I can only assume you know very little about Eric Cantona.
Is Mbappe the best french player ever?
- Thread starter Skills
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran discuss a horrific month of December and a depressing FOUR defeats in a row - the latest coming against Wolves and Newcastle.
They discuss how much blame is on Ruben Amorim and rank our squad against other Premier League teams.
Do we have any chance of avoiding defeat at Anfield?
Yes, but Zidane and Platini did more and achieved more. They were also more talented. I'm sorry but that's just how it is and no one outside of some MU fans will put Cantona in the same tier as Platini or Zidane.
Not sure about that. He certainly was eccentric though. Platini was a leader as well and Zidane became one.
We'll never know and it's kinda pointless to bring this as an argument. Also both Zidane and Platini played (and shone, Zidane a bit less than Platini though) in Italy when the Serie A was the european yardstick.
Last edited:
That’s fair enough pal
for me Both players were somewhat fairly similar as players
However where Zidane edges for me, in numerous areas would be
His ball control, his ability to keep the ball because of that, physically he was imo a stronger player too, his subtle touches and crisp passing were a thing of magic and his ability to beat a player, which by the way, Platini was fabulous at also, but stylistically combining Zidanes superior quality’s mentioned above, made for a more complete monster
I believe Platini himself even said no one can match Zidane for his ability in controlling and receiving the ball.
Platini’s distribution in build up play and then finishing in the final third, seeing the right decisions through freakishly regularly, was mesmerising, but Zidane was also capable of this and more for me.
on a talent level, he's not even better than Gourcuff was. I stand by that. Yoann just had the mentality and work ethic of an idiot.. and the injries didn't help either.
But to answer the question, no. He's 3-4yrs of competing at this level from even being considered top 3.
But to answer the question, no. He's 3-4yrs of competing at this level from even being considered top 3.
To me you are undervaluing goalscoring. While Platini and Zidane were close in terms of playmaking, even if one gives an edge to Zidane the gulf in terms of goalscoring abilities and abiltiy to consistently take a game by the scruff and win it puts Platini above. But in the end, we are talking about two genuine all time greats, so having one or the other isn't really that important as long as you have one of them.
Sure I know very little about Cantona, that must be it.
Also Eusebio who scored 9 at one world cup when he was 24. You probably read it wrong.
Yep
That's a true shame and not only for Platini. It heavily skews younger people ability to truly grasp how good the greats of previous eras were. That and the over-reliance on statistics to judge a player, without any context, which seems to be the plague of this decade.
True, statistcally Lukaku is better than R9
And neither him nor Maradona (or Pelé for that matter) ever won the CL which format was quite different back then. The former two's numbers are also quite "underwhelming" and they never did it in a cold night at Stoke. Yet in any GOAT discussion, there's no chance their names don't pop up.
I also think that Messi and C. Ronaldo completely changed the game and a great's appreciation due to the insane stats they've been continuously churning out in the last 15 years. It's quite interesting to see M'bappé and Haaland being hailed as the next GOATS as they're more numbers than 'talent' compared to those of the previous generations.
Or maybe I'm getting old.
No I think that you are spot on. In fact there is something even darker here, I suspect that a lot of people don't actually watch Football games, as in being focused on the game instead of being on their phone or chatting on a forum or twitter. In that context relying on stats or high/lowlights has seemingly become the norm. Even in the case of Messi it has become more and more obvious over the years that many people were talking about Barcelona or Messi without watching them because they weren't grasping the levels he had to reach after 2017 for Barcelona not look inept.
Last edited:
C Ronaldo is all numbers. It's all his fans talk about. In fact it's the only metric used by younger fans thesedays. Imagine G Muller in the modern day.
For me, numbers are especially skewed if you start looking at them from dominant teams in France or Germany. in a team like PSG where he's been fed by Neymar, Messi, Di Maria and Verratti against opposition that would mostly be in the championship in England. Playing for a PSV or Ajax in the Dutch league and producing those numbers probably carries as much weight, it may be even harder. It's partially why the golden boot award for leagues considered lesser were adapted, but in truth I feel that it should also have been adapted for Ligue 1 as well.
Yes, Ronaldo and Messi dominated La Liga; but unlike others, especially when people actually look at their goals, I actually believe despite the level of talent both Real and Barca had, the amount of goals they would have scored and games they would have won would have been far less without them. With CR7 left to Juventus, the Real Madrid goalscoring numbers dropped drastically. It's no coincidence that the points tally, goal difference and goals scored numbers shot up when both joined the side and has gone back to pre - 2009 numbers since both have gone.
That's very different to Lewandowski at Bayern, who look as good without him as they did with him. At the end of the season, I'm pretty sure their goals scored tally will be similar to last season despite losing him.
Ligue 1 is a low scoring league, what kind of adjustment do you want?
Certainly, and it's easy (and exasperating) to notice in many football discussions on the net. Football is about a bit more than the guy who made the last pass and/or the guy who put it in the net, and you can quickly sort out the ones who actually follow the games from the rest. The latter tending to bring numbers to paint their opinion as a fact. But we're in a time where people feel they can judge a player based on a YouTube compilation, so...
at a time when Spanish football was so far above the rest of the world the only way they went out in europe was to other spanish teams...
[
There is actually nothing really to compare other than their nationality, Platini was mentioned alongside Maradona, Zidane alongside Ronaldo, Cantona is a couple levels behind.
There is actually nothing really to compare other than their nationality, Platini was mentioned alongside Maradona, Zidane alongside Ronaldo, Cantona is a couple levels behind.
Not sure about Zizou but Platini has also elevated a struggling/underperforming gigantic club to another level (and you could argue that it was a higher level than Cantona’s United since the latter side failed in Europe). And he was both a better playmaker and a better goalscorer.
And I adore Cantona, obviously.
It’s all subjective, regarding Cantona, no other footballer has ever brought the excitement and pure theatre as he did during those glorious years at Utd.
For me it’s not just about football, but the man himself.
The stats thing is insane these days. Platini was an amazing player. I think Mbappe is an amazing player and one day Im sure he will be thought of as Frances greatest but he has a lot to do yet to overtake a long list of French players. Also the whole thing that winning trophies also makes one player greater than another is a distortion. There have been some amazing players who have never even made it to a WC but they were still great players. George Best arguably the greatest player to come from the UK but other UK players have won more trophies. Stats and trophies are worth factoring in but they dont tell the full story.
Where was TMNT for almost whole 40 or so minutes? Has he been hiding under an invisibility cloak? 
Brilliant thanks for that, more material for when someone throws stats in my face to "prove" Hazard was inconsistent.
I don't really pay attention to his fans or anyone who only swears by stats, but I've seen him play.
Yes, in terms of raw footballing ability there are certainly many other greats who absolutely blow him out of the water. But you can't achieve what he's done without a healthy dose of talent. Forget about the last two seasons and his current meltdown. It's not easy to reach the top, but it's even harder to stay up there. He adapted his game and evolved continuously throughout his whole career, which is very rare to see and also another form of talent.
Gerd Müller was an out and out striker and belonged to a now almost extinct species, the fox in the box, which Ronaldo originally never was and still not quite is, even in his latest years.
It does my head in and I generally avoid any kind of discussion where it's only about numbers. There are so many factors to take into account. The pitch, the boots, the ball, the fitness, the tactics, the rules, the teams they've played for at the time, the strength of the league, the importance of a tournament in a given era, how it was played...
He's on course but only time will tell. I'll be honest though and say that he doesn't move me the way Maradona, M.Laudrup, R9 or Messi did. Same for Haaland. But I've always has a soft spot for playmakers and artists of the game, so I might be biased.
Yes although George Best was way before my time (I grew up in the 80's) but he regularly popped up in the conversations. When I started kicking a ball and follow football games, Maradona was the football god and Platini just retired. After Maradona went to Sevilla, it was a bit muddled although I'd make a case for fantastic players like Van Basten or Michael Laudrup. They weren't of course in the same tier. Then it was R9 who blew everyone away until his first knee injury, after which Zidane and Ronaldinho (for a short time) took over. Then Messi and C. Ronaldo came along.
I've watched documentaries and games of Best, Zico, Platini, Beckenbauer or Cruyff. Heard what their peers, former managers or even people around me who were old enough to remember, said about them. So I have a pretty good idea about how great they were. No one who followed the game can argue that Best wasn't one of the best players to ever grace a pitch. Greats will always be greats, no matter the era or the trophy cabinets. Put Messi or C. Ronaldo in the 80's or 70's and they'll deliver. Maybe not the same numbers but still ahead of their peers. Likewise the other way around. I'm certain that Maradona, Platini, Best or Pelé would absolutely tear it up if they trained and played today.
I think the comparison with Cantona and Zidane is an interesting one because it's one of those, where, on the face of their career accomplishments alone, you're going to get a lot of "nowhere near as talented/good" sort of comments. Cantona was also the biggest French all-round attacking talent in between platini and Zizou ( Papin being an out and out goalscoring 9), the one with arguably most expectations for a widely internationally recognised great career, so the comparison is quite direct to see why one fulfilled that, and the other fell slightly short , outside of being considered one of the better players in his position for his generation/a certain league.
personally, i think the gap as far as individual talent/pure footballing ability go is marginal and not the biggest difference in why one ended with a career that can be accurately said to be a couple of levels below. Both had great technique, vision and intelligent tactical interpretation within a well set positional role ( supporting forward for Cantona, attacking/creative midfielder for Zidane) and didn't step too far outside what was expected from the typical elite player in their positions. Each have some advantages over the other, and some similar weaknesses like average pace/defensive application.
Difference in personal character clearly played a big part; Cantona a serial troublemaker in his French career, despite being recognised by the likes of Platini as a great talent and potential successor as team leader, he obviously needed more specific club/manager/teammate circumstances to settle and play to his best.
Then choices of leagues/clubs: Cantona should have gone to Italy (or even Spain) if he was being entirely career minded, even a mid table club at first. Getting then suceeding in the best move at the right time is vital for piling up the team accolades and transcending your era( in the eyes of type of fans who will rank players all-time at least) and plenty of potential greats don't manage it, especially back pre-00s. Cantona finds himself in a league/club that has great history, but currently relatively fallen from grace; even with the romanticism of bringing a big club like united back to the top domestically, it's tougher to be recognised as among the very best in the world from the top of early-mid 90s post-ban England than Italy, unless you can win a few times in Europe, which foreign rules could make tough for certain leagues. Zidane would not had have got the same acclaim playing the same way for Blackburn or Newcastle -had they the foresight to see his talent instead of rejecting him - or even united, as he did for Juventus. Once you made it at Juve or Milan in the 90s, that was you in the best possible position to maximise your talent, with trophies and international recognition from playing in the best league. A sidestep move to Real or Barca, as Spanish football eventually caught up with Italian was well set up, and the trophies will keep flowing.
Internationally, both have lots of talent around them, but Zidane's era went a step further there overall, and maintained a more cohesive core/style, while Cantona's was initially transitional and underachieved. Cantona generally played very well for France imo. He was prolific and creative, but when he had a period of bad form like most of the Euro92 group stage, the rest of the team had also too many players underperforming as a collective, and didn't manage to compensate so he could get back in form. Zidane had a better contributions from teammates when he wasn't there, or playing badly ( 98 last 16, 06 group stage) I strongly suspect the 06 French team would have gone out right away, if they had been against some of the stronger opponents that notably foiled the Cantona era like 89-90 yugoslavia, 92-94 Sweden, 92 Demnark, Stoichkov/Balakov era Bulgaria...They also came very close to not qualifying, or at least being forced into a playoff for Euro 2000. So Zidane's era also just had some of the fine margin fortune you need in international football when playing under form.
tldr; when comparing zidane and cantona's careers, i think it's ultimately different team, league and character factors that make the real difference in ranking, rather than a substantial gap in talent.
personally, i think the gap as far as individual talent/pure footballing ability go is marginal and not the biggest difference in why one ended with a career that can be accurately said to be a couple of levels below. Both had great technique, vision and intelligent tactical interpretation within a well set positional role ( supporting forward for Cantona, attacking/creative midfielder for Zidane) and didn't step too far outside what was expected from the typical elite player in their positions. Each have some advantages over the other, and some similar weaknesses like average pace/defensive application.
Difference in personal character clearly played a big part; Cantona a serial troublemaker in his French career, despite being recognised by the likes of Platini as a great talent and potential successor as team leader, he obviously needed more specific club/manager/teammate circumstances to settle and play to his best.
Then choices of leagues/clubs: Cantona should have gone to Italy (or even Spain) if he was being entirely career minded, even a mid table club at first. Getting then suceeding in the best move at the right time is vital for piling up the team accolades and transcending your era( in the eyes of type of fans who will rank players all-time at least) and plenty of potential greats don't manage it, especially back pre-00s. Cantona finds himself in a league/club that has great history, but currently relatively fallen from grace; even with the romanticism of bringing a big club like united back to the top domestically, it's tougher to be recognised as among the very best in the world from the top of early-mid 90s post-ban England than Italy, unless you can win a few times in Europe, which foreign rules could make tough for certain leagues. Zidane would not had have got the same acclaim playing the same way for Blackburn or Newcastle -had they the foresight to see his talent instead of rejecting him - or even united, as he did for Juventus. Once you made it at Juve or Milan in the 90s, that was you in the best possible position to maximise your talent, with trophies and international recognition from playing in the best league. A sidestep move to Real or Barca, as Spanish football eventually caught up with Italian was well set up, and the trophies will keep flowing.
Internationally, both have lots of talent around them, but Zidane's era went a step further there overall, and maintained a more cohesive core/style, while Cantona's was initially transitional and underachieved. Cantona generally played very well for France imo. He was prolific and creative, but when he had a period of bad form like most of the Euro92 group stage, the rest of the team had also too many players underperforming as a collective, and didn't manage to compensate so he could get back in form. Zidane had a better contributions from teammates when he wasn't there, or playing badly ( 98 last 16, 06 group stage) I strongly suspect the 06 French team would have gone out right away, if they had been against some of the stronger opponents that notably foiled the Cantona era like 89-90 yugoslavia, 92-94 Sweden, 92 Demnark, Stoichkov/Balakov era Bulgaria...They also came very close to not qualifying, or at least being forced into a playoff for Euro 2000. So Zidane's era also just had some of the fine margin fortune you need in international football when playing under form.
tldr; when comparing zidane and cantona's careers, i think it's ultimately different team, league and character factors that make the real difference in ranking, rather than a substantial gap in talent.
I reckon after we have a new owner we'll go after Mbop.
Is this even a debate anymore?
It never was, the answer is no
He could beat Kloses record before he hits 30
He’s the best player in the world and had he gone to Real, he’d have won the Ballon d’or already.
And recency bias strike again. 
Just no.
Just no.Depends what he does in his career.
It is for anybody over 30 yes.
He is becoming Mr World Cup.
Best player in the world right now too.
Best player in the world right now too.
Hehe every goal he's gonna score, this thread will get bumped with people asking whether it's still a debate...
He's an immense player alright,
but people speak as if French football started yesterday
He's an immense player alright,
but people speak as if French football started yesterday
His World Cup performances are what great players are supposed to do in the World Cup. If they win a second World Cup he'll be on Pele trajectory.
After last night I'd say Messi is still the best but M'bappe is fantastic.
Would have to agree, if he once again contributes heavily to a second consecutive world cup for France then you would have to start comparing him to not just France's greatest ever players but football as a whole greatest players
The best player at a world cup since Ronaldo in 2002.
Simply deadly.
Simply deadly.
Messi has been great but Mbappe has been better imo.