Zidane at 5 is fine, if only for the audacity to chip a penalty off the bar and in during a World Cup final.
FourFourTwo ranked their 100 best football players of all time( 2022 version)
- Thread starter General_Elegancia
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are joined by special guest Anders (@Lyng) to celebrate the news that ETH is staying put! They also talk about the Euros so far, with special attention on England, Scotland and Denmark. They then finish with some transfer talk and the potential comings and outgoings at Old Trafford.
Yeah, he was just too cool for him not to get overrated. He usually is the fan's favourite out of that 1982 side too, despite not being its best player.In the same way Europeans underrate Pelé, they overrate the hell out of Socrates for whatever reason. Maybe because he was mysterious, a doctor etc? Him being top30 above many Brazilians is weird, nobody would put Socrates above Rivaldo here. Rivaldo not even in top100? MVP of 2 consecutive world cups for brazil
You guys get the pre-90s Brazilians all wrong
Rivaldo is one of the weirdest omissions. And even having Socrates higher than Didi and Rivellino seems odd.
Starting to believe Jean-Pierre Papin was a figment of my imagination.
It's time to share my points after I've already seen a lot of great opinions from other fellas.
+Facchetti is too low IMHO, he's one of the best full-backs and Italian defenders of all time. He is even remembered as the greatest wing-back of all time and Beckenbauer personally idolized him and used him as a role model for attacking contributions from a defender. If Nilton Santos is placed at 50 and Gaetano Scirea is placed at 54, I think Facchetti should be placed a lot higher than 91. It's too low for a generational talent like him at 91.
+Zidane point, I agree with many people in this thread that he's placed too high. He's for me a great player, a superb ball controller, a great passer, a great dribbler, and a skillful player. But I think placing him at 5 is too high, he should be below players like Di Stefano, Cryuff, Franz Beckenbauer, or Platini( debatable). I think his ranking should be between 8-20 (a wide range depending on each person but I would place him between 8-15).
+Rijkaard at 77 is too low, he must be in the top 50. He's rated as the greatest defensive midfielder and one of the greatest midfielders of all time.
+Paolo Rossi at 42 is a joke tbh, I think his World Cup 1982 performances boost his status and reputation in the football world. His career as a top player finished too early at 31, and his domestic scoring records after 28 years old didn't impress me so much. He lacked the longevity to be in the top 50. I don't know why Alex Reid ranked him ahead of his teammates like Dino Zoff and Gaetano Scirea
+Maldini vs Baresi: I will answer this as a Milan fan, you can pick anyone else who you admire more to be the winner. I think both have different strengths and career paths. Maldini was pretty amazing since he's already a world-class defender at 19-20 years and his longevity was one of the best from any players in football history. He was a very consistent player, a very versatile player who could perform both center-back and fullback at the highest order. On the other hand, Baresi had a bit higher peak and he was a more dominant player than Maldini in terms of peak performance, and being a leader of a defense. A very close call for me.
Fun fact: Baresi's favorite team in Spain is Barcelona but Maldini's favorite team in Spain is Real Madrid. You can see a lot of Maldini's pictures with RM players.
+Messi, Pele, Maradona, and Ronaldo(7) are always settled at the top 4 in football rankings at the moment and I think it's fine.
@harms has already made the other great points and I agree with almost everything( especially other players like Krol, Elias Figueroa, Nesta, Breitner, Thuram, Bozsik, Rivaldo, Lewa, Suarez, and a lot of other great players who didn't feature in this list).
Overall, I think it's a good list and I respect Alex Reid's efforts in working on this hard project.
+Facchetti is too low IMHO, he's one of the best full-backs and Italian defenders of all time. He is even remembered as the greatest wing-back of all time and Beckenbauer personally idolized him and used him as a role model for attacking contributions from a defender. If Nilton Santos is placed at 50 and Gaetano Scirea is placed at 54, I think Facchetti should be placed a lot higher than 91. It's too low for a generational talent like him at 91.
+Zidane point, I agree with many people in this thread that he's placed too high. He's for me a great player, a superb ball controller, a great passer, a great dribbler, and a skillful player. But I think placing him at 5 is too high, he should be below players like Di Stefano, Cryuff, Franz Beckenbauer, or Platini( debatable). I think his ranking should be between 8-20 (a wide range depending on each person but I would place him between 8-15).
+Rijkaard at 77 is too low, he must be in the top 50. He's rated as the greatest defensive midfielder and one of the greatest midfielders of all time.
+Paolo Rossi at 42 is a joke tbh, I think his World Cup 1982 performances boost his status and reputation in the football world. His career as a top player finished too early at 31, and his domestic scoring records after 28 years old didn't impress me so much. He lacked the longevity to be in the top 50. I don't know why Alex Reid ranked him ahead of his teammates like Dino Zoff and Gaetano Scirea
+Maldini vs Baresi: I will answer this as a Milan fan, you can pick anyone else who you admire more to be the winner. I think both have different strengths and career paths. Maldini was pretty amazing since he's already a world-class defender at 19-20 years and his longevity was one of the best from any players in football history. He was a very consistent player, a very versatile player who could perform both center-back and fullback at the highest order. On the other hand, Baresi had a bit higher peak and he was a more dominant player than Maldini in terms of peak performance, and being a leader of a defense. A very close call for me.
Fun fact: Baresi's favorite team in Spain is Barcelona but Maldini's favorite team in Spain is Real Madrid. You can see a lot of Maldini's pictures with RM players.
+Messi, Pele, Maradona, and Ronaldo(7) are always settled at the top 4 in football rankings at the moment and I think it's fine.
@harms has already made the other great points and I agree with almost everything( especially other players like Krol, Elias Figueroa, Nesta, Breitner, Thuram, Bozsik, Rivaldo, Lewa, Suarez, and a lot of other great players who didn't feature in this list).
Overall, I think it's a good list and I respect Alex Reid's efforts in working on this hard project.
I don't think Iniesta is too high. He's probably in the top-4 players in the last 20 years for me. Extrapolate that out and 20th seems a good spot.
No Totti or Rivaldo strange. Perhaps objectively Totti is borderline, but Rivaldo certainly isn't. Wouldn't include Rooney.
No Totti or Rivaldo strange. Perhaps objectively Totti is borderline, but Rivaldo certainly isn't. Wouldn't include Rooney.
Tbh, Rivaldo should be on the list. His performances had answered it all.
As for inventing, things I've read state it began decades ago but has become a more common moniker under certain managers/systems these days. Some say it started with the Dutch in the mid-70s, some point to Grosics for Hungary in the 50s, while others point to the likes of Campos for Mexico and Higuita for Colombia who carried on the style.
What the hell was Barthez trying back in his pomp? He was always marauding around the area and sometimes trying to dribble out, acting like a wannabe defender or midfielder to the dismay of fans.
Lewa should be on, but not ahead of Rooney for me. Young Rooney was a force of nature. An incredible footballer with tenacity and was capable of absolute magic. He was shunted about everywhere when he should have been the jewel in the crown.
I agree, I think Iniesta was comfortably better.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but Rooney is rated far too low
No RVN?
Couldn't care less about who is where but the real joy of this list is the depth and the quality not included, football crushes every other major sport there.
Last edited:
Boxing is up there if not better.
Great Sport but no chance that an individual sport can match the depth of football. Could make a top 500 and you would still be leaving out incredible players.
Last edited:
It's bollocks.
It's part of the overrating of the '82 team in general.
I loved that team as a kid, but it's clearly overrated.
However, I would add that Socrates was a brilliant and in some ways rare/unusual player. But to rank him above Didi is just nonsense.
This isn’t a thread on potential from young players though. It's a players career and ability. I know we all love Rooney but Lewa objectively has had a better career and was the better player even if Rooney was a different beast as a teenager.
Surprised they haven't included Neymar. Great record for club and country and one of the more aesthetically pleasing brands of football in the last decade.
I don't know, the thing about boxing is that it's probably the oldest recorded major sport so you do get see some older great that isn't possible in football, proper football history begins in the 60s, also the fact that there are weight divisions means you get a ton of fighters to rank so there's that.
Still it's a point dick measuring contests, both are great.
Very good ranking.
Zidane way too high
Gulf of 50 spots about right but with Modric on top.
Iniesta was great at keeping possession and might have been the most technical dribbler ever but had way too little end product for an attacking midfielder and had little impact defensively. I find him way overrated.
Who on earth would choose him in your midfield over Ronaldinho?
I wouldn't even take him over Scholes or Redondo who are not even on the list.
Compiling such a list is a no-win situation really. Compared to many efforts, this makes a decent fist of it, covers a range of eras, a reasonably healthy representation of South Americans, and doesn't have too many obvious omissions. Still, it falls down for me in these three areas:
First, it has an odd representation of different eras. To give four examples across the decades:
Secondly, although there is a decent smattering of South Americans, there are some fairly major omissions. Figueroa, Falcao and Rivaldo should all have been ensconsed in the top half, never mind not mentioned. Probably Enzo Francescoli too. The placing of Socrates (29th), Rivellino (47th) and Jairzinho (53rd) looks more like a list of the coolest Brazilians. It's certainly not a list of the most effective ones.
Thirdly, the striker selection is odd as well and jars given it's an easier position to compare across the eras. Rossi at 42nd and Keegan at 48th looks like someone who knows nothing about football spent 5 minutes searching for Ballon D'Or winners. And the UK having 8 strikers seems a bit generous, with Italy, Argentina, Spain, Uruguay, Belgium, Austria, Sweden, Poland, etc all having a fat zero.
First, it has an odd representation of different eras. To give four examples across the decades:
- Moreno is a great shout at 51st. But no mention of his Brazilian equivalent at the time Zizinho.
- Matthews is high up at 33rd, while his peer Finney - who was often regarded as a better player in the English game - isn't listed in the top 100.
- Shearer is 86th, but no mention of Batistuta who was basically a slightly better and more proven version of him in every way.
- Zidane is 5th, yet spent much of his peak years second fiddle to Ronaldo (9th) and Rivaldo (not even listed).
Secondly, although there is a decent smattering of South Americans, there are some fairly major omissions. Figueroa, Falcao and Rivaldo should all have been ensconsed in the top half, never mind not mentioned. Probably Enzo Francescoli too. The placing of Socrates (29th), Rivellino (47th) and Jairzinho (53rd) looks more like a list of the coolest Brazilians. It's certainly not a list of the most effective ones.
Thirdly, the striker selection is odd as well and jars given it's an easier position to compare across the eras. Rossi at 42nd and Keegan at 48th looks like someone who knows nothing about football spent 5 minutes searching for Ballon D'Or winners. And the UK having 8 strikers seems a bit generous, with Italy, Argentina, Spain, Uruguay, Belgium, Austria, Sweden, Poland, etc all having a fat zero.
All these lists are subjective and pretty meaningless in my opinion.
I was lucky enough to have seen George Best play. The best in mine and Pepe’s opinion.
I was lucky enough to have seen George Best play. The best in mine and Pepe’s opinion.
Zidane way too high at 5. Ronaldinho was better for one, as was Original Ronaldo. Top 4 is pretty solid. I'd have a different order, Maradona, Messi, Pele, Cristiano Ronaldo, but not going to argue it too much. Neuer at 38 and Schmeichel at 92 is laughable though. Schmeichel was better, let alone so far below in the rankings. fecking hard to do these lists and not have some disagreement. I could really only pick those two things that bothered me.
Zidane is overrated. Iniesta was more consistent and also had the big moments so I'd actually have him abit higher than Zidane.
For me top 10, interms of their career:
1. Messi (amongst the very best in history at every facet of the game)
2. Pele (tbh from hearsay, but need to respect the older generation opinions)
3. Maradona (greatest wc campaign ever by FAR probably won't ever be replicated)
4. Cristiano (longevity, goals, individual and team success despite lacking the on- the- ball genius of others on the list)
5. Cruijff (Revolutionary as a player and then as a manager)
5. Backenbauer (a leader, brought the sweepers role to the game, brilliant)
7. Di Stefano (also on hearsay, see Pele)
8. Ronaldo (Could have been higher if not for his knees or maybe not given his typical Brazilian attitude)
9. Van Basten (the perfect no 9)
10. Puskas (See Di Stefano and Pele)
Ronaldinho would be on the list but his peak was too short lived. Similarly, George Best would also be on the list but for relative lack of longevity interms of success on the pitch.
For me top 10, interms of their career:
1. Messi (amongst the very best in history at every facet of the game)
2. Pele (tbh from hearsay, but need to respect the older generation opinions)
3. Maradona (greatest wc campaign ever by FAR probably won't ever be replicated)
4. Cristiano (longevity, goals, individual and team success despite lacking the on- the- ball genius of others on the list)
5. Cruijff (Revolutionary as a player and then as a manager)
5. Backenbauer (a leader, brought the sweepers role to the game, brilliant)
7. Di Stefano (also on hearsay, see Pele)
8. Ronaldo (Could have been higher if not for his knees or maybe not given his typical Brazilian attitude)
9. Van Basten (the perfect no 9)
10. Puskas (See Di Stefano and Pele)
Ronaldinho would be on the list but his peak was too short lived. Similarly, George Best would also be on the list but for relative lack of longevity interms of success on the pitch.
Last edited:
This was seeming mostly voted for by people who likely grew up and heavily watched a generation they've almost entirely just.... left out. Barring a few, one of whom is wildly getting feedback as being the most overrated great player at this point (Zidane).
Man Utd Treble and League Dominating Team - No one who was there for the full duration at least. (Beckham, Keane, Scholes, Giggs etc)
Italy World Cup Teaam - No one? (Cannavaro, Nesta, Del Piero, Pirlo, Totti)
France - Thuram, Desailly.
Ballon d'Or Winners missing - Rivaldo, Owen, Nedved, Shevchenko and the already mentioned Cannavaro.
Regular Top 10 in the above voting missing - Raul, Gerrard, Lampard, Terry, RvN.
I'm not vouching for them all at all... but I could almost make the argument for anyone of those over some on the list. It just seems wild that it's casually been blanked out heavily. I consider Thuram a terrific defender, in two positions in World Cup Finals... and yet, Zanetti's the one who gets in at the end as they realize they've forgot a generation. (PS - Zanetti also great, but what's the case for him over even Rio, forget the above lot?).
Man Utd Treble and League Dominating Team - No one who was there for the full duration at least. (Beckham, Keane, Scholes, Giggs etc)
Italy World Cup Teaam - No one? (Cannavaro, Nesta, Del Piero, Pirlo, Totti)
France - Thuram, Desailly.
Ballon d'Or Winners missing - Rivaldo, Owen, Nedved, Shevchenko and the already mentioned Cannavaro.
Regular Top 10 in the above voting missing - Raul, Gerrard, Lampard, Terry, RvN.
I'm not vouching for them all at all... but I could almost make the argument for anyone of those over some on the list. It just seems wild that it's casually been blanked out heavily. I consider Thuram a terrific defender, in two positions in World Cup Finals... and yet, Zanetti's the one who gets in at the end as they realize they've forgot a generation. (PS - Zanetti also great, but what's the case for him over even Rio, forget the above lot?).
Glaring omissions, yes.
Figueroa in particular (reason enough to dismiss the person responsible for the the list as an ignoramus).
But also Finney, yes. If you're gonna include Matthews at 33rd (which is pretty high, relatively speaking) it makes no sense not to include Finney at all.
Zidane is the best French player ever. I don’t care about Platini and other greats. When Zidane was wearing this blue shirt, he was the best player to have played for that team ever. He won one World cup, almost made it two, and an European cup. I think it’s fine to put him above Cruyff because he won the world cup being the best player (being the best when France lost it too). I can agree that he was not as consistent in club football but in big games he was incredible. Few players had better performances in the biggest games.
Anyway, it’s fine to put him lower. But as a French, I just can’t because he was the best player ever to play for France.
I am sure people in Argentina fell the same ormore about Maradona. The guy was incredible for his country (I was too young to see him play).
3. Messi Good
2. Ronaldo Better
1. George Best
2. Ronaldo Better
1. George Best
In order for me:
In terms of pure talent: Pele/Messi/Maradona, L.Ronaldo
I'm including Pele based on hearsay from old timers. Got to respect their opinion.
Interms of career (factoring in longevity): Messi, Pele, Cristiano
Interms of "legacy": Pele, Maradona, Messi, Cristiano, Cruijff, Beckenbauer, L. Ronaldo
Interms of goal stats: Pele , Messi (has more goals per game than Cristiano), Cristiano.
This ofcourse does not include other stats like assists, big chances created, through balls completed, dribbles completed.
Zidane is not a better player than George Best.
No 10s are the best players in any team imo. For me the main thing against Pele is that he played when football was in its infancy so much so that many players were actually part timers. In addition most of the goals he scored were in regional championship while his record in national championships wasn't as good. But ofcourse, for his record for Brazil, his performances in 1958 and the glowing praises by the likes if Bobby Charlton, you have to have him in top 3
People don't recognise the work rate and team play that characterised Rooney's game. In addition he was a very good passer. Everyone remembers Van Persies volley but no one talks about Rooneys brilliant pass. The only thing is Rooney could have been so much more if he was as dedicated to his craft as Cristiano.
Its not about potential, but you are talking about a good 8 years for Rooney as an absolutely monster. Incredibly versatile, hard working, good finisher, great passer, excellent control. He has it all and was an all round better player for me at his peak than Lewandowski (as good as he has been)
Lots of names on the list (Best, Ronaldinho) has relatively short peaks. It doesn’t mean they weren’t spectacular players.
United fans have a tendency to underrate Rooney (possibly because of his final years), but at the peak of his powers, he was absolutely phenomenal for years.
Strange you place Ronaldinho that high when you mentioned career longevity and stats as your main criteria, when he is clearly lacking both.
But interesting inclusion on Zico. His stats as AM is unreal.
The World Cup I watched it was Thuram and DeSailly along with the rest of the back line who carried France the whole way through. Zidane was far more the best Frenchman in 2006 from what I saw. No clue why they imploded in 2002.
Don Elias was pretty unlucky that his peak belonged to the early 1970s, the era when broadcasting wasn't ubiquitous as today's football(2010s) and football wasn't as globalization as post-1980s. Another reason is Elias played mostly 20 years in South America, which isn't easy to find his footage in league games or even Copa Libertadores. Over 80 percent of his footage on footballia.net are his National games, it's fecking hard to find his footage during Penarol or CD Palestino. Also, his national team was Chile, which wasn't surrounded by a lot of quality players and his position alone couldn't carry the team to the highest order like attackers( cam/cf/striker or wing-forward).
I'm confident that if he had played or hit his peak in the early 1980s, he would have been a lot more famous or recognized by football fans due to globalization, technology especially broadcasting on color tv or he would move to some teams in Serie-A/ La Liga(Passarella esque). Anyway, he's a real-deal talent that is often overlooked due to a lack of footage and I can understand this point.
Top 500 is super hard not because of lack of talent but because it could make a lot of controversies and it is very difficult to research or find the information you must think about pre-historic players( 1880s-1940s) like J.L.Andrade, Monti, Orsi, Meazza or Schollser that didn't have any real footage or anything else, the only way you can find their information comes from old match reports or some articles which again is hard to judge. Players in the second half 1940s until the second half 1950s like Zizinho, Juan Alberto Schiaffino, Jose Manuel Moreno, Di Stefano, Obdulio Valera, Neil Franklin, etc. also didn't have that much of live games or footage or even didn't have it.
+I would agree that Socrates at 29 is a bit too high due to his personality or bigger-than-life attitude, he's a bit inconsistent due to his unprofessional attitude and injuries. His performances in the Brazilian league from what I've searched are not that impressive and he also never participated in Copa Libertadores. Maybe if Brazil won the world cup, his reputation would be a lot different. Anyway, his talent was out-of-this-world and his style of playing was beautiful, skillful, and unique.
Agree with this. The disrespect towards Zidane is unwarranted. It's not shocking to see him in the top 5.