Iniesta vs Zidane

[Sir Scott McToMinay]

I don't know how anyone could find Xavi boring and then turn around and enjoy Scholes.

Less cross-field passes I suppose, honestly Cross-field passes are not all that hard to execute when you have Valencia completely isolated on the right.
But I have to agree that Scholes was more entertaining than Xavi, he scored some absolute classic bangers over the years, and he had those crazy tackles every second game, Xavi was less adventurous player than Scholes in those regards.

 

[Ishdalar]

And there's a reason Zidane started at Cannes. France didn't have a single club on the level of Barcelona when it comes to the academy.
Also your point is silly, countless players went through Barcelona and turned out bang average too, It's not like It's a feat to get into the academy.



Iniesta definitely wasn't as good as Zidane.
Xavi was never rated world class before 2008/09. At 28 he was just another good player in the eyes of the world, It's Pep and Messi that took his career to the next level.
Getting 90+ points became the standarts in the early 2010s, Madrid and Barca started consistently doing it with even Atletico reaching 90 points in 2014.
Barca literally won a treble with Xavi being a bench player, you are vastly overrating his importance to Barca's success.
The key factor is Messi, It's always been Messi, he is the one scoring 50+ goals every season and getting 15/20 assists on top of that.

I don't want to argue for the sake of doing it, or to prove a point, I just wanted to state my opinion.

If you think Xavi was just another good player then you probably didn't have the pleasure of watching him in the half season Antic was with us, or the one he injured his knee with Rijkaard. He never got to that level of play again even when he started winning titles, but the fact that injuries and inept managers made him play as a DMC doesn't take away his class those years.

The same could be said about Iniesta, we lost some of his best years with him playing as a false winger because our midfield was stacked, history might make justice with Xavi and Iniesta on the long run, same way most people have forgotten about Zidane days in Juve after Del Piero got injured.

Better scouting systems in the 90's compared with the 80's allowing for top young players to be snapped up sooner?

Iniesta will go down as one of the greatest ever players for sure and you make a great point about Jack Daniels. How could he not go down as one of history's greats when he helped dominate football at club level, internationally and in europe for years. history will look at him much kinder in say 20-30 years.

Well that's the first thing about Iniesta, he was one of the first media wonderkids that happened as a phenomenom here due to everyone being able to watch the U-12 tournament that Canal+ started a couple years before, so you didn't really need great scouts to spot him.

He amazed a lot of people back in 96' and kept doing that for almost 22 years, I don't think that him playing for Barcelona should be something that diminishes his legacy, we weren't what we are today pre-Iniesta, neither as a club or as a youth academy, and players like him are what gave the club arguments to bet on that model as big as we've done lately.

It's always the same thing with this theme, did our good job at base level help guys like Iniesta thrive and hence it's not that special compared to others, or did guys like Iniesta help elevate our expectations in our method so much that now everyone thinks if you're a prospect you have half the road covered?.

 

[Stacks]

Not to the same level of dominance of Xavi. Definitely in England though.

There is some sort of overcompensation on both sides when it comes to Scholes with English fans. Most fans elsewhere wouldn't have any issues putting him in that caliber, even if he ranks behind most of the mentioned names.

One cannot make claims about most fans as we don't get to encounter most fans.

Scholes is both underrated and overrated at the same time. he is somewhere between the opinions of fans. Not the heights that some claim i.e. Xavi but then better than where opposition fans place him. The claims of putting him in the calibre of Xavi are simply not backed up when held up to scrutiny. quality little player though

 

[adexkola]

I'm convinced @Stacks was the tree Scholes kept on hitting in those stories.

I think Xavi is a tier above Scholes but it's not that weird if United fans slightly overrate a key player for England's best side, that the rest of England chronically underrated and ignored.

And any metric that makes Ramos out to be a world class defender is instantly trash. (The Ramos Test™ )

 

[JPRouve]

The thing about Xavi is that he would routinely make the craziest passes and make them look like it was nothing. At his peak, he is the best midfielder that I have ever seen.

 

[Stacks]

Iniesta accomplished nothing with Spain that Zidane didn't do with France so how is it relevant to the debate exactly?

2 European cups to Zidane's 1.............

 

[adexkola]

Less cross-field passes I suppose, honestly Cross-field passes are not all that hard to execute when you have Valencia completely isolated on the right.
But I have to agree that Scholes was more entertaining than Xavi, he scored some absolute classic bangers over the years, and he had those crazy tackles every second game, Xavi was less adventurous player than Scholes in those regards.

Way more exciting? A tad bit more, probably. The teams Scholes played in were more dynamic, so I understand that. But talking about the actual players. The great thing about Scholes was that he had his moments, but in most games he just did the simple shit really really well, at a world class level (same with Keane). And I think that is part of the reason why he was, and is underappreciated, and yet ended up with a feck ton of trophies.

Xavi did that but at a higher level of excellence. Which is why some people in this thread are calling him boring. Then feck, go watch freestyle football then

 

[Prometheus]

2 European cups to Zidane's 1.............

True, but let me fuel the debate and say that Zidane had two majestic world cup campaigns to Iniesta's one.

 

[soap]

Have to agree with those saying Xavi was better than both! I love Scholes as much as the next Utd fan, but to say he was on the level of those 3 would be incredibly bias.

 

[Sir Scott McToMinay]

Way more exciting? A tad bit more, probably. The teams Scholes played in were more dynamic, so I understand that. But talking about the actual players. The great thing about Scholes was that he had his moments, but in most games he just did the simple shit really really well, at a world class level (same with Keane). And I think that is part of the reason why he was, and is underappreciated, and yet ended up with a feck ton of trophies.

Xavi did that but at a higher level of excellence. Which is why some people in this thread are calling him boring. Then feck, go watch freestyle football then

I didn’t say Scholes was “way more exciting than Xavi”, I actually completely agree with what you’re saying.

 

[adexkola]

Did Zidane ever own a league or CL season? You don't have to win a league or CL to dominate in it (he didn't win WC 06 but was definitely the star)... but did he ever dominate a league/CL season? He had that goal at Hampton Park but was that him just showing up in the final or did he do that in the semi and QF...

 

[De Portago]

True, but let me fuel the debate and say that Zidane had two majestic world cup campaigns to Iniesta's one.

1998 was not majestic, he scored two goals in the final....That's all. If it wasn't for Thuram, they wouldn't have been there in the first place. Also team was without him for a couple of games due to a moronic red card and barely missed a beat. Probably the most single overrated tournament in recent years, alongside Sneijder in 2010.

 

[adexkola]

I didn’t say Scholes was “way more exciting than Xavi”, I actually completely agree with what you’re saying.

Ah, misread that. Then we're on the same page

 

[Balu]

True, but let me fuel the debate and say that Zidane had two majestic world cup campaigns to Iniesta's one.

Zidane was probably the biggest disappointment of the 1998 World Cup up until the final. He was pretty underwhelming throughout, got himself sent off in the group stages and missed a knockout round. Then got saved by his defenders who not only were exceptional at the back, but also scored crucial goals. Thuram scored his only 2 goals of his international career in the semifinal. Obviously Zidane was sensational in the final, but saying he had a majestic world cup campagin in 1998 is dishonest. He had one great game and only because his brilliant teammates saved the team throughout the whole tournament until he finally showed up.

 

[Peyroteo]

Zidane was probably the biggest disappointment of the 1998 World Cup up until the final. He was pretty underwhelming throughout, got himself sent off in the group stages and missed a knockout round. Then got saved by his defenders who not only were exceptional at the back, but also scored crucial goals. Thuram scored his only 2 goals of his international career in the semifinal. Obviously Zidane was sensational in the final, but saying he had a majestic world cup campagin in 1998 is dishonest. He had one great game and only because his brilliant teammates saved the team throughout the whole tournament until he finally showed up.

Even 2006 wasn't that great either, very good but certainly not as good as it's remembered anyway. One great game vs Brazil but what happened in the final skewed people's perspective.

Winning player of the tournament wasn't really fair, Pirlo should have won it.

 

[De Portago]

Even 2006 wasn't that great either, very good but certainly not as good as it's remembered anyway. One great game vs Brazil but what happened in the final skewed people's perspective.

Winning player of the tournament wasn't really fair, Pirlo should have won it.

His best international tournament bar none was Euro 2000, which is usually glossed over for some unknown reason.

 

[Le Red]

Arguably the two best playmakers in the history of the game. Absolute legends, but I believe Zidane is one step above. He was unreal.

 

[JPRouve]

Did Zidane ever own a league or CL season? You don't have to win a league or CL to dominate in it (he didn't win WC 06 but was definitely the star)... but did he ever dominate a league/CL season? He had that goal at Hampton Park but was that him just showing up in the final or did he do that in the semi and QF...

If I'm not mistaken he dominated the 2000/2001 Serie A season but you will have to ask older folks. He was also a lot more fun to watch at that time.

 

[Le Red]

Zidane was probably the biggest disappointment of the 1998 World Cup up until the final. He was pretty underwhelming throughout, got himself sent off in the group stages and missed a knockout round. Then got saved by his defenders who not only were exceptional at the back, but also scored crucial goals. Thuram scored his only 2 goals of his international career in the semifinal. Obviously Zidane was sensational in the final, but saying he had a majestic world cup campagin in 1998 is dishonest. He had one great game and only because his brilliant teammates saved the team throughout the whole tournament until he finally showed up.

Still, it was one of the best individual performances of all time against a fearsome Brazilian squad. It was stuff of the Gods.

 

[Balu]

Even 2006 wasn't that great either, very good but certainly not as good as it's remembered anyway. One great game vs Brazil but what happened in the final skewed people's perspective.

Winning player of the tournament wasn't really fair, Pirlo should have won it.

His best international tournament bar none was Euro 2000, which is usually glossed over for some unknown reason.

Fully agree with both of you. Euro 2000 was all time great level by Zidane. Actually a bit similar to Platini's brilliance in 84, which was even better than Zidane in 2000. Both don't have an overall all time great World Cup though. The best World Cup performance by a French player is still Kopa in 1958.

 

[Stacks]

I'm convinced @Stacks was the tree Scholes kept on hitting in those stories.

I think Xavi is a tier above Scholes but it's not that weird if United fans slightly overrate a key player for England's best side, that the rest of England chronically underrated and ignored.

And any metric that makes Ramos out to be a world class defender is instantly trash. (The Ramos Test™ )

True. And this is absolutely fine. It's just the company of players that people try to place him alongside that makes me take exception. Being compared with Xavi, Zidane, Iniesta and co, when I see NO ENGLISH MIDFIELDER in the last 30 years, on that level, not just Scholesey. I will happily tell a Pool and Chelsea fan that Iniesta and Xavi are much better than Gerrard and Lampard. call me an Anglophobe, I don't care. there are levels. What these guys did on the European AND International stage (not just EPL), was unprecedented and puts them levels above. Also how they decimated top teams and players to prove their superiority. These Spaniards gave me nightmares. Zidane and Figo too, during the early 2000's when they kept wreaking us. I cannot say that many of our English lads have this same clout (although Gerrard had a great 2005 tourney) so I feel the comparisons are misleading. sorry x

 

[Stacks]

Did Zidane ever own a league or CL season? You don't have to win a league or CL to dominate in it (he didn't win WC 06 but was definitely the star)... but did he ever dominate a league/CL season? He had that goal at Hampton Park but was that him just showing up in the final or did he do that in the semi and QF...

Yes, he was regularly one of the leading CL contributors, hence his sides making it all the way to finals.

97 season 10GP, 2GS, 6A(assists)
98 season 11GP, 3GS, 8A
2002 season 9GP, 3GS, 2A
2003 season 14GP, 3GS, 7A

he was frequently contributing a goal a game or near to that in the top competition.

 

[Gio]

Yes, he was regularly one of the leading CL contributors, hence his sides making it all the way to finals.

97 season 10GP, 2GS, 6A(assists)
98 season 11GP, 3GS, 8A
2002 season 9GP, 3GS, 2A
2003 season 14GP, 3GS, 7A

he was frequently contributing a goal a game or near to that in the top competition.

His Champions League record is very impressive in my book.

 

[Stacks]

If I'm not mistaken he dominated the 2000/2001 Serie A season but you will have to ask older folks. He was also a lot more fun to watch at that time.

the guys a genius. Him and Iniesta with their tight control and quick feet can get out of any situation.

 

[11101]

2009 CL final (the one when Rooney said Messi and Ronaldo are not the 2 best in the world, as it's as Xavi and Iniesta, directly after we couldn't get near to them)
2011 CL final - see above
in terms of seasons when Xavi was the glittering Star, please see below;

Individual

• La Liga top assist provider: 2008–09, 2009–10
• World Soccer Player of the Year: 2010
• UEFA European Championship Player of the Tournament: 2008
• UEFA Best Player in Europe Award Second place: 2011
• Ballon d'Or/FIFA Ballon d'Or Third place: 2009, 2010, 2011
• FIFA World Player of the Year Third place: 2009
• UEFA Champions League top assist provider: 2008–09
• UEFA Club Midfielder of the Year: 2008–09
• IFFHS World's Best Playmaker: 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011
• La Liga Breakthrough Player of the Year: 1999
• La Liga Spanish Player of the Year: 2005
• Trofeo Alfredo Di Stéfano: 2nd place 2010, 3rd place 2011
• La Liga Midfielder of the Year: 2009, 2010, 2011
• FIFA World Cup Dream Team: 2010[92]
• UEFA European Championship Team of the Tournament: 2008, 2012
• FIFA FIFPro World XI: 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
• FIFA FIFPro World XI 3rd team: 2014[93]
• UEFA Team of the Year: 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012
• ESM Team of the Year: 2008–09, 2010–11, 2011–12
• Don Balón Team of the Decade: 2010
• FIFA Club World Cup Silver Ball: 2011
• FIFA Club World Cup Bronze Ball: 2009

Since we won the CL twice in decades. How did he have the measure of every team in Europe, considering he was left out of finals, important semi final legs and also quarters?

In a team with Messi, Ronaldinho, Henry, Iniesta and so on, Xavi was never the star. The attention was on them. All the Wikipedia links and made up awards you like won't change that. That's not to say he wasn't the best all round midfielder most of us have ever seen, he was just the one who did his thing quietly and without fuss.

Scholes dominated when he was in his peak as a central midfielder. Other than Xavi i never saw anyone in his position who was clearly better than him, Iniesta and Zidane were a different type of midfielder.

When he sat out the CL finals he was 35 and 37... not sure what you expect against a team like Barcelona.

 

[DWelbz19]

The thing about Xavi is that he would routinely make the craziest passes and make them look like it was nothing. At his peak, he is the best midfielder that I have ever seen.

Agreed. Easily so.

 

[RooneyLegend]

Iniesta : one of the best players of his generation

Zidane : one of the best players of all time.

As simple as that.

Sometimes it really is this simple.

 

[Suedesi]

1998 was not majestic, he scored two goals in the final....That's all. If it wasn't for Thuram, they wouldn't have been there in the first place. Also team was without him for a couple of games due to a moronic red card and barely missed a beat. Probably the most single overrated tournament in recent years, alongside Sneijder in 2010.

Jesus Christ man, if you're going to use that kind of microscope, then, you can't turn around and say Xavi and Iniesta dominated in 2010. I posit to you that Spain only made it past the group stages after a Torres dive with Chile, and Spain went through against Paraguay (saving a PK when it was 0-0) due to Casillas saving a penalty when the score was 0:0. Spain also got saved by Iker in the final when he thwarted Robben who was bearing on goal with the score tied at 0:0.

For all the supposed Xavi and Iniesta domination, they scraped-by more than a few times to be saved Casillas and David Villa who kept scoring the decisive goals (Honduras, Chile, Portugal, Paraguay).

Call me old-fashioned but when it comes to domination, I prefer to win 7-1 like Germany against Brazil (or 7-0 like Bayern vs Barcelona), not scraping by the odd goal which Spain did throughout 2010.

 

[RooneyLegend]

Del Piero was without question the most important player for Juventus from 1996 to 1998. When Del Piero did his knee in November 1998, Juventus went from 1st to 6th in Serie A. Guess what? Zidane was still playing that season.

When Zidane left Juventus, they replaced him with Nedved who did everything Zidane did plus more. From 2001-2006, Nedved scored more goals, more assists, and had superior defensive workrate to Zidane from 1996-2001. Nedved was objectively better for Juventus that Zidane was.

That's not what Lippi thinks.

 

[goin4glory]

Euro 2008, his breakthrough onto the world stage, Spain's team had Casillas (Real) Capdevilla (Villareal), Marchena(Valencia), Puyol (Barcelona), Ramos (Real), Iniesta (Barca) Xavi (Barca) Senna (Villareal) Silva (Valencia) Torres (Liverpool) Villa (Valencia) so 5 players from the top 2 in Spain.

Please note that Xavi is 6 years younger than Scholes and 8 years the junior of Zidane. why would he be mentioned in the same breath when he comes from a completely different generation? comparing 32 year old players who have a whole career behind them to someone in their 20's. Makes sense.

If you don't want to count the world cup then no problem. I was responding to a poster who brought up the world cup. Also Villa went on to play for Barca and was immense at Valencia, Silva too. Torres was at the time the best pure striker in the world, he finished 3rd in the Ballon D'or voting in 2008 so I struggle to see how this enhances your argument in any way.

You're seriously questioning why Xavi wasn't ever mentioned in the same breath as Scholes/Zidane and using his age as a reason? You do realise this is a thread comparing Iniesta to Zidane? Iniesta is 12 years younger than Zidane too.

 

[De Portago]

Jesus Christ man, if you're going to use that kind of microscope, then, you can't turn around and say Xavi and Iniesta dominated in 2010. I posit to you that Spain only made it past the group stages after a Torres dive with Chile, and Spain went through against Paraguay (saving a PK when it was 0-0) due to Casillas saving a penalty when the score was 0:0. Spain also got saved by Iker in the final when he thwarted Robben who was bearing on goal with the score tied at 0:0.

For all the supposed Xavi and Iniesta domination, they scraped-by more than a few times to be saved Casillas and David Villa who kept scoring the decisive goals (Honduras, Chile, Portugal, Paraguay).

Call me old-fashioned but when it comes to domination, I prefer to win 7-1 like Germany against Brazil (or 7-0 like Bayern vs Barcelona), not scraping by the odd goal which Spain did throughout 2010.

I don't need to conflate team performances with individual performances. France won EURO 2000 with both semi and final going into extra time, they scraped through also. It means nothing. I just feel that Zidane was superior in 2000, and not by a small margin either.

 

[Suedesi]

I don't need to conflate team performances with individual performances. France won EURO 2000 with both semi and final going into extra time, they scraped through also. It means nothing. I just feel that Zidane was superior in 2000, and not by a small margin either.

Look, the whole French team was better in 2000 - more mature more confidence, better personnel - they were playing with Henry and Trezeguet instead of Guivarch and Dugarry upfront - so that clearly would have a direct effect on the effectiveness of the playmaker. Zidane was magnificent in 2000.

I disagree with those who say Zidane got bailed out by his teammates in 1998 (some poster mentioned Thuram scoring, forgetting that Thuram's mistake resulted in Suker's goal in the first place), when he clearly was the best player for France during the tournament and was by far the best player in the toughest match, which is of course, Brazil in the final.

So the narrative I'm reading here from some posters goes that Zidane got bailed out by his teammates in 1998 whereas Xavi and Iniesta dominated world football in 2010 with a bunch of 1-0 (and some amazing Casillas saves).

 

[Suedesi]

Btw, I'd like Ed to hire Zidane as our next coach!

After winning a couple of CL's with us, you'll all forget about Scholes, Xavi and Iniesta

 

[Infordin]

All the greatest players have atleast one outstanding worldcup..
Some starred in more than one


Pele..58....70
Maradona..86..
Cruyff 74..
Backenauer 74
Zidane...2006
Platin..82.86

I dont think players like iniesta..xavi..are in that catagory.

Xavi created 30 chances at the 2010 World Cup.

Zidane created 12 in 2006 and 14 in 1998.

In other words, Xavi created more chances in 2010 than Zidane did in 1998 and 2006 combined.

Pirlo created 24 chances at the 2006 World Cup, and was overall vastly superior to Zidane that tournament.

 

[Infordin]

Zidane's game against Brazil in 2006 is the most comically overrated performance of all time.

It wasn't even the best individual performance from a midfielder that tournament, Pirlo against Germany was better.

 

[Peyroteo]

Xavi created 30 chances at the 2010 World Cup.

Zidane created 12 in 2006 and 14 in 1998.

In other words, Xavi created more chances in 2010 than Zidane did in 1998 and 2006 combined.

Pirlo created 24 chances at the 2006 World Cup, and was overall vastly superior to Zidane that tournament.

Spain didn’t create 30 chances in the whole tournament, nevermind just Xavi...

 

[De Portago]

Look, the whole French team was better in 2000 - more mature more confidence, better personnel - they were playing with Henry and Trezeguet instead of Guivarch and Dugarry upfront - so that clearly would have a direct effect on the effectiveness of the playmaker. Zidane was magnificent in 2000.

I disagree with those who say Zidane got bailed out by his teammates in 1998 (some poster mentioned Thuram scoring, forgetting that Thuram's mistake resulted in Suker's goal in the first place), when he clearly was the best player for France during the tournament and was by far the best player in the toughest match, which is of course, Brazil in the final.

So the narrative I'm reading here from some posters goes that Zidane got bailed out by his teammates in 1998 whereas Xavi and Iniesta dominated world football in 2010 with a bunch of 1-0 (and some amazing Casillas saves).

Let's agree to disagree. You feel his level was the same, I just don't. There's no point going back and forth.

 

[Infordin]

Spain didn’t create 30 chances in the whole tournament, nevermind just Xavi...

Xavi WC 2010:

7 games, 635 minutes played, 657 passes total (93 passes per 90 minutes), 91.2 % passing accuracy, 83.3 % passing accuracy in opposition half, 57.6 % duels won, 34 recoveries, 9 tackles won, 9 interceptions, 15 fouls won, 33.3 % successful crosses, 30 chances created

Zidane WC 1998:

5 games, 460 minutes played, 280 passes total (55 passes per 90 minutes), 80.4 % passing accuracy, 71.6 % passing accuracy in opposition half, 47.0 % duels won, 37 recoveries, 5 tackles won, 5 interceptions, 10 fouls won, 23.5 % successful crosses, 18 chances created

Source: OPTA

Btw, I was wrong about Zidane's 1998 World Cup. He created 18 chances, not 14. Nonetheless, my point stands.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Xavi WC 2010:

7 games, 635 minutes played, 657 passes total (93 passes per 90 minutes), 91.2 % passing accuracy, 83.3 % passing accuracy in opposition half, 57.6 % duels won, 34 recoveries, 9 tackles won, 9 interceptions, 15 fouls won, 33.3 % successful crosses, 30 chances created, 0 goals in the final

Zidane WC 1998:

5 games, 460 minutes played, 280 passes total (55 passes per 90 minutes), 80.4 % passing accuracy, 71.6 % passing accuracy in opposition half, 47.0 % duels won, 37 recoveries, 5 tackles won, 5 interceptions, 10 fouls won, 23.5 % successful crosses, 18 chances created, 2 goals in the final

Source: OPTA

Btw, I was wrong about Zidane's 1998 World Cup. He created 18 chances, not 14. Nonetheless, my point stands.

These statistics really don't mean that much once you factor in the bolded.

 

[Suedesi]

Xavi created 30 chances at the 2010 World Cup.

Zidane created 12 in 2006 and 14 in 1998.

In other words, Xavi created more chances in 2010 than Zidane did in 1998 and 2006 combined.

Pirlo created 24 chances at the 2006 World Cup, and was overall vastly superior to Zidane that tournament.

That's 30