Mascherano vs Keane (vs Busquets)

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

"Any player, in any position, anywhere in the world" being that category. Seriously, you should consider going back to school at this rate.

Should have said that at the start young William. Irony just doesn't get through to you does it?

pmasterson95

Ah what kind of ****e is this. I thought it was who is better Masch or Keane yet now its who is literate and is Keane the best player in the world ever when its clearly Busquets.


I am too sober for this. Maybe theres heatstroke getting involved.

Billy86

efb wrote: »

Where's the argument for him being the BEST then, at best you're saying here he is top 8!

Yes, because there was no standout definitive #1 in that time for me. I fully understand a lot of people would put Zidane out in front of that group, but for me while he obviously was one of the very best in the world, he also overrated (to the point that a good few people were trying to claim he was better than Pele or Maradona when he retired; an argument that has since died an absolute death).

Andersonisgod

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Ah what kind of ****e is this. I thought it was who is better Masch or Keane yet now its who is literate and is Keane the best player in the world ever when its clearly Busquets.


I am too sober for this. Maybe theres heatstroke getting involved.

Now nobody said Busquets is the best player ever, just somebody accidentally said he's the best from 2010-present. The best ever is surely Cruyff....

efb

Billy86 wrote: »

Yes, because there was no standout definitive #1 in that time for me. I fully understand a lot of people would put Zidane out in front of that group, but for me while he obviously was one of the very best in the world, he also overrated (to the point that a good few people were trying to claim he was better than Pele or Maradona when he retired; an argument that has since died an absolute death).

So he was top 8 at his peak- I could live with that

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Should have said that at the start young William. Irony just doesn't get through to you does it?

And I did. Here is the very first sentence of my first post in this thread - "Keane in his prime was arguably the best player in the world." Like I said, your reading comprehension needs considerable work.

Still can't believe you are saying Busquets is better than Messi, Xavi or Ronaldo over the last five years, though.

So go on... Puyol or Baresi? Pique or Moore?

Billy86

efb wrote: »

So he was top 8 at his peak- I could live with that

Anywhere from 8th to 1st yeah, because it was splitting hairs and a matter of personal preference among that bunch really.

Andersonisgod

efb wrote: »

So he was top 8 at his peak- I could live with that

Just to put this in a modern day context. It'd be the same as claiming James Rodriguez (8th in Balon D'or 2014) is the best player in the world.

efb

Billy86 wrote: »

Anywhere from 8th to 1st yeah, because it was splitting hairs and a matter of personal preference among that bunch really.

Well do you want to argue for 1st? Not being able to make a decision isn't one

efb

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Just to put this in a modern day context. It'd be the same as claiming James Rodriguez (8th in Balon D'or 2014) is the best player in the world.

No, I'm saying James is top 8. I'd never claim he was the best, even top 3 or top 5

But when someone is considered say in the top 7, I accept that means they're 7th

gosplan

Billy86 wrote: »

Yes, because there was no standout definitive #1 in that time for me. I fully understand a lot of people would put Zidane out in front of that group, but for me while he obviously was one of the very best in the world, he also overrated (to the point that a good few people were trying to claim he was better than Pele or Maradona when he retired; an argument that has since died an absolute death).

Take out Keane's semi final vrs Juve and match vrs Holland for Ireland and it looks very different.

We tend to focus on the MOTM perfrmances where he dragged his team into it but that's such an Anglo-centric view if football. Gerrard has done that loads as well, notably in the final vrs Milan.

The truth though is that Milan fcuked up that night, Holland were a collection of good players but not a good team and Juve threw away a 2 goal lead.

Football at the highest level isn't about how hard you try or how much you want it.

Keane was an excellent footballer and an excellent captain. But to call him the best footballer in the world for a four year period is nuts.

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

And I did. Here is the very first sentence of my first post in this thread - "Keane in his prime was arguably the best player in the world." Like I said, your reading comprehension needs considerable work.

Still can't believe you are saying Busquets is better than Messi, Xavi or Ronaldo over the last five years, though.

So go on... Puyol or Baresi? Pique or Moore?

Yes but then you began dithering and it all became rather difficult to follow through text, likely because you found it difficult to follow in your mind.

Neither can I! It's unbelievable! Almost as unbelievable as saying that Keane was better than Zidane and Ronaldo in their pomp but there you go, we are in this together apparently.

I would rather not drag the thread off topic. Answer me this, why would it matter on the context of this thread?
Also can't anyone spit out random player arguments? Xavi or Keane? Iniesta or Scholes? Messi or Beckham? Suarez or Andy Cole? Pique or Cygan? All entirely irrelevant.

Andersonisgod

efb wrote: »

No, I'm saying James is top 8. I'd never claim he was the best, even top 3 or top 5

But when someone is considered say in the top 7, I accept that means they're 7th

I know what you mean and I agree with you. Claiming Keane was top 8, basically 8th, means his modern day equivalent in that position is James Rodriguez and nobody is claiming he is the best player in the world.

efb

Xavi
Iniesta
Messi
Suarez
Pique

GavRedKing

So at the very least, do we all agree on Keane being better than Mascherano ya?

Billy86

efb wrote: »

Well do you want to argue for 1st? Not being able to make a decision isn't one

You should read my first post in this thread, so.

Andersonisgod

GavRedKing wrote: »

So at the very least, do we all agree on Keane being better than Mascherano ya?

Dammit Gav I don't agree with it and nobody can make me agree either!

Billy86

GavRedKing wrote: »

So at the very least, do we all agree on Keane being better than Mascherano ya?

Not AndersonIsGod. But hey, he reckons Busquets is the best player of the last five years, so...

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

Not AndersonIsGod. But hey, he reckons Busquets is the best player of the last five years, so...

Hahaha that's literally the most childish thing I think I've ever read on any forum, your argument has descended into "na na na na na na I can't hear you"

Muff_Daddy

It wouldn't have been outrageous to award Keane the Ballon D'or in 1999. The most influential player in the team that won a treble, in a year with no World Cup. Who was definitively better than him that year?

David Beckham placed 2nd that year, and while I rate him highly and always felt his role in any team he played was vastly under appeeciated, Roy Keane was a level above Beckham.

GavRedKing

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Dammit Gav I don't agree with it and nobody can make me agree either!

Well it depends what you want, as a CB, something I'd class Mascherano now, then yes hes better than Keane, even though Keane has lined out very rarely at CB.

As a CM or DM its not close, Keane was a good few levels above Mascherano.

It is however not really fair to compare either player given Mascheranos time at CB, IMO.

Billy86

gosplan wrote: »

Take out Keane's semi final vrs Juve and match vrs Holland for Ireland and it looks very different.

We tend to focus on the MOTM perfrmances where he dragged his team into it but that's such an Anglo-centric view if football. Gerrard has done that loads as well, notably in the final vrs Milan.

The truth though is that Milan fcuked up that night, Holland were a collection of good players but not a good team and Juve threw away a 2 goal lead.

Football at the highest level isn't about how hard you try or how much you want it.

Keane was an excellent footballer and an excellent captain. But to call him the best footballer in the world for a four year period is nuts.

Actually, consistency was one of his strongest attributes. Time and again he did that kind of stuff, just those two often get pointed out as they are the two most famous examples for him due to the stakes at hand.

As for the bolded part, you can say that about more or less any loss suffered by a team. Take a lead and wind up losing means that yes, you did throw away that lead.

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Hahaha that's literally the most childish thing I think I've ever read on any forum, your argument has descended into "na na na na na na I can't hear you"

Didn't you mention irony earlier? :pac:

Andersonisgod

GavRedKing wrote: »

Well it depends what you want, as a CB, something I'd class Mascherano now, then yes hes better than Keane, even though Keane has lined out very rarely at CB.

As a CM or DM its not close, Keane was a good few levels above Mascherano.

It is however not really fair to compare either player given Mascheranos time at CB, IMO.

I'd say though that if you were to find the Argentinian equivalent of Billy and ask him the same question he'd say Mascherano without doubt and he'd reference his incredible WC semi final performance, just as Billy references Keane vs Juventus or vs Netherlands. I am simply saying it is absolutely not as cut and dry as some would think.

Personally I'd rather Mascherano, I only came into this thread because I believe that saying Keane is better solely based on the fact that Mascherano doesn't start as the DM for Barcelona is both an unfair and uninformed opinion.

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

Didn't you mention irony earlier? :pac:

I can't remember childishly taunting anything you said that you obviously said in an aloof manner and taking it seriously.

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

just as Billy references Keane vs Juventus or vs Netherlands.

My God, you're on autopilot now. Find the post where I referenced those games or admit you are just making stuff up as you go at this point/as per usual.

I'm taking it your lack of a response means you know Baresi and Moore are better than Puyol or Pique. So at least there's that.

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I can't remember childishly taunting anything you said that you obviously said in an aloof manner and taking it seriously.

Nah, you just childishly tried to misrepresent what I said over and over and over again so you could attempt to mock the straw man you had created.

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

My God, you're on autopilot now. Find the post where I referenced those games or admit you are just making stuff up as you go at this point/as per usual.

I'm taking it your lack of a response means you know Baresi and Moore are better than Puyol or Pique. So at least there's that.

And I quote "Actually, consistency was one of his strongest attributes. Time and again he did that kind of stuff, just those two often get pointed out as they are the two most famous examples for him due to the stakes at hand. "
Hmmm...there seems to be a reference to those games in this post. Am I getting an apology? Probably not, but I don't need one, I know I'm right.

I'm assuming from your lack of responses to my 5 comparisons that you know Xavi, Iniesta, Messi, Suarez and Pique are better. I also assume that given the amount of times that you have floated the off topic comparisons that you seem slightly more concerned with me than you are the topic or indeed anything else. To steal a lyric "God I'm very,very frightening."

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

Nah, you just childishly tried to misrepresent what I said over and over and over again so you could attempt to mock the straw man you had created.

I didn't have to create anything, you did all the hard work.

Muff_Daddy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I'd say though that if you were to find the Argentinian equivalent of Billy and ask him the same question he'd say Mascherano without doubt and he'd reference his incredible WC semi final performance, just as Billy references Keane vs Juventus or vs Netherlands. I am simply saying it is absolutely not as cut and dry as some would think.

Personally I'd rather Mascherano, I only came into this thread because I believe that saying Keane is better solely based on the fact that Mascherano doesn't start as the DM for Barcelona is both an unfair and uninformed opinion.

You bring that up, then you go on about unfair and uninformed opinions. Keane never had the players an Argentina or Spain so how can you point to World Cup performances as the basis for the claim that Masherano or Busquets is better.

Replace Keane with Mascherano/Busquets in the Ireland team from 1998/2002, are Ireland better or worse off? Yes or no, I don't want a soliloquy.

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

I didn't have to create anything, you did all the hard work.

Of course, of course. By saying he was arguably the best player in the world, I totally said he was only the best player in the world when we discount attacking players. That's exacctly what I said. No sad attempts to twist those words on your part. No, not at all.

Andersonisgod

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

You bring that up, then you go on about unfair and uninformed opinions. Keane never had the players an Argentina or Spain so how can you point to World Cup performances as the basis for the claim that Masherano or Busquets is better.

Replace Keane with Mascherano/Busquets in the Ireland team from 1998/2002, are Ireland better or worse off? Yes or no, I don't want a soliloquy.

So are you now telling me that any player from a top 10 country can't be considered "the best in the world"? How about top 20 country? Where's the cut off point I wonder? Yes Mascherano had great players around him when he put in that incredible performance in the semi final, just like Keane had great players around him when he put in that incredible performance vs Juventus yet nobody uses that as a stick to beat Keane with.

Silly, hypothetical question that absolutely doesn't take into account the needs of the team. Replace Mascherano at the back with Keane are Barcelona better or worse? Replace Sergio Busquets, the heartbeat of Barcelona and Spain's tiki taka with Roy Keane, are they better or worse? It cuts both ways.

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

Of course, of course. By saying he was arguably the best player in the world, I totally said he was only the best player in the world when we discount attacking players. That's exacctly what I said. No sad attempts to twist those words on your part. No, not at all.

These comments are beginning to sound rather panicked, like your jittery or something. Why would I bother twisting your words? That's for you to do.

efb

Billy86 wrote: »

You should read my first post in this thread, so.

You still concede at the end that makes him top 6

efb

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

You bring that up, then you go on about unfair and uninformed opinions. Keane never had the players an Argentina or Spain so how can you point to World Cup performances as the basis for the claim that Masherano or Busquets is better.

Replace Keane with Mascherano/Busquets in the Ireland team from 1998/2002, are Ireland better or worse off? Yes or no, I don't want a soliloquy.

Better off In 2002 anyway

Charlie19

Different type of player but I'd still rather have keane with me than against.

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

And I quote "Actually, consistency was one of his strongest attributes. Time and again he did that kind of stuff, just those two often get pointed out as they are the two most famous examples for him due to the stakes at hand. "

Actually, gosplan made that reference. I replied, saying he was consistently playing around that level and not just in those two games - if anything that is downplaying them. I hope you understand the difference, but I'm not banking on it.

I'm assuming from your lack of responses to my 5 comparisons that you know Xavi, Iniesta, Messi, Suarez and Pique are better. I also assume that given the amount of times that you have floated the off topic comparisons that you seem slightly more concerned with me than you are the topic or indeed anything else. To steal a lyric "God I'm very,very frightening."

The point of the Puyol/Pique bit is that you are the most biased fan of any sports team I have ever seen. You're impossible to take seriously.

Xavi, Scholes (would take Xavi over Scholes), Messi, Suarez, Pique (why Cygan?) to answer that, if you want to drag things off topic... why bring up these five? And again... Cygan? You don't/didn't watch much football, in England at least, from over 10 years ago, did you?

efb

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

It wouldn't have been outrageous to award Keane the Ballon D'or in 1999. The most influential player in the team that won a treble, in a year with no World Cup. Who was definitively better than him that year?

David Beckham placed 2nd that year, and while I rate him highly and always felt his role in any team he played was vastly under appeeciated, Roy Keane was a level above Beckham.

He was missed the CL final - no doubt that went against him

Billy86

efb wrote: »

You still concede at the end that makes him top 6

I was talking all time there, in his position.

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

These comments are beginning to sound rather panicked, like your jittery or something. Why would I bother twisting your words? That's for you to do.

You keep reading what you want to read, it's equally as entertaining as it is perplexing.

efb

So he's a GOAT now... Oh my

Billy86

efb wrote: »

He was sent off in the semi final - no doubt that went against him

Erm... no he wasn't?

Andersonisgod

Billy86 wrote: »

Actually, gosplan made that reference. I replied, saying he was consistently playing around that level and not just in those two games - if anything that is downplaying them. I hope you understand the difference, but I'm not banking on it.


The point of the Puyol/Pique bit is that you are the most biased fan of any sports team I have ever seen. You're impossible to take seriously.

Xavi, Scholes (would take Xavi over Scholes), Messi, Suarez, Pique (why Cygan?) to answer that, if you want to drag things off topic... why bring up these five? And again... Cygan? You don't/didn't watch much football, in England at least, from over 10 years ago, did you?

Still it's a reference though, I mean it's as clear as day, its right there in that quote, should I highlight it again? You said you didn't reference those games at all and you did, I showed that you did, does that make you disingenuous? Maybe you're just forgetful? I mean I wouldn't want to think you a liar.

Funny, I'd say I'm one of the more informed people here but whatever, I mean when the person telling everyone that Keane was the best player in the world for 4 years is calling you biased maybe it's time I took a look in the mirror.

We really are operating on different levels aren't we? The idea was to illustrate just how pointless and ridiculous player comparisons actually are, just like the Busquets thing this has kinda gone over your head too, shame, we could have had something nice.

Andersonisgod

efb wrote: »

So he's a GOAT now... Oh my

Keane's reputation expanding at the same rate as the hole that William is digging.

efb

Billy86 wrote: »

Erm... no he wasn't?

Sorry missed the final

Billy86

efb wrote: »

So he's a GOAT now... Oh my

In his position, yes. As a matter of fact I clearly stated that in the very same post I keep referring back to. Just as only a small handful of CDM/box to box players in the history of the game have matched the play Keane exhibited from 1998-2002. Again...

"There are probably less than a half dozen players in his position who can match the play Roy Keane exhibited from 1998-2002.

Roy Keane is legitimately in the same bracket as Monti, Jose Andrade, Neeskens, Redondo, Falcao, and possibly even Rijkaard and Matthaus (the absolute gold standards at the position). With all due respect to them as they are fine players, Mascherano... is not. And Busquets... is not."

...

"I was talking all time there, in his position."

Magico Gonzalez

All I will say is the answer would be the opposite in Argentina were Mascherano is revered and Keane is not.

Billy86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Still it's a reference though, I mean it's as clear as day, its right there in that quote, should I highlight it again? You said you didn't reference those games at all and you did, I showed that you did, does that make you disingenuous? Maybe you're just forgetful? I mean I wouldn't want to think you a liar.

"he'd say Mascherano without doubt and he'd reference his incredible WC semi final performance, just as Billy references Keane vs Juventus or vs Netherlands."

Someone else referenced those games. I replied.

Funny, I'd say I'm one of the more informed people here but whatever,

Keep telling yourself that.

We really are operating on different levels aren't we? The idea was to illustrate just how pointless and ridiculous player comparisons actually are, just like the Busquets thing this has kinda gone over your head too, shame, we could have had something nice.

Don't worry, you can always throw on a few replays of the weekend and have something nice with yourself.

brevity

Blow it up ref!

Muff_Daddy

Andersonisgod wrote: »

So are you now telling me that any player from a top 10 country can't be considered "the best in the world"? How about top 20 country? Where's the cut off point I wonder? Yes Mascherano had great players around him when he put in that incredible performance in the semi final, just like Keane had great players around him when he put in that incredible performance vs Juventus yet nobody uses that as a stick to beat Keane with.

No, you're twisting words again. You don't even know what my opinion is as to who's better for a start, as I haven't proffered it yet. You're jumping the gun. You constantly bang on about medals and accolades as if that is the measuring stick of how a player is to be judged, and there is cases to be made that a standout player who is not in the top 20 teams in the world could be better than an individual in a once in a generation team.

You're correct about Keane having great players around him a club level.

Silly, hypothetical question that absolutely doesn't take into account the needs of the team. Replace Mascherano at the back with Keane are Barcelona better or worse? Replace Sergio Busquets, the heartbeat of Barcelona and Spain's tiki taka with Roy Keane, are they better or worse? It cuts both ways.

Is it silly? You mentioned earlier in the thread that Busquets graduated from La Masia and has played with players and in a system since a very young age. He has a role in the team, and fulfills it to the barca standard. The argument could be made that this is advantageous to Sergio Busquets, one that not every footballer is privileged to have. There was no La Masia in Cobh. Not to take anything away from Busquets, he is a smashing footballer, technically better than Keane, and was the best player on the pitch in the Champions League final, and there is an argument to be made that he's better than Roy Keane.

But that's what it is, an argument. You're posting style comes across too much as he's not Blaugrana, therefore he is simply not good enough.