Iniesta - Is there another? | Announces retirement

I think when you have a player like Zidane/Iniesta it is almost impossible to decide who is better. They both had great dribbling, ability to carry the ball forward, match-winning plays, assists, goals. The decider for me is that Zidane was never part of a midfield that dominated as hard as Iniesta has done. It shows that Iniesta was easy to build a team around whereas Zidane with all the money of Madrid failed to build a midfield around Zidane which reached the Barcelona sides domination.

Zidane in the AM position made himself look amazing but the teams did not always look as amazing as Zidane did.
 
thepolice123 said:
So much wrong in this I don't even know where to begin. I think you mixed up Xavi with Iniesta. Iniesta has always been the one who stepped up when Barcelona are lacking penetration. Even yesterday when Spain looked devoid of inspiration, Iniesta was the one who kept driving through the Italian defence.
Click to expand...


exactly. same for spain.

Xavi delivers the plan, Iniesta the imagination and the winning goal when the chips are down.
 
Annahnomoss said:
I think when you have a player like Zidane/Iniesta it is almost impossible to decide who is better. They both had great dribbling, ability to carry the ball forward, match-winning plays, assists, goals. The decider for me is that Zidane was never part of a midfield that dominated as hard as Iniesta has done. It shows that Iniesta was easy to build a team around whereas Zidane with all the money of Madrid failed to build a midfield around Zidane which reached the Barcelona sides domination.

Zidane in the AM position made himself look amazing but the teams did not always look as amazing as Zidane did.
Click to expand...


How about his Juventus side two straight champions league finals, well 3 but he was there for two I believe and his France side international football should be counted. Zidane has made a bigger individual mark Iniesta has as many big game goals but Iniesta shares the spotlight with Messi and Xavi if he is playing well they almost always are too. Zidane has been in great teams his whole career things didn't come together at Real. Queiroz had them playing their best stuff but bar Del Bosque but I remember they burnt out he employed little rotation and rarely took off the big names when they 3-0, 4-0 up.
 
It was a pleasure to watch him against Brazil. Seemed to be the only Spanish player who came out of that game with any credibility. Wonderful to watch him twist and turn whilst being hacked down at every opportunity.
 
JaffyJoe said:
Xavi is an arrogant man in all honesty he has a quiet profile off the field though but yes Scholes is a player highly rated on the continent and by former pro's. A footballer's footballer.
Click to expand...


How is he arrogant? I watched a documentary with him where pretty much his whole family lives with him in a not so extravagant house. Seemed very humble to me. I'd like to know how he is arrogant.
 
vuc said:
How is he arrogant? I watched a documentary with him where pretty much his whole family lives with him in a not so extravagant house. Seemed very humble to me. I'd like to know how he is arrogant.
Click to expand...


He has a tendency to come out and criticize the way other teams play Barca is the best etc etc not humble just my opinion. He comes out and speaks out of turn alot.
 
JaffyJoe said:
How about his Juventus side two straight champions league finals, well 3 but he was there for two I believe and his France side international football should be counted. Zidane has made a bigger individual mark Iniesta has as many big game goals but Iniesta shares the spotlight with Messi and Xavi if he is playing well they almost always are too. Zidane has been in great teams his whole career things didn't come together at Real. Queiroz had them playing their best stuff but bar Del Bosque but I remember they burnt out he employed little rotation and rarely took off the big names when they 3-0, 4-0 up.
Click to expand...


Zidane has little on Iniesta in terms of International success. The Juventus side was admittedly one of the best sides the last 20 years but they were not really near the "current" Barcelona side which is what I mean.

That Juventus struggled had a +2 statistics after 3 knock-out games.(When they won the CL)They played Nantes, Madrid and Ajax and failed to dominate in any of the games. They won but it was not near domination. They lost to Nantes, Madrid and drew Ajax in the final and won. They didn't even win the league when they won the CL and they are closer to Uniteds Ronaldo side than Barcelona.

The year after they played better in general in Europe but lost the Final comfortably 3-1 against Leverkusen.

Zidane's France, Juventus and Real Madrid all failed to dominate games anywhere near what Iniestas Spain/Barcelona has done. Individually I think they were pretty much at the same level but having different playing styles they fit in to teams differently. I think that if you build a team around Zidane you will never get a team as good as if you build one around Iniesta which history showed.

No manager ever got a Zidane team to absolutely dominate on the same level as 2 managers has made an Iniesta team dominate. I think that the Ronaldinho side was much more even with Juventus as well.

Edit; Just want to highlight that my stand is that they are equally great as individuals but Iniesta's style makes a team with him in it have a higher skill-ceiling.
 
JaffyJoe said:
He has a tendency to come out and criticize the way other teams play Barca is the best etc etc not humble just my opinion. He comes out and speaks out of turn alot.
Click to expand...


Ah, didn't know that. As I said, the documentary made him seem real humble, maybe a lot of it is heat of the moment and he's not actually intending to be arrogant.
 
vuc said:
Ah, didn't know that. As I said, the documentary made him seem real humble, maybe a lot of it is heat of the moment and he's not actually intending to be arrogant.
Click to expand...


I agree he is a nice guy just annoying how he looks down on other philosophies. He was much more quiet when they were not winning. Iniesta is confident in his team without disregarding others and their style. I do like Xavi terrific player I watched that doc as well.
 
Annahnomoss said:
Zidane has little on Iniesta in terms of International success. The Juventus side was admittedly one of the best sides the last 20 years but they were not really near the "current" Barcelona side which is what I mean.

That Juventus struggled had a +2 statistics after 3 knock-out games.(When they won the CL)They played Nantes, Madrid and Ajax and failed to dominate in any of the games. They won but it was not near domination. They lost to Nantes, Madrid and drew Ajax in the final and won. They didn't even win the league when they won the CL and they are closer to Uniteds Ronaldo side than Barcelona.

The year after they played better in general in Europe but lost the Final comfortably 3-1 against Leverkusen.

Zidane's France, Juventus and Real Madrid all failed to dominate games anywhere near what Iniestas Spain/Barcelona has done. Individually I think they were pretty much at the same level but having different playing styles they fit in to teams differently. I think that if you build a team around Zidane you will never get a team as good as if you build one around Iniesta which history showed.

No manager ever got a Zidane team to absolutely dominate on the same level as 2 managers has made an Iniesta team dominate. I think that the Ronaldinho side was much more even with Juventus as well.

Edit; Just want to highlight that my stand is that they are equally great as individuals but Iniesta's style makes a team with him in it have a higher skill-ceiling.
Click to expand...


I see what you mean. They played Dortmund I think you meant right? Nobody has dominated like Barca/Spain has these last 5 years. Maybe Cruiyff with Holland and Ajax from what little I have seen and read, but I was not around for that. Zidane was more tested in terms of seeing what he can do as the clear best player on his team than Iniesta has been, though so important for Spain Xavi is equally as important. Then with Barca he has had Messi. Would Zidane fit into the team concept and pressing game they play as well as deferring to Messi as well as Iniesta has?
 
Annahnomoss said:
Zidane has little on Iniesta in terms of International success. The Juventus side was admittedly one of the best sides the last 20 years but they were not really near the "current" Barcelona side which is what I mean.

That Juventus struggled had a +2 statistics after 3 knock-out games.(When they won the CL)They played Nantes, Madrid and Ajax and failed to dominate in any of the games. They won but it was not near domination. They lost to Nantes, Madrid and drew Ajax in the final and won. They didn't even win the league when they won the CL and they are closer to Uniteds Ronaldo side than Barcelona.

The year after they played better in general in Europe but lost the Final comfortably 3-1 against Leverkusen.

Zidane's France, Juventus and Real Madrid all failed to dominate games anywhere near what Iniestas Spain/Barcelona has done. Individually I think they were pretty much at the same level but having different playing styles they fit in to teams differently. I think that if you build a team around Zidane you will never get a team as good as if you build one around Iniesta which history showed.

No manager ever got a Zidane team to absolutely dominate on the same level as 2 managers has made an Iniesta team dominate. I think that the Ronaldinho side was much more even with Juventus as well.

Edit; Just want to highlight that my stand is that they are equally great as individuals but Iniesta's style makes a team with him in it have a higher skill-ceiling.
Click to expand...
Would you call Barca 08/09 Iniesta's Barcelona? It's a weird comparison anyway, because Zidane was usually the best player in his teams (Juventus, France and Real) while Iniesta was never the best player for Barca (in general, not in a single game of course) and probably only in 2012 the most influential spanish player in an international tournament win.
 
Balu said:
Would you call Barca 08/09 Iniesta's Barcelona? It's a weird comparison anyway, because Zidane was usually the best player in his teams (Juventus, France and Real) while Iniesta was never the best player for Barca and probably only in 2012 the most influential spanish player.
Click to expand...


he was their best player in 2010 and 2008 as well.
 
B20 said:
he was their best player in 2010 and 2008 as well.
Click to expand...
You could arguably say that for 2010 because of the game winning goal in the final, but it's not true for 2008 and it's not true for 2010 up to the final. Xavi was clearly the better player in midfield and Villa's contribution was just as big as Iniesta's in 2010.
 
One can't forget that Real/Juve had absolutely great line-ups. Figo, Beckham, Ronaldo, Owen, Raul, Roberto Carlos, Casillas, Robinho, Makelele, Salgado etc.

Zidane had a great team at Juve too but there he was quite clearly a level above everybody else. It is important to note that that Juventus side however played the CL final without Zidane and won.

So the team Zidane was the star in was still good enough to win a CL final without him. He was not carrying them on his back or anywhere near that.

Zidane joined the 1995 CL winners and did not improve them substantially which I think really tells the story. They even got worse results after he joined than before he was there.
 
Balu said:
Would you call Barca 08/09 Iniesta's Barcelona? It's a weird comparison anyway, because Zidane was usually the best player in his teams (Juventus, France and Real) while Iniesta was never the best player for Barca (in general, not in a single game of course) and probably only in 2012 the most influential spanish player in an international tournament win.
Click to expand...


Of course not, I wouldn't call Juve/Real Zidane's Juve/Real but it is easier than stating the years every time. I think only a rare few players have reached a status where a team is "Their team". Maradona for example.
 
JaffyJoe said:
I agree he is a nice guy just annoying how he looks down on other philosophies. He was much more quiet when they were not winning. Iniesta is confident in his team without disregarding others and their style. I do like Xavi terrific player I watched that doc as well.
Click to expand...


Yeah, don't like it when players become more arrogant after dominating.
 
Somehow I get the feeling Xavi's contribution in the past is now massively downplayed because he's now clearly in decline and Iniesta is at his peak. Xavi in 08/09 (Euros 08 and the following season with Barca) was simply incredible and I doubt Iniesta now is a better player than Xavi was back then. Anyone remember that 2-6 at Real that season with Xavi giving 4 assists? He finished that season with 22 assists in the league and 7 assists in the CL (according to transfermarkt). His range of passing was spectacular. And he did that while controling the midfield and the tempo of the game like very few players did in the last 20 years.

When Guardiola changed Barca's style towards the possession based game that peaked in 2011, he contributed less and less in attack. But some of the descriptions of Iniesta and Barca/Spain prior to 2010 sound like an attempt to rewrite history to me and really belittle Xavi's contribution to the teams back then.
 
Xavi was immense. I think he was more influential to Barcelona for a few years for sure, he's not an attacking midfielder which is why he's not mentioned but his ability to control games allows Iniesta to play the game that suits him best. Xavi's Less spectacular but without Xavi there is/was no dominating possession and passing game that we know now.
 
I understand your point but we can't forget that the decline of both teams has coincided with Xavi's which should further highlight his importance to both teams. Iniesta is a different player he was not as dominant as Xavi though that is for sure. I just think at time Xavi's style is forgotten in comparison to Iniesta's that is all. Both have had the most success with each other Xavi was not as successful or dominant before Iniesta came along.
 
kouroux said:
Did you even read the thread ?
Click to expand...

yep... stuff like:

My point is summed up nicely by Brwned above: Iniesta sticks to the plan, he doesn't have a game of his own, beyond that plan. When the team clearly struggle (as they did on some very conspicuous occasions last season and the one before that) his ineffectiveness - his inability to affect the match positively and directly - stood out for me

WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF...


 
Annahnomoss said:
I think when you have a player like Zidane/Iniesta it is almost impossible to decide who is better. They both had great dribbling, ability to carry the ball forward, match-winning plays, assists, goals. The decider for me is that Zidane was never part of a midfield that dominated as hard as Iniesta has done. It shows that Iniesta was easy to build a team around whereas Zidane with all the money of Madrid failed to build a midfield around Zidane which reached the Barcelona sides domination.

Zidane in the AM position made himself look amazing but the teams did not always look as amazing as Zidane did.
Click to expand...
That's silly. You can't compare the galacticos team to the barcelona one. It was a freak show. If madrid failed to build a midfield as good as barca's I don't see what zidane has to do with it? Zidane was just as easy to build a team round. Easier infact given he was much more of leader and brought others into play better.

As for the comparison, it's zidane for me. He was the more complete player. Stronger, better finisher, better shot from long range and a better leader. And he affected games more. Iniesta should be better in the final third.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
That's silly. You can't compare the galacticos team to the barcelona one. It was a freak show. If madrid failed to build a midfield as good as barca's I don't see what zidane has to do with it? Zidane was just as easy to build a team round. Easier infact given he was much more of leader and brought others into play better.

As for the comparison, it's zidane for me. He was the more complete player. Stronger, better finisher, better shot from long range and a better leader. And he affected games more. Iniesta should be better in the final third.
Click to expand...


Juventus was a freak-show too?
 
Iniesta's a more flexible, disciplined player so there might well be a shred of truth to the idea it's easier to fit him into a successful team but using the amount of trophies they've won as proof is a bit silly. Barcelona just had a group of players that came together by coincidence and Iniesta profited from that. It's not something Iniesta deserves any credit for. 8 of their 11 players in the starting lineup in the 2011 final came from the youth team. Zidane and Juventus never had that luxury.
 
That isn't exactly a luxury, rather more tough to create than buying international stars and making a superstar team, which is what Juve did. Davids, Deschamps and Zidane were three internationally proven superstar names who were at their prime ready to perform while the Barca players had to work a lot harder to reach that level and have the faith of the management in letting them develop. I wouldn't call our class of 92 a luxury, rather immensely determined youngsters who had to spend many years with huge expectations and huge shoes to fill while also not let the club completely drift away from success. Roman's chelsea, now that is a luxury that every player in the team had, that was to have paired up with the league's best. Zidane had the "luxury" of being supported by that watertight platform, yet he wasn't good enough to not be marked out by Paul Lambert of all people on the biggest of stage.
 
AldoRaine18 said:
That isn't exactly a luxury, rather more tough to create than buying international stars and making a superstar team, which is what Juve did. Davids, Deschamps and Zidane were three internationally proven superstar names who were at their prime ready to perform while the Barca players had to work a lot harder to reach that level and have the faith of the management in letting them develop. I wouldn't call our class of 92 a luxury, rather immensely determined youngsters who had to spend many years with huge expectations and huge shoes to fill while also not let the club completely drift away from success. Roman's chelsea, now that is a luxury that every player in the team had, that was to have paired up with the league's best. Zidane had the "luxury" of being supported by that watertight platform, yet he wasn't good enough to not be marked out by Paul Lambert of all people on the biggest of stage.
Click to expand...


It's not a luxury to play with world class players who you happen to have grown up with and know inside out, compared to playing with world class players that you haven't grown up with and need to get to know??!
 
Fergus' son said:
It's not a luxury to play with world class players who you happen to have grown up with and know inside out, compared to playing with world class players that you haven't grown up with and need to get to know??!
Click to expand...

It's quite the reverse here. They weren't world class when they started playing together, but they worked harder and harder to achieve that understanding that makes the sum of the parts a lot greater than the individuals. There were many times whent he quality of Xavi and Iniesta in the team was questioned, many times when a question was asked that why shouldn't the club buy an experienced proven player rather than giving more time to them, just like with any youngster who goes through a long development at one club. If I remember correctly in around 2000-02 time Jermaine Pennant was rated by some news channel as a better young prospect than Iniesta, so they were not really born with this understanding, rather they worked a lot harder to achieve it. If it was easy, every club would have a set of players they think have potential play together for a few years and create that level of understanding, but it rarely happens. Even to this day a lot will argue that Xavi or Iniesta alone in a club wouldn't have been this dominating as they are together, so even after doing what they have they are at a disadvantage when it comes to being appreciated for their own talent, and they have to keep working as hard as ever because the minute that telepathic understanding goes, they could be found out. It is definitely not a luxury compared to international class footballers capable of winning games on their own and having done that prior to their time. Obviously this is all subject to them being added to the correct tactics and balance, which is why it is not a given that each and every moneybag and walk to glory by buying 4-5 big players, but Juve didn't have that. The team was very balanced and tactically fine tuned by a great coach, so after that it is indeed a luxury for those very players to find themselves in the company of other greats in a system that suits all of them than being a group of players pinging balls to each others for hours to even be considered for the first team on the hopes that they will be world class one day and clearly the fact less and less teams are able to create homegrown greats, not just now but since a long time, shows what is a bigger luxury.
 
AldoRaine18 said:
Zidane had the "luxury" of being supported by that watertight platform, yet he wasn't good enough to not be marked out by Paul Lambert of all people on the biggest of stage.
Click to expand...

That's a bit of an odd comment really. Lambert prove himself to be one of the best British holding midfielders of the time.
 
That's highly overrating him and he himself wouldn't go that far saying that. A very efficient player who did his job well, shouldn't have been a match for the so called "never fails on the big stage" Zizou had he performed to his ability. As good as Lambert was, Zizou had a proper shocker on the biggest game of the season. This one year before he supposedly "won" the World Cup for France by putting head to ball in the final.
 
AldoRaine18 said:
That's highly overrating him and he himself wouldn't go that far saying that. A very efficient player who did his job well, shouldn't have been a match for the so called "never fails on the big stage" Zizou had he performed to his ability. As good as Lambert was, Zizou had a proper shocker on the biggest game of the season. This one year before he supposedly "won" the World Cup for France by putting head to ball in the final.
Click to expand...

One of the best British holding midfielders of his time is highly over-rating him? Who was the competition? There was David Batty, Paul Ince, Gary McCallister, but I'm struggling to think of anyone else and Lambert's performances at Dortmund that year were better than anything those players managed at the cutting edge in Europe. And we both know Zidane did a lot more in that final than just the two headers. Yes the rest of his performances during that tournament were patchy, but he certainly turned it on in the final, albeit Brazil were shell-shocked and destined to lose irrespective of his display.
 
Gio said:
One of the best British holding midfielders of his time is highly over-rating him? Who was the competition? There was David Batty, Paul Ince, Gary McCallister, but I'm struggling to think of anyone else and Lambert's performances at Dortmund that year were better than anything those players managed at the cutting edge in Europe. And we both know Zidane did a lot more in that final than just the two headers. Yes the rest of his performances during that tournament were patchy, but he certainly turned it on in the final, albeit Brazil were shell-shocked and destined to lose irrespective of his display.
Click to expand...

Ah I misunderstood that is the "best holding midfielder in Britain". Yeah he was probably one of the best British holding midfielder but as you said the names there hardly make that a great achievement.


paceme said:
That's a fecking shit reason. Mikel marked Iniesta out of a game in the champions league last season. You can't just point to one performance as the 'standard'.
Click to expand...

You cannot seriously compare a team putting 10 men behind to stop a combined attacking unit to the job Lambert did. Zidane was in his pocket for 90 minutes in a Champions League Final, as incredible as that may sound.
 
I don't see why that's so incredible. Mascherano marked Kaká out of the final despite Kaká clearly being a great big game player, some bloke called Voronin marked Uwe Seeler out of the game despite him clearly being one of Germany's most renowned big-game players, there's countless examples of players doing superb man-marking jobs on some great, great players. Sure you've got Ronny Johnsen on Zidane too. Generally it has more to do with him being the only creator in the team and thus being able to be singled out than any indictment of his quality. You just have it in for Zizou for some reason.
 
I never said that Zidane was the only one to have faced that sort of a job. But it really irks me when people cannot stop banging on Zizou's "big game awesomeness" like he never failed in a big game. He is a player whose strengths get underrated and other attributes (won't say a weakness) get overrated.

Also from what I have read Voronin is one of the greatest Soviet footballers of all time so it wasn't as incredible as Lambert taking Zidane out of the game with Davids and Deschamps there to support. Zidane had a lot less excuses to fail there than a few other "big name getting marked out" incident, has to be said.
 
Aldo I see where your coming from but he has enough notable performances in 'big games' for that tag to be earned. Goals in the Champions league final, world cup finals (plural) dominating Euro 2000 and World Cup 2006 knockout stages his reputation is well earned. He has not played well in EVERY big game but who has? the ability to stop the opponents best player playing well is always the main goal of the opposition and in that regard a few times Zidane was kept quiet.
 
Indeed. Iniesta has never had to face a strict man-marking job in his Champions League finals because the opposition have been so busy marking Messi that the best they can do is keep a close eye on Xaviesta. Hence why there's merit to pointing out Iniesta's inability to really step up in Messi's absence v PSG. The mere presence of a half-fit Messi opened up space for Iniesta and co. to take the game to PSG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.