Gbear

What makes Xavi a generally brilliant player is the simpler side to his game.

I think he got caught in possession once in the final and it stood out like a sore thumb because that almost never happens to him.

His movement, his short passing, the way he drives his team on, sets the tempo and directs the attack are what make him so important.
What seems incredibly simple to Xavi is quite often amazing. All the spanish players have the ability to a degree but I think none more so than Xavi.

They pass and look for the ball when they're completly surrounded and normally you would assume they have no space. They make space and time, either by turning or even just by being aware and look completely comfortable in a situation in which 99% of footballers would **** the bed and lose possession in.

event wrote: »

the only reason Xavi had a quieter tournament was due to the fact spain didnt play with a striker.
he is mainly noticed with spain as he slides balls through for the striker(s) to run onto. this didnt happen this year, so he didnt look as good.

watch barca this year, he'll be back to his best and the key man again

That's what makes him one of the best ever - the flair he has, the technical ability and the vision. That he has the touch of genius at key moments in addition to his general play being to such a high standard is what makes Xavi Xavi.

osnola ibax

Xabi Alonso ftw

chopperbyrne

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maradona

Diego is the GOAT

inmyday

I know hes not the best of all time, but he has won uefa player of the year 11/12. He was ahead of Messi and Ronaldo.
Well Done Andres, well deserved.

Cienciano

Xavi6 wrote: »

Keane, Xavi, Zidane. And that's just from my lifetime.

darkman2 wrote: »

Because one LOL is not enough




LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL:pac:


That's hilarious. Thought some fool would bring up Keane or Scholes. NOT A PATCH on Iniesta. Keane is not fit to shine his boots.

As much as I dislike Keane, xavi6 has a point. Out and out skill, obviously iniesta is better, but keane had the ability to drag his every other player on his team up by the bootstraps. If I was a united fan at the moment I'd rather a roy keane in his prime than an iniesta in his prime right now.
But Zidane is far better than either of them, so it makes no difference.

Bodhisopha

Cienciano wrote: »

As much as I dislike Keane, xavi6 has a point. Out and out skill, obviously iniesta is better, but keane had the ability to drag his every other player on his team up by the bootstraps. If I was a united fan at the moment I'd rather a roy keane in his prime than an iniesta in his prime right now.
But Zidane is far better than either of them, so it makes no difference.

Wrong on both counts. Laughably so on the first one.

The Keane one isn't even worth getting into, it's so ridiculous. As for Zidane, he was an amazingly gifted player but probably the most overrated footballer in the history of football, probably owing to some truly iconic moments in his career which have overshadowed the fact that he would go missing for large chunks of seasons and really didn't win all that much at club level. Much less than Inesta. He's even won less at international level than Iniesta.

elefant

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Wrong on both counts. Laughably so on the first one.

really didn't win all that much at club level.

from wikipedia:



Girondins Bordeaux
UEFA Intertoto Cup:
Winner: 1995
UEFA Cup:
Runner-up: 1995–96
Juventus
Serie A:
Winner: 1996–97, 1997–98
Runner-up: 1999–00, 2000–01
Supercoppa Italiana:
Winner: 1997
Runner-up: 1998
UEFA Champions League:
Runner-up: 1996–97, 1997–98
UEFA Super Cup:
Winner: 1996
Intercontinental Cup:
Winner: 1996
UEFA Intertoto Cup:
Winner: 1999
Real Madrid
La Liga:
Winner: 2002–03
Runner-up: 2004–05, 2005–06
Supercopa de España:
Winner: 2001, 2003
Copa del Rey:
Runner-up: 2001–02, 2003–04
UEFA Champions League:
Winner: 2001–02
UEFA Super Cup:
Winner: 2002
Intercontinental Cup:
Winner: 2002

The_Kew_Tour

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Wrong on both counts. Laughably so on the first one.

The Keane one isn't even worth getting into, it's so ridiculous. As for Zidane, he was an amazingly gifted player but probably the most overrated footballer in the history of football, probably owing to some truly iconic moments in his career which have overshadowed the fact that he would go missing for large chunks of seasons and really didn't win all that much at club level. Much less than Inesta. He's even won less at international level than Iniesta.

I have heard it all now.

Bodhisopha

elefant wrote: »

from wikipedia:



Girondins Bordeaux
UEFA Intertoto Cup:
Winner: 1995
UEFA Cup:
Runner-up: 1995–96
Juventus
Serie A:
Winner: 1996–97, 1997–98
Runner-up: 1999–00, 2000–01
Supercoppa Italiana:
Winner: 1997
Runner-up: 1998
UEFA Champions League:
Runner-up: 1996–97, 1997–98
UEFA Super Cup:
Winner: 1996
Intercontinental Cup:
Winner: 1996
UEFA Intertoto Cup:
Winner: 1999
Real Madrid
La Liga:
Winner: 2002–03
Runner-up: 2004–05, 2005–06
Supercopa de España:
Winner: 2001, 2003
Copa del Rey:
Runner-up: 2001–02, 2003–04
UEFA Champions League:
Winner: 2001–02
UEFA Super Cup:
Winner: 2002
Intercontinental Cup:
Winner: 2002

3 league titles and 1 Champions League. Now do Iniesta, or would you rather wait 7 or 8 years until his career has finished?

Melion

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Wrong on both counts. Laughably so on the first one.

The Keane one isn't even worth getting into, it's so ridiculous. As for Zidane, he was an amazingly gifted player but probably the most overrated footballer in the history of football, probably owing to some truly iconic moments in his career which have overshadowed the fact that he would go missing for large chunks of seasons and really didn't win all that much at club level. Much less than Inesta. He's even won less at international level than Iniesta.

Wow, thats the only word i have for that.

Melion

Bodhisopha wrote: »

3 league titles and 1 Champions League. Now do Iniesta, or would you rather wait 7 or 8 years until his career has finished?

Is the man who won these a better player than Zidane?

Premier League (5): 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007–08, 2008–09, 2010–11
FA Cup (1): 2003–04
Football League Cup (3): 2005–06, 2008–09 2009–10
FA Community Shield (4): 2003, 2007, 2008, 2010
UEFA Champions League (1): 2007–08
FIFA Club World Cup (1): 2008

Bodhisopha

Melion wrote: »

Is the man who won these a better player than Zidane?

Premier League (5): 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007–08, 2008–09, 2010–11
FA Cup (1): 2003–04
Football League Cup (3): 2005–06, 2008–09 2009–10
FA Community Shield (4): 2003, 2007, 2008, 2010
UEFA Champions League (1): 2007–08
FIFA Club World Cup (1): 2008

Was he the major star, top man of that team? The jewel in the crown of one of the most spectacular projects in the history of football, a project that turned out to be a bit of a failure?

Melion

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Was he the major star, top man of that team? The jewel in the crown of one of the most spectacular projects in the history of football, a project that turned out to be a bit of a failure?

Is he a better player? I fail to see how Reals failure lies at the feet of Zidane.

Bodhisopha

I can't have been the only person who watched a lot of La Liga during that era? Wasn't anyone else watching before Ronaldo and Messi rolled into town?

MD1990

Bodhisopha wrote: »

I can't have been the only person who watched a lot of La Liga during that era? Wasn't anyone else watching before Ronaldo and Messi rolled into town?

i have watched it since 2001
Rivaldo is underated imo
he was some player

Melion

Ronaldo looked happy as the decision was announced

martingriff

darkman2 wrote: »

Because one LOL is not enough




LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL:pac:


That's hilarious. Thought some fool would bring up Keane or Scholes. NOT A PATCH on Iniesta. Keane is not fit to shine his boots.

I am a Liverpool fan so have a big dislike of Man Utd but Keane is/was 1 of the greatest midfielders and to say he is not fit to shine someone buts is laughable. Also what are we meant to see from 2 pictures for all someone knows he could lose the ball after. I could show a pic with 5 people with Charlie Adams with the ball is doesn't mean he is the best or he retained the ball. Your starting OP was weak.

inmyday

Melion wrote: »

Ronaldo looked happy as the decision was announced

Thats unfair. I watched that when iniesta got the trophy, ronaldo and messi looked happy for him. The pic doesnt do him justice...

By the way, for what its worth, Im sorry for starting back on this thread. Because the iniesta/ zindane thing.
Its kinda like comparing pele/mardonna. Keane/veira. messi/ronaldo. These are never gonna be settled.

Sanity_Saviour

inmyday wrote: »

I know hes not the best of all time, but he has won uefa player of the year 11/12. He was ahead of Messi and Ronaldo.
Well Done Andres, well deserved.

Well deserved my arse, Messi and Ronaldo are in a different galaxy to every other player in the world right now.

Cienciano

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Wrong on both counts. Laughably so on the first one.

The Keane one isn't even worth getting into, it's so ridiculous. As for Zidane, he was an amazingly gifted player but probably the most overrated footballer in the history of football, probably owing to some truly iconic moments in his career which have overshadowed the fact that he would go missing for large chunks of seasons and really didn't win all that much at club level. Much less than Inesta. He's even won less at international level than Iniesta.

I think the trophies = quality argument doesn't work. If it does you may also think Vladimir Smicer was a better player than Gabriel Batistuta. Although that wouldn't surprise me if you think Zidane was the most over rated player in the history of football

blue-army

I really can't understand how someone can score 50 league goals in 37 games, in what is one of the world's best leagues and not win the award!

Messi is simply a different class. A quick look at the La Liga table NOT including Messi or Ronaldo's goals last season says it all.