Mascherano vs Keane (vs Busquets)

gosplan

Something somebody said in the World Cup thread about Mascherano's performance in last years semi got me thinking of this.

Keane is going to be overrated in Ireland without a doubt but that doesn't mean he wasn't awesome in his day.

Who is/was the better player?

Caovyn Lineah

gosplan wrote: »

Something somebody said in the World Cup thread about Mascherano's performance in last years semi got me thinking of this.

Who is/was the better player?

Oh god, this is going to be awful. Ironic considering the conversation of United v Liverpool that took place in the feedback thread.

Keane BTW

Just a little Samba

I hate United, I'm not a fan of Keane at all, but in ever single area of their play Keane was far superior.
Keane is one of the best players of his era, Masch is not on his level at all.

BoJack Horseman

Different positions so why bother comparing?

Roy Keane was a terrific all-rounder midfielder with a game:goal ratio of 8:1.

Mascherano is a defender with 2 goals in over 300 career games.

If one has to pick.... Its Keane, by some distance.

Bounty Hunter

As said above Keane was not just a DM despite some thinking he was but still Keane would be my answer to this question. Think it will be a landslide to Keane here tbh and I llike Masch

Oranage2

ask this in Argentina and I would love to see the answer.

GavRedKing

gosplan wrote: »

Something somebody said in the World Cup thread about Mascherano's performance in last years semi got me thinking of this.

Keane is going to be overrated in Ireland without a doubt but that doesn't mean he wasn't awesome in his day.

Who is/was the better player?

Can I say Busquets? :pac:

Mascherano has played nearly exclusively at CB for Barca for the best part of 3 years.

I'd put Keane over Mascherano though in the original argument.

Caovyn Lineah

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Different positions so why bother comparing?

Roy Keane was a terrific all-rounder midfielder with a game:goal ratio of 8:1.

Mascherano is a defender with 2 goals in over 300 career games.

If one has to pick.... Its Keane, by some distance.

Mascherano was never a defender until he joined Barca, he played in midfield for Argentina last summer.

CSF

Keane wins easily. This thread is gonna be a trainwreck.

Just a little Samba

Caovyn Lineah wrote: »

Mascherano was never a defender until he joined Barca, he played in midfield for Argentina last summer.

I'd argue that playing him Cb is more of a sign of Barcelona papering over the cracks in their defence spending than it is of his talents as centre back. His best position is dmc.

thebaz

Keane was the best midfielder of his era - never saw him outplayed - when he was at his best , like against Juve - a colussos - apart from Paul McGrath no other irish player was so influential for the team - Richard Dunne was class too for us -how we now lack players like these today

BoJack Horseman

Caovyn Lineah wrote: »

Mascherano was never a defender until he joined Barca, he played in midfield for Argentina last summer.

I know, however he's spent the last 5 years & 45% of his senior club career as a defender.

Suffice to say, Masch is a defender.
Keano wasn't.

Comparison is almost futile.

Completely different players and a very strange comparison

posturingpat

Surely this is a wind up? Keane on a different level.

Will I Amnt

CSF wrote: »

This thread is gonna be a trainwreck.

I doubt it, sure who would argue that Mascherano is a better player than Keane was? Seriously?

LuckyLloyd

Difficult to compare as they have fulfilled different roles in their career. I think Keane was a more integral cog in the Utd teams he played for than Mascherano was for the Liverpool and Barcelona teams he's played for. You could make an argument that Keane was one of the most impactful players in the world from 1998 - 2002, and I'm not sure Mascherano has ever been that good. The question is also complicated because people would hold Keane's 2002 - 2005 period against him as a negative in this comparison where he became a very good holding midfielder as opposed to a World Class box to box midfielder. But Mascherano has those post peak years ahead of him and there's no guarantee that he will age as well or better than Keane did.

bucketybuck

Oranage2 wrote: »

ask this in Argentina and I would love to see the answer.

Thats a specious argument. If you went to Argentina and asked who was better, Messi or Robbie Keane, the overwhelming answer would be Messi of course. Would that be because of a hometown bias, or would it be because Messi is simply the correct answer?

So too in this example, the answer is so blindingly obvious as to make any hometown bias irrelevant.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Difficult to compare as they have fulfilled different roles in their career. I think Keane was a more integral cog in the Utd teams he played for than Mascherano was for the Liverpool and Barcelona teams he's played for. You could make an argument that Keane was one of the most impactful players in the world from 1998 - 2002, and I'm not sure Mascherano has ever been that good. The question is also complicated because people would hold Keane's 2002 - 2005 period against him as a negative in this comparison where he became a very good holding midfielder as opposed to a World Class box to box midfielder. But Mascherano has those post peak years ahead of him and there's no guarantee that he will age as well or better than Keane did.

No, the question isn't complicated at all.

gosplan

Sorry, the comparison was because they're both outstanding in the DMF position and on form, I'd struggle to think of a player who got the better of either if them.

Obv Keane was more box to box and Masch has played more in defence recently.

I'm surprised people think Keane takes it so easily.

MagicIRL

If Mascherano was on the level of Keane there wouldn't be a hope of Barca playing him at CB at all. If Mascherano was as good as Keane, you would play Mathieu at CB and leave Macherano at DM. But he's not as good as Keane. Not even close.

Caovyn Lineah

Its not as ridiculous as some make out, in my mind Mascherano would be close to the top if you made a list of the best DMs to play in the premier league. Keane would probably be top of that list however.

LuckyLloyd

bucketybuck wrote: »

No, the question isn't complicated at all.

*Shrugs*

There's no bigger fan of Keane on this forum than me and I think he was better than Masch has been. But Mascherano's trophy haul and his performances in major games / tournaments makes it a question worth asking. I'd dare say the default answer outside of Ireland might be different also, even if it's incorrect.

Nalz

If you had the both of them in their prime and you started them both, who would you play as CAM in front of them... Now that's a better question!

Iused2likebusts

Keanes passing was far better than Mascherano. Mascherano maybe has a slight edge at winning the ball back. Overall I'd class keane as a midfielder a level above Mascherano.

LuckyLloyd

Trilla wrote: »

If you had the both of them in their prime and you started them both, who would you play as CAM in front of them... Now that's a better question!

Zidane imo.

Andersonisgod

MagicIRL wrote: »

If Mascherano was on the level of Keane there wouldn't be a hope of Barca playing him at CB at all. If Mascherano was as good as Keane, you would play Mathieu at CB and leave Macherano at DM. But he's not as good as Keane. Not even close.

That's far too black and white and, as a result, is simply incorrect. The first thing is recognising that the demands of playing for Barcelona aren't quite like any other club and, as such, your comparison here is simply unfair. That holding midfield role is such a treasured position at Barcelona, it's so pivotal in how Barcelona build their attacks, to the flow of their game, how they play out from the back, how they work the wing backs into forward positions.
Then there's Sergio Busquets, the anointed successor to Xavi Hernandez, probably the most perfect holding midfielder Barcelona have ever had and will ever have. Busquets has been schooled in the Barcelona way for the majority of his life, he fits every single requirement one must have to play in that Barcelona midfield, not Mascherano, not Keane, not anybody from outside the club could replace him. So no, just because Mascherano doesn't play in front of Busquets doesn't mean "it isn't even close"
Mascherano is fantastic, his skills have been put to use at centre back for Barcelona. He's got far more ability on the ball than your typical center back, he's as good 1 vs 1 as any player you will see, he's a leader and vocal, he's basically Puyol's replacement.
As said earlier in this thread, ask this question in Argentina and you will get a very different answer than you would by asking it in Ireland, personally I'd tend to agree with the Argentines.

kfallon

Well nobody would have seen that coming..........

RedemptionZ

I think Keane was the better player, but it's not as much of a landslide as some are making out. Keane was a terrific player. Probably the best Ireland has produced in terms of overall effectiveness. But he still wouldn't make my fantasy XI, even in that era. Now that's probably more down to my footballing ideologies than a reflection of Keane and I could have no qualms if someone did select him in theirs, but my point is that he is being portrayed as some god here and I just don't think that's accurate.

Rant over, he's still definitely ahead of mascherano but Masch is a top quality CDM and what a performance against the Dutch in the semis, guarantee if Keane had that kind of performance it'd be cited as an example of why he was so good.

gosplan

gosplan wrote: »

Sorry, the comparison was because they're both outstanding in the DMF position and on form, I'd struggle to think of a player who got the better of either if them.

Obv Keane was more box to box and Masch has played more in defence recently.

I'm surprised people think Keane takes it so easily.

If it's as a DM I'd go with Mash.

Busquets on a different level to them both though

Crimson King

Caovyn Lineah wrote: »

Its not as ridiculous as some make out, in my mind Mascherano would be close to the top if you made a list of the best DMs to play in the premier league. Keane would probably be top of that list however.

This.

Mascherano was World Class, so was Keane. However Keane had the edge, nothing to be ashamed of as he had the edge on pretty much everyone.

kfallon

rarnes1 wrote: »

If it's as a DM I'd go with Mash.

Busquets on a different level to them both though

Would have Keane in his pomp ahead of Busquets every time!

Andersonisgod

kfallon wrote: »

Would have Keane in his pomp ahead of Busquets every time!

Really? Please expand on that.

kfallon

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Really? Please expand on that.

Better player, what do I need to expand on? Scored more goals, better tackler, Keane's short passing game was fantastic, especially the balls he fed into players between the lines! Drove his team on. Wouldn't expect you to agree with me tho, you'd have to take the blinkers off!

I could never see Busquets doing what Keane did in the qualifying campaign for World Cup '02!

LuckyLloyd

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Really? Please expand on that.

Keane 1998 - 2002 could impact a game to a greater overall extent than Busquets.

Will I Amnt

Busquets is a technically superior player but he's not the one that will drag you accross the line when you really need it.
You can make an argument for both players, it all depends on what you are looking for in a player.

Moneymaker

Keane but it's closer then some people in this thread would have you believe.

Busquets vs Keane is an interesting one.

lassykk

Also as much as I dislike Keane he wasn't a diving, play-acting little b0ll0x like Busquets is

Richard Hillman

Great question. I would lean towards Keane at the moment but the gap is not as wide as some of the posters have made out

kfallon

lassykk wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

To be fair if you are gonna throw that at Busquets you'd have to mention the Haaland/Southgate stuff with Keane!

Oranage2

I don't get really get the point of this thread, two players that don't really play in the same position, one player that's better and with a huge bias too. It's like something you'd see on redcafe or rawk.

A better question would be Keane vs Gerrard, or Keane vs scholes and you had to pick one.

brevity

kfallon wrote: »

To be fair if you are gonna throw that at Busquets you'd have to mention the Haaland/Southgate stuff with Keane!

No no no dont do that!!! :pac:

lassykk

lassykk wrote: »

Also as much as I dislike Keane he wasn't a diving, play-acting little b0ll0x like Busquets is

Yeah true but you could counter that by saying busquets hadn't the filthiness Keane had.

Andersonisgod

kfallon wrote: »

Better player, what do I need to expand on? Scored more goals, better tackler, Keane's short passing game was fantastic, especially the balls he fed into players between the lines! Drove his team on. Wouldn't expect you to agree with me tho, you'd have to take the blinkers off!

I could never see Busquets doing what Keane did in the qualifying campaign for World Cup '02!

Better player how? Busquets is far more technically accomplished than Keane, he's more tactically aware than Keane. I forgot that Busquets plays for Spain and Barcelona because of his incredible goal scoring record, Fellaini scores more goals than Busquets too so perhaps you should begin to make a case for him next. Tackles better? No, makes more dramatic tackles perhaps but that's because Busquets wins the ball early, he sees the danger and he intercepts. Are you seriously arguing that Keane's short passing game is better than the player who has been described as the best one touch player on the planet, the lynchpin of tiki taka? This is priceless. I love that you then mention blinkers.

The tournament where he walked out on his team? No I couldn't imagine Busquets doing that, I can imagine him winning the World Cup though, as he did in 2010.

Blatter

To those who say 'those in Argentina would have a different opinion', I would ask realistically what % of Argentines are qualified to have an opinion on the subject.

Well, maybe that's because the majority of people that you would ask in Argentina never saw/were not old enough to appreciate just how good Keane was. He was a clear level above Mascherano and it isn't even that close.

A far more interesting comparison would be Keane v Redondo.

Demosthenese

Both excellent players in their own right.
Keane though is ahead when it comes to scoring goals, linking up with players, better on the ball and just overall in his abilities as a footballer. It is no landslide but if it were Fifa Keane is the 92 and Masch is 90

If i were to sum up exactly why if you were to take their PL performances and as a Liverpool supporter Masch - although brilliant in winning the ball back and his ability and engine to get him around the field was impressive - Keane influenced the game in a manner that he just wasn't able to with his superior ability on the ball. He drove forward more often and was more positive in possession and was a solid attacking threat as well. It just brought more to the team. Masch was more of the Makelele/Matic type mould.

lassykk

kfallon wrote: »

To be fair if you are gonna throw that at Busquets you'd have to mention the Haaland/Southgate stuff with Keane!

Yeah, that's definitely a fair point. Could throw Saipan in the mix too depending on your allegiances!

Just hate play acting and diving which is why I would find it hard to warm to someone like Busquets (Don't particularly like Keane much either). He's clearly a top notch player but like so many others in the Barca team they lose a little bit of their gloss by play acting when they don't need to.

Andersonisgod

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Keane 1998 - 2002 could impact a game to a greater overall extent than Busquets.

Its telling of the attitude of some Irish fans that they believe that because Keane ran around a lot, screamed at the top of his lungs a bunch and made a crunching tackle that he is having a greater effect on a game than a player who is constantly moving the ball around at pace, that is always available for a pass, that is finding spaces between the lines to play forward into, that is quietly covering his rampaging full backs and, occasionally, centre backs. It's that attitude which is a big reason why Ireland doesn't produce footballers like Sergio Busquets. You have your players chasing the ball around, Barcelona/Spain will have those moving the ball around, see which one wins.

kfallon

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Better player how? Busquets is far more technically accomplished than Keane, he's more tactically aware than Keane. I forgot that Busquets plays for Spain and Barcelona because of his incredible goal scoring record, Fellaini scores more goals than Busquets too so perhaps you should begin to make a case for him next. Tackles better? No, makes more dramatic tackles perhaps but that's because Busquets wins the ball early, he sees the danger and he intercepts. Are you seriously arguing that Keane's short passing game is better than the player who has been described as the best one touch player on the planet, the lynchpin of tiki taka? This is priceless. I love that you then mention blinkers.

The tournament where he walked out on his team? No I couldn't imagine Busquets doing that, I can imagine him winning the World Cup though, as he did in 2010.

Proper midfielders can do it all so of course goal scoring will come into it! If you don't take goalscoring into account you may as well say Frank Lampard was a nothing player!

Keane was a better tackler, also he was more of an inspiration to his teamates! I never said his short passing game was better, I said his was fantastic but never compared it to Busquets so not sure what you're babbling on about there!

Never mentioned the World Cup finals, did I? Answer the question, do you think Busquets could do what Keane did in the quaifying campaign, answer the question this time please!

Demosthenese

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Better player how? Busquets is far more technically accomplished than Keane, he's more tactically aware than Keane.

Tackles better? No, makes more dramatic tackles perhaps but that's because Busquets wins the ball early, he sees the danger and he intercepts.

Better tactically aware ... sweet love of the devine! Priceless.

Being far more technically accomplished still doesn't mean better overall, else we may all give up football and just the Germans and Spanish rule the game.

It all needs to be taken in context here. Busquets sees the danger more quickly than who exactly? How can this even be judged? ON the Opta Stats for "Seeing the ball earlier than your opponent stat"?

Busquets was a lynchpin the a side that had regularly 70+% possession for a decade ... so it is a big ask to say he is a better tackler than someone else. I'd say there's a long list of players who are statistically better tacklers than him.

... but yes, probably a handful only that made as many passes, % completion etc than any of that team he was in.

Giggsy11

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Its telling of the attitude of some Irish fans that they believe that because Keane ran around a lot, screamed at the top of his lungs a bunch and made a crunching tackle that he is having a greater effect on a game than a player who is constantly moving the ball around at pace, that is always available for a pass, that is finding spaces between the lines to play forward into, that is quietly covering his rampaging full backs and, occasionally, centre backs. It's that attitude which is a big reason why Ireland doesn't produce footballers like Sergio Busquets. You have your players chasing the ball around, Barcelona/Spain will have those moving the ball around, see which one wins.

The "I see more in the game and appreciate the game better" type of post.

Unearthly

Keane. Easily

kfallon

I'd say if we mentioned Rakitic he'd be saying he was better than Keane too! It's all about the jersey you wear, not the ability you have!