The water-logged pitch and the Portillo assist
Iniesta - Is there another? | Announces retirement
- Thread starter SAred
- Start date
Of course it's a serious question. People say all the time that Zidane was such a big-game player, something I don't really doubt. I am just interested in two things. Do people who repeatedly say this have some particular games in mind, and if that is the case, which are those games. Or are they just repeating a statement that is not bound to be questioned.
Ajax (H) 1996-97 - Champions League
Ajax (A) 1996-97 - Champions League
Man Utd (A) 1996-97 - Champions League
Inter (H) 1996-97 - Serie A
PSG (A) 1996-97 - UEFA Super Cup
Just a pick of five from his first season at Rube, where he struggled for quite a lot of the campaign. There are more I could've taken -- Roma (A), Milan (A), Sampdoria (A), etc -- but you asked for five.
In case you're implying his big game effect was a little overrated, you might not be wrong, but he was still a player who took charge against the better sides. Didn't he lead Bordeaux to a UEFA cup final? I may be confusing them with Marseille, not sure.
Off the top of my head:
CL final vs Leverkusen
WC 06 vs Brasil, he also played very well in the games leading up to it. You can also count the final, but I guess he tarnished it at the end. He also destroyed Spain in the early stages.
Juventus vs Man United, both legs if I recall correctly.
Juventus vs Ajax, in the Turin leg.
France vs England, euro 2004
France vs Spain, euro 2000
Agreed about 98, by the way. It wasn't actually his best tournament, the other midfielders in that side were all more in-form, but I guess no one will forget the goals in the final anytime soon.
i don't know if he made one to owen, but he made one to riise at 21 that was very similar:
Go to 49th minute, 28 seconds.
You could really mention the entire Euro 2000 and not just the match vs Spain.
Iniesta will go down as the greatest playmaker of all time by a country mile and watching him rip the Atletcio defense to shreds last night was a real joy to watch. Even if the best defenses in the world park the bus against Barca - Iniesta will still rip them to shreds, doesn't always mean the forwards will score the chances he creates......he's a one off
Zidane played well in the final, he didn't have a good tournament. But on the ball he was his usually self. If Guviarch was on his job they would have been a few up before half time. But Zidane was quality, Brazil couldn't get near him.
Last edited:
Plus 1
Im not bothered to list them all, but against spain and Portugal in the last world cup he was great and that was when he was at the end of his career and considered to be past his best. He wasn't bad in the final either, but i wouldn't put it down as a game he excelled in.
Everyone mentions the Spain and Portugal games from Euro 2000 so I should have a good look (I did watch them back then, but it was ages ago, so i can't recollect them properly)
What about club games with Juve or Madrid? Someone mentioned a game against Valencia in 2003 or something like that, and his Cl performances versus Barca and Leverkusen in 2002. I have recently re-watched the CL final from 2002 and he was very, very good, but not as good as Iniesta was last night.
In any case, I am not doubting ZZ's talent for a second here, I just get the sense that people merely out of custom tend to hype ZZ up, with little personal knowledge, plus I really want to see his best ever games.
I mean spain and Portugal from wc06. He was very good in both matches vs united too, but maybe not the star as raul and Ronaldo got more credit over the two legs. He is hyped up but that is a mixture of nostalgia and other things. Its like how some people cant accept messi is better than the best player from when they were young, like maradona, George best etc. When messi (and Ronaldo too i guess) retire, they will be hyped up too and people wont talk about the flaws in their game.
You're right that Zidane gets a good press and many assume he was the star of his generation when, at the time, he was one of a few who were around the top. His tendency to shine on the biggest stage also gives him a favourable reception from those, especially over here, who did not watch him every week when his consistency in the bread and butter of domestic football was questionable. Still you're right to try and find some of his best performances and check those out before elevating Iniesta to another tier - I see them fairly on par at the moment.
You see I think it's gone so far the other way now and his performance in the final is actually overshadowed by his goals. He was easily the best player on the pitch even without the goals in that game. The defence was what won them that tournament but he stepped up when it counted in that game in more ways than just the goals. I'm not even sure there's been a better midfield performance in a WC final since then. Iniesta in 2010 was there or thereabouts but I'm not sure he was any better.
Jesus Christ, you asked for 5 matches and they were given to you...what next? 10, 20, 30?
I agree 100%.
I remember that first leg v United at the Bernabeu when Zidane did that stationary dribble move
The only other player I have ever seen do that, is Andres Iniesta.I am not complaining mate. I am only making conversation. Isn't that what football forums are about?
That is precisely my view of this issue, you read me very well right there. I was not following football that closely back then, but I remember a series of atrocious performances by Real Madrid during his time there. There were many factors behind that of course, but many people tend to forget precisely what you mentioned, the bread and butter of league football, in which Iniesta seems to have been more consistent, on top of his big game performances.
He's not even the greatest playmaker of his own time... (or on his own team)
other then the goal was iniesta very good in that world cup? As in an all time standard? maybe since i haven't really watched that game again since watching it live my memory is a little spotty, but i didn't think so. I thought iniesta was tremendous at euro 2012 though. In the final Xavi was the motm to me though, despite iniesta having arguably the outstanding tournament.
that's a funny thing, iniesta had a pretty dissapointing 2009-2010 league campaign, but got on the balon d'or top 3 pretty much for that world cup winning goal. goes both ways no?
barcelona have had plenty of atrocious performances even with iniesta. That's not to say it's iniesta's fault, but it's happened, and it follows your logic in bringing up that madrid have had poor performances.
there was that stretch last season where messi was injured, and iniesta simply couldn't step it up and fill the gap for barcelona. The CL game against PSG was dead until messi subbed in. However, without iniesta in the team, barcelona have been absolutely fine most of the time.
So it seems you're being a bit selective.
I have no clue what you mean when you say bread and butter of league football. why should league football be the bread and butter?
Zidanes first two seasons at Madrid were his best at Madrid, and after that he and the team declined due to age, lack of a good coach etc. His most consistent league football was at juve. I don't think zidane and iniesta can be compared. Iniesta is not the star for either Barcelona or spain. I think xavi is more important than him and this has been backed up by barca declining and not being invincible like before as xavi is slowing down. Iniesta does not grab games by the ball like zidane. Against munich without messi last year iniesta did not do anything. You could find example like that for zidane, but if the opposition were lining up for a match and they heard zidane was out of the team, they would have more relief than if they heard iniesta was out of the team. for me is the 4th best player in the last few years after messi, Ronaldo and xavi. he is overrated like zidane too. In 2010 he got into balon dor top 3 after a poor league campaign and purely on the back of his world cup form even though inter had more deserving candidates. And i have to say as a Madrid fan that xavi scares me more when he has the ball than iniesta.
Messi does that move all the time though?I agree 100%.
I remember that first leg v United at the Bernabeu when Zidane did that stationary dribble move
Well aye. I do imagine though that it would be easier for Zidane to be consistent in a team as domestically dominant as today's 95-points-a-season Barca, rather than the 55-75-points-a-season Real or Juve.
i agree. For me xavi is not only a better player, but he is also much more important to the team in terms of style and results. Very few midfielders like him. best proper central midfielder i have ever seen
i think messi is a better playmaker as well anyways, if we strictly talk about playmakers and not positions.
He didn't have a brilliant tournament in 2010 (though it was better than an out-of-position Xavi) but I vaguely remember thinking he was the best player in that final. Not as good as he was in the CL finals but still very influential. Xavi was obviously the star of the show in the Euro 2012 final.
Calm down buddy, I am arguing for Zidane's case here. All I said was that it wasn't his best tournament - he did play very well in 98, and even if he didn't, two goals in a final is two goals in a final.
True - he performed quite consistently. He really is a big game player, I don't get how people can argue otherwise. There are so many examples here.
Barca's top performances have always included an in-form Iniesta, no two ways about that. Virtually all of our defeats in 08/09 and 09/10 occurred when Iniesta was injured. Iniesta outshone Messi in the run-in of the treble season as well. Iniesta was great throughout the 2010 WC, except the first two games (Switzerland in which he got injured, and Honduras which he missed through that injury)
It is definitely true that Barcelona have been bad at times, even with Iniesta on the pitch, but not even remotely as frequently as Zidane's Madrid. Not even remotely.
As for last season, I agree, the team was utter toss in the run-in of the season, no redeeming performances whatever, including Iniesta and Messi (when half-fit)
I totally disagree with you on that Barca have been fine without Iniesta most of the time. Have not missed almost any game for many a year now, and can certainly tell you that that is simply not true. Our only really good game without the Don, was the CL semi in 2011, I really can't think of any other big game in which Iniesta was absent and we played well.
As per league football being the bread and butter, I mean that it is basic, what a player does most of the time. In terms of overall importance, the CL, euros and World Cup totally pawn league football imo.
Choosing between Iniesta and Xavi is like choosing between Adriana Lima and Olya Abrahmovich (for a Barca fan that is) But if I had to go there, I would go for Iniesta.
Definitely a valid point. Still, the truth is that I cannot really provide a good assessment of Zidane's performances at Real Madrid at that time since I was not closely following Spanish football 10 to 12 years ago.
You just posted this, well if you weren't closely following madrid and zidane's team during his time, how can you say:
This with such assertion? when you say afterwards that you don't actually know?
Messi didn't have any redeeming performances last season? What are you talking about? You may watch all of the games, but i watch a good 60-70% of barca's games, and last year almost 80% of their games. Messi was phenomenal. Performances like the hattrick to lead a pitiful defence to a 5-4 victory against a team that got relegated, saving barcelona after subbing in a game against bilbao with an immediate individual goal and assist on the back of injuries. Messi's double against Milan to lead them from a 3-1 deficit to a 4-0 win. Messi subbing into the PSG game and immediately changing the tide of the game in barca's favour, where previously they where listless and virtually strolling to the stadium exits, to getting the go ahead goal and winning the tie. He was doing everything for a barcelona that was simply awfully assembled for most of the year, and struggled in all the big matches (including iniesta). Messi was the one that scored the freekicks and goals to keep them in the kings cup against madrid. Messi was the one that scored in the clasicos.
Have you seen that chart that shows how important messi's goals were? It showed that if you took away cristiano's goals for madrid, they'd be 3rd or so. if you took away messi's goals from barca, taking into account goals that change wins to draws, draws to losses, barca dropped from 1st to 7th.
Messi scored 46 goals in only 28 games, he played less then iniesta for fecks sake and scored 12 more goals then cristiano ronaldo? and he didn't redeem himself?
*i've just reread your line and it includes (when half-fit). what the hell is the point of comparing a half-fit messi with iniesta? so you're saying messi half fit is just as useful as iniesta was? which was not very useful?
i'm not going to delete all that about messi realizing you've put that "(when half fit)", because that seems like a stupid stupid condition of comparison.
It seems like a very cheap way of shifting responsibility off of iniesta's shoulders. the simple question can just be, where was iniesta when messi was gone and barcelona needed someone to step up? No one stepped up, including iniesta. So that shoots the view you have that iniesta is this unfailingly big game player to me.
barca won 32 games with 100 points last season where iniesta only started 24 games, you've played plenty of good enough matches without iniesta. Are you talking about the big games? Well how many big games has barca played without messi? i don't think there's been any?
The one chance to see what barcelona could do without messi was the second leg against PSG, and barcelona were utterly utterly average. They had no fight, and were well on their way to exiting the CL, basically forcing a half fit messi still clearly struggling with injury to sub in and save them. And save them he did.
Iniesta can't dominate a game by himself. By this i mean, If Messi isn't on the field occupying the attention of 3 defenders, iniesta doesn't have space to do what he wants, and he can't impose his game at will. If he is evenly accounted for, he's been shut out of matches plenty of times. When Xavi was at his heydey there was zero doubt, He was the dictator and talisman, Iniesta was the silky magician that had clever moments here and there, but nothing compared to the prescence and influence of xavi over a game.
Where was iniesta the other games against atletico this season? i didn't notice him. Arda turan dominated the previous game quite thoroughly against iniesta. No mention?
Messi is a better playmaker then iniesta, and xavi was unquestionably better when he was at his best.
Iniesta is a gloriously good player... but i just see you and others taking it too far. he's not an essential player, he's a romantic player that does unexpected and clever things, but needs strong teammates to have the space to take over games. He has never been and never will be as vital as messi or xavi was. Hell i think Busquets was more valuable one of the last two seasons, can't distinguish which one.
Agree with the people saying Xavi will go down as the better player, but both have been phenomenal.
1. I know the results of Zidane's Madrid and they have been far worse than Barca's recently. They were an extremely inconsistent team. Which is unlike Iniesta's Barcelona.
2. I said that Barca did not have any redeeming performances in the run-in. Mediocre against PSG, atrocious against Madrid and Bayern (who were to be certain far better teams at that particular time) Before his injury against PSG, Messi was literally walking on water, best in the world and all that. No doubt about it.
3. You seem to have interpreted my praise for Iniesta into me arguing that Iniesta is a better player than Messi. No way will I ever suggest that. I am mostly interested in how Iniesta compares with other midfield greats. Messi can only be compared with players like Maradona, and Ronaldo.
4. Let me also add that you massively underrate Iniesta here. For me, he was always more vital to Xavi, in the sense that his actions in the game were more decisive and more risky. He was the one who on so many occasions could take the pressure of Barcelona by retaining the ball under the severest pressure. Xavi was of course more involved the entire time, but that was exactly his role, to allow the functioning of the team with the minimum of risk of costly mistakes. Iniesta had the mission of carrying the ball forward and taking the pressure off the team when most needed. Both were equally vital, with Iniesta being the most entertaining of the two. Messi is not a better playmaker than Iniesta. A better final ball, yes, but better playmaker? I don't think so. Xavi certainly was at his heyday, but these are merely semantics. My point here is that Iniesta was awfully vital to the team throughout the past 7-8 years.
5. During the previous Atletico game, Iniesta was quite good in the first half, and then got injured, he was subbed off at half time. Before the New Year, he was not at his best, but during the past few 7-8 games has been nothing short of sensational.
6. I do not really get what you mean by describing Iniesta as a "romantic" player. I heard some of Iniesta's detractors saying that his main contribution are merely flashy moves in tight spaces with very little actual end product. I think that is massively false. The way he takes the pressure off the team, and destabilises the opposing team is unique. I think one of the reason why people liken him to ZZ, is that his contribution and greatness is not tangible as in terms of goals/assists etc. It is just the his presence makes a team far better. You may also want to consider that he has been the main for Spain for many years now. For example, in the 2010 WC, he did much more than score the winning goal. He was utterly brilliant against Chile, Portugal and Paraguay. He was good versus Germany and very good against the Netherlands. I still remember that brilliant pass he gave D. Villa before scoring against Chile, and that awesome solo run leading up to the Villa goal against Paraguay in the QFs. Brilliant player!
7. Busquets is/was super vital for Barca since he is the only one who can play well at the DM position for Barcelona since the Yaya departure. In terms of CM/AM Barcelona have Iniesta/Xavi/Cesc/Messi.
I've waited for 2 days. No one has mentioned this.
Why isn't Iniesta getting flack for his lacklustre performances recently, especially when the chips have been down for Barcelona?
Messi I get, he has shouldered a tremendous burden for the last few years, and he looks burned out. Xavi is nearing the end of his career, and he can't control games like he used to. But this is the second season Iniesta has failed to make an impact on the important games. He was found wanting against PSG before Messi came on and scared the shit out of the opposition. He was nowhere against Bayern last year. He had a good pass against Atletico in the semifinals yet failed to do anything of note. And facing Atletico at home, in a title decider, he goes missing. He's had two managers in this timeframe. No one has called him out on this, yet the next time he displays some silks, this thread is always bumped. Yet he's miles ahead of the likes of Silva. I don't buy it.
Rant over
Why isn't Iniesta getting flack for his lacklustre performances recently, especially when the chips have been down for Barcelona?
Messi I get, he has shouldered a tremendous burden for the last few years, and he looks burned out. Xavi is nearing the end of his career, and he can't control games like he used to. But this is the second season Iniesta has failed to make an impact on the important games. He was found wanting against PSG before Messi came on and scared the shit out of the opposition. He was nowhere against Bayern last year. He had a good pass against Atletico in the semifinals yet failed to do anything of note. And facing Atletico at home, in a title decider, he goes missing. He's had two managers in this timeframe. No one has called him out on this, yet the next time he displays some silks, this thread is always bumped. Yet he's miles ahead of the likes of Silva. I don't buy it.
Rant over
Because he's god.
EDIT: Tbf, in the recent games when Barca have struggled, Messi has been way more anonymous than Iniesta. He may have lacked cutting edge at times recently, but then as a midfielder cutting edge is less his concern than it is for the forwards, especially Messi. He's always maintained his exceptionally high standards of ability on the ball. In the title decider against Atletico it was Busquets more than Iniesta whose standards dropped.
As for the Silva thing, they were both starters at the Euros and I expect they will both be at the WC this summer. So it's not as if he's keeping him out or anything. As good as Silva is, Iniesta is still the better player. In fact he tends to be even better for Spain than for Barca these days, because he gets to play as a proper #10 and the focal point of Spain's attack.
EDIT: Tbf, in the recent games when Barca have struggled, Messi has been way more anonymous than Iniesta. He may have lacked cutting edge at times recently, but then as a midfielder cutting edge is less his concern than it is for the forwards, especially Messi. He's always maintained his exceptionally high standards of ability on the ball. In the title decider against Atletico it was Busquets more than Iniesta whose standards dropped.
As for the Silva thing, they were both starters at the Euros and I expect they will both be at the WC this summer. So it's not as if he's keeping him out or anything. As good as Silva is, Iniesta is still the better player. In fact he tends to be even better for Spain than for Barca these days, because he gets to play as a proper #10 and the focal point of Spain's attack.
Of course he is.
A) He isn't as good a player as Messi, so expectations aren't quite the same.
B) As Brightonian said, he's a midfielder so you can't have the same expectations when it comes to what he actually provides.
C) Nobody was saying he's perfect or that his form never dips, particularly when the rest of the team is struggling too. How many players on that Barca team haven't seen their form dip?
D) It's not like Silva hasn't gone through poor form in the last couple of seasons either. He was one of several City players to underperform last season.
E) Iniesta remains a better player than Silva.
B) As Brightonian said, he's a midfielder so you can't have the same expectations when it comes to what he actually provides.
C) Nobody was saying he's perfect or that his form never dips, particularly when the rest of the team is struggling too. How many players on that Barca team haven't seen their form dip?
D) It's not like Silva hasn't gone through poor form in the last couple of seasons either. He was one of several City players to underperform last season.
E) Iniesta remains a better player than Silva.
I'd excuse him for the same reason I'd excuse Messi, Martino's tactics were abysmal and completely geared to get the best out of their direct players like Alexis and Cesc - which came at the cost of Messi, Iniesta and Xavi. He had a few months of good form in an overall disappointing season for him and for Barcelona but it's hard to expect him to perform in a playing style he doesn't fit in to.
I'd guess that many people actually can't tell when Iniesta has a poor game or series of poor games. Even in his worst games, he still registers a high passing percentage, displays a few feints, turns and dribbles, and a plays few nice through balls.
A casual watcher wont be able to tell he's played poorly by his standards.
Whereas for Messi, it's obvious due to his goal scoring records.
I'd say that many Premier League fans also wouldn't be aware of Silva having similar dips in form.
This sums is up very nicely, good post.