So where is Modric rated in best CM’s of all time ?

[Deery]

I’d go as far to say he’s better than Xavi never mind Scholes, does it all dirty work, doggy work, sublime passes, genius moments, big game player. He’s got everything in his locker..

 

[giorno]

It's up for debate for me.

Nah, not really. Pirlo was a better passer from deep and had better vision. Modric more dynamic and a better dribbler. Pirlo for set pieces. Modric was never the controller Pirlo was but he has the ability to run the transition and is more incisive and dangerous near the box. Slightly different players, I'd put them on the same level. Only Xavi has been better in the last 30 years

 

[Devil81]

Incredible pass. One of the best I've ever seen.

Said it straight away, actually think it's my favourite pass of all time. It was sublime in every way that you didn't notice the excellent finish because you were in such awe from the pass.

 

[Deery]

Pirlo was a beautiful, beautiful player, could put a ball on a six pence, but if the chips are down we’re all picking Modric..

 

[Righteous Steps]

Nah, not really. Pirlo was a better passer from deep and had better vision. Modric more dynamic and a better dribbler. Pirlo for set pieces. Modric was never the controller Pirlo was but he has the ability to run the transition and is more incisive and dangerous near the box. Slightly different players, I'd put them on the same level. Only Xavi has been better in the last 30 years

Exactly my thoughts you truly are a good poster.

 

[EtH]

Nah, not really. Pirlo was a better passer from deep and had better vision. Modric more dynamic and a better dribbler. Pirlo for set pieces. Modric was never the controller Pirlo was but he has the ability to run the transition and is more incisive and dangerous near the box. Slightly different players, I'd put them on the same level. Only Xavi has been better in the last 30 years

Wow surprising from a Madrid fan. Pirlo was a better long passer and better at set pieces but that’s as far as it goes. He could also be completely bypassed against top opposition due to his lack of athleticism and prowess off the ball. Modric is by far the better all-around midfielder. His versatility is unparalleled. I’d have him over Xavi as well.

 

[Fortitude]

Pirlo and Modric don't play the same position, so it's a bit of an odd comparison to make. You're no more likely to see Modric literally dictating games from deep than you are seeing Pirlo run around like a man possessed in a two-way CM role.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Pirlo and Modric don't play the same position, so it's a bit of an odd comparison to make. You're no more likely to see Modric literally dictating games from deep than you are seeing Pirlo run around like a man possessed in a two-way CM role.

This as well.

 

[Deery]

Pirlo and Modric don't play the same position, so it's a bit of an odd comparison to make. You're no more likely to see Modric literally dictating games from deep than you are seeing Pirlo run around like a man possessed in a two-way CM role.

I’m pretty sure in his younger days Modric used to dictate play for Croatia from deep, did it against England on several occasions..

 

[giorno]

Wow surprising from a Madrid fan. Pirlo was a better long passer and better at set pieces but that’s as far as it goes. He could also be completely bypassed against top opposition due to his lack of athleticism and prowess off the ball. Modric is by far the better all-around midfielder. His versatility is unparalleled. I’d have him over Xavi as well.

Pirlo was a slower Xavi. Modric is a middle ground between Xavi and Iniesta

Modric is definitely the more well rounded and versatile player, but Pirlo's strenghts were incredible. The guy dominated a world cup

As for getting bypassed, that happens to Modric too. Guardiola had to sub Xavi off at times against teams that pressed them really well and forced a high tempo on the game - Bielsa's Bilbao comes to mind

 

[Deery]

Pirlo was a slower Xavi. Modric is a middle ground between Xavi and Iniesta

Modric is definitely the more well rounded and versatile player, but Pirlo's strenghts were incredible. The guy dominated a world cup

As for getting bypassed, that happens to Modric too. Guardiola had to sub Xavi off at times against teams that pressed them really well and forced a high tempo on the game - Bielsa's Bilbao comes to mind

To be fair Modric also bossed a World Cup and won a fifa player of the year off the back of it..

 

[Fortitude]

I’m pretty sure in his younger days Modric used to dictate play for Croatia from deep, did it against England on several occasions..

Not like Pirlo. You are talking about a true specialist in the role, who performed it the highest levels, not a stand in.

There's comparisons to make, then there's a line where things aren't making sense anymore.

 

[giorno]

To be fair Modric also bossed a World Cup and won a fifa player of the year off the back of it..

Sure. As i've said, only central midfielder i've seen in the last 30 years who i consider better than either was Xavi

 

[Deery]

Not like Pirlo. You are talking about a true specialist in the role, who performed it the highest levels, not a stand in.

There's comparisons to make, then there's a line where things aren't making sense anymore.

I wouldn’t agree Modric was pretty specialised at it also, only Pirlo was more eye catching with longer passes whereas Modric would play one-two’s through people.

 

[EtH]

Pirlo was a slower Xavi. Modric is a middle ground between Xavi and Iniesta

Modric is definitely the more well rounded and versatile player, but Pirlo's strenghts were incredible. The guy dominated a world cup

As for getting bypassed, that happens to Modric too. Guardiola had to sub Xavi off at times against teams that pressed them really well and forced a high tempo on the game - Bielsa's Bilbao comes to mind

Don’t get me wrong. I love Pirlo. Brilliant player. But this is the problem with him and Xavi. They were majestic as long as the team was performing but if the chips are down you’d rather have Modric in the side every day of the week. Despite being a shite tackler Scholes was more useful in a true midfield battle than Pirlo or Xavi.

 

[Deery]

Sure. As i've said, only central midfielder i've seen in the last 30 years who i consider better than either was Xavi

I agree just more in his locker, may it be biased as I never enjoyed Xavi’s work as much I don’t know but Modric just lights me up time after time.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Don’t get me wrong. I love Pirlo. Brilliant player. But this is the problem with him and Xavi. They were majestic as long as the team was performing but if the chips are down you’d rather have Modric in the side every day of the week. Despite being a shite tackler Scholes was more useful in a true midfield battle than Pirlo or Xavi.

Was he? I don’t think that’s correct at all.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Because possession is everything? Its about impact. Modrić has been the heartbeat of the midfield of the most successful modern day club side during his time there. He's up there with anyone IMO

Up there yes, but I just feel that when compare to Xavi and if you call him the best ever, it’s a point worth noting. People are saying he’s running games but he isn’t, Kovacic was better in general play here for example. The pass was absolutely unbelievable to be fair and he deserves all the plaudits for that.

Are they the most successful club side? Barca won two league and CL doubles in 3 years, Real didn’t win the league for two of their 3 in a row CLs. And I felt they were far more superior when doing it, Real would find a way but I always felt there was a lot more luck involved than Barca who were in control of everything.

 

[genardk]

Below Xavi, no comparison, at a similar level to Iniesta and Pirlo..
A couple of good moments in the CL where Real midfield gets dominated throughout against PSG and Chelsea do not make him better than Xavi, that's just recency bias..

 

[Andrade]

I’d go as far to say he’s better than Xavi never mind Scholes, does it all dirty work, doggy work, sublime passes, genius moments, big game player. He’s got everything in his locker..

Something in the water over there in Spain.

Modric over Xavi either way for me.

Not for me. Xavi and Iniesta still reign supreme of the midfielders I've seen, with Pirlo also right up there as a deep lying playmaker. Modric's longevity is extremely impressive though and his WC 2018 was special. He definitely belongs in that company.

 

[Connoisseur]

In the last 25 years only behind Pirlo for me, absolutely sublime player. Close between him and Xavi though.

 

[Fortitude]

I wouldn’t agree Modric was pretty specialised at it also, only Pirlo was more eye catching with longer passes whereas Modric would play one-two’s through people.

Pirlo is not going to be deployed in a team to do what Modric does, and the same vice-versa. What you're saying is Modric has some ability in the role, which is a given as Modric is, without doubt, one of the most eclectic midfielders the game has seen, but you're arguing the case against a player who is a specialist performing said role on the grandest stages and being heralded a great specifically for said performances.

Like-for-like at least makes sense; pitting a specialist against someone playing a different role on the pitch makes no sense. This is like saying Modric is better at Busquets' role than Busquets is. Of course he isn't, and there's no issue there as it should be a given.

 

[Deery]

Below Xavi, no comparison, at a similar level to Iniesta and Pirlo..
A couple of good moments in the CL where Real midfield gets dominated throughout against PSG and Chelsea do not make him better than Xavi, that's just recency bias..

Would Xavi have as many plaudits without Messi though?

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

I question Modric being better than Xavi, but he’s definitely better than Pirlo, who had a few weaknesses and could be targeted far easier than the other two. You couldn’t press Xavi or Modric, the close control is too quick, whereas Pirlo you could. I don’t think Park could do the same job on Modric than he did on Pirlo.

 

[EtH]

Was he? I don’t think that’s correct at all.

I do. Xavi and Pirlo were marginalized if a match was evens never mind if the opposition was actually on the front foot. Meanwhile Scholes could still affect a match in so many different ways.
Case in point the screamer against Barca in the CL.

 

[KeanoMagicHat]

Would Xavi have as many plaudits without Messi though?

Xavi stood out as much or more for Spain without Messi than for Barcelona.

 

[matherto]

That assist is almost as good as Kaka's for Crespo versus Liverpool in the 2005 final.

 

[Deery]

Pirlo is not going to be deployed in a team to do what Modric does, and the same vice-versa. What you're saying is Modric has some ability in the role, which is a given as Modric is, without doubt, one of the most eclectic midfielders the game has seen, but you're arguing the case against a player who is a specialist performing said role on the grandest stages and being heralded a great specifically for said performances.

Like-for-like at least makes sense; pitting a specialist against someone playing a different role on the pitch makes no sense. This is like saying Modric is better at Busquets' role than Busquets is. Of course he isn't, and there's no issue there as it should be a given.

That’s not what I’m saying at all, I’m saying Modric can play the DLP role as good as anyone in his day, might be wrong but I think he played it against Xavi’s Spain and didn’t look out of place.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

Would Xavi have as many plaudits without Messi though?

If only we could see Xavi play in a team without Messi.

 

[EtH]

Xavi stood out as much or more for Spain without Messi than for Barcelona.

Spain was also loaded at the time though.

 

[Righteous Steps]

I do. Xavi and Pirlo were marginalized if a match was evens never mind if the opposition was actually on the front foot. Meanwhile Scholes could still affect a match in so many different ways.
Case in point the screamer against Barca in the CL.

How is that a case in point? Pirlo and Xavi dominated far more games on a European and international stage than Scholes did so don’t think that argument applies here, maybe if you were talking about Keane? There were occasions earlier in Scholes career sir Alex never even played him in the big big European ties, it wasn’t him that was the designated midfielder to go to when United needed a lift it was Keane.

Pirlo Xavi Modric are all on a level above Scholes.

 

[j65454]

All time?

Top 20?

 

[Fortitude]

That’s not what I’m saying at all, I’m saying Modric can play the DLP role as good as anyone in his day, might be wrong but I think he played it against Xavi’s Spain and didn’t look out of place.

Come on now...

 

[Deery]

If only we could see Xavi play in a team without Messi.

“As many”.

Xavi still an amazing player, but when you club is winning 5,6-0 every week because you have a super midget up front, it’ll make you look a whole lot better..

 

[Deery]

How is that a case in point? Pirlo and Xavi dominated far more games on a European and international stage than Scholes did so don’t think that argument applies here, maybe if you were talking about Keane? There were occasions earlier in Scholes career sir Alex never even played him in the big big European ties, it wasn’t him that was the designated midfielder to go to when United needed a lift it was Keane.

Pirlo Xavi Modric are all on a level above Scholes.

As much as I love Scholes this is a good point.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

“As many”.

Xavi still an amazing player, but when you club is winning 5,6-0 every week because you have a super midget up front, it’ll make you look a whole lot better..

He was the MOTM in a Euro final in 2012 and was the Player of the Tournament at the 2008 Euros.

He didn't need Messi to look great and receive plaudits.

 

[EtH]

How is that a case in point? Pirlo and Xavi dominated far more games on a European and international stage than Scholes did so don’t think that argument applies here, maybe if you were talking about Keane? There were occasions earlier in Scholes career sir Alex never even played him in the big big European ties, it wasn’t him that was the designated midfielder to go to when United needed a lift it was Keane.

Pirlo Xavi Modric are all on a level above Scholes.

That wasn’t my point and I’m not discounting their dominance versus Scholes. My point was Modric is definitely more useful when the chips are down. I think Xavi and Pirlo flourished when their teams were on top but not so much when the deck was more evenly stacked. That said they played a big role in being on top as much as they were.

 

[Righteous Steps]

That wasn’t my point and I’m not discounting their dominance versus Scholes. My point was Modric is definitely more useful when the chips are down. I think Xavi and Pirlo flourished when their teams were on top but not so much when the deck was more even stacked. That said they played a big role in being on top as much as they were.

Agree.

 

[Eckers99]

These threads are pretty useful in highlighting which posters have no clue about the different roles midfielders have in various teams. It's usually McT being compared to Rice, so it's refreshing to see that the same lack of insight can be applied to a wide spread of completely different types of midfielder.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Don’t get me wrong. I love Pirlo. Brilliant player. But this is the problem with him and Xavi. They were majestic as long as the team was performing but if the chips are down you’d rather have Modric in the side every day of the week. Despite being a shite tackler Scholes was more useful in a true midfield battle than Pirlo or Xavi.

Scholes wasn't a shite tackler. He was dirty but Scholes could tackle.