The unpopular football opinion thread

I've never really understood why you would include honours when talking about who the best players are. That depends on their team and teammates. Just look at them and decide who you think is better at football.

 

Totally agree. It's a fair response to posts saying that a player transcends absolutely everything and runs games single-handedly though (HTT on Zidane). If that's true then the rewards are pretty unimpressive compared to the other greats.

 

That ability to impose oneself on a game, to take charge and control it absolutely, is a trait of greatness, surely? Maradona and Zidane both benefit from this - and possibly why Xavi/Iniesta are not as praised, because their method isn't so much control but distribution and movement.

 

 

It's a trait of greatness yeah. What I'm saying is, if you're eulogising about Zidane being some sort of all-seeing God on the field, then that being the case (which I don't think it was with the regularity that's being suggested), the fruits of his labour weren't all that impressive compared to other players considered as greats of the game. If you're a player that controls matches and is generally seen as one of the greatest of all time, then you would think there'd be more trophies as a result of that genius.

 

Re the Xavi/Iniesta thing, I personally can't think of a player who's ever controlled matches more regularly and with more dominance than Xavi, whatever the method.

You mean like a World Cup, a European Championship, the Champions League and league titles in Spain and Italy?

Xavi and Inesta did control matches, but it was through a system and way of playing that made them able to control a match rather than through their sheer ability more than anything.

I’m not saying they were not great players btw because they were, but in the same way Lampard was. And before you start I’m not saying Lampard was as good as them.

Zidane’s greateness was defined by his ability to impose his game to a level that wasn’t bound by tactics, systems, position etc. He could impose his game regardless.

Players like Zidane are so good and so far ahead of the rest they can do their thing anywhere on the pitch, against anyone, in a good team or a great team and even in a shit team. Obviously the better players around them the better they will perform and go onto achieve success because you can’t do it all on your own all of the time, the fact he could some of the time though made him stand out as better than the rest in the same way HBA did for us at times although obviously on a much smaller scale because he was that good.

I know what his honours are, the point is that they're not that impressive as a supposed God-like great of the game, compared to other players considered as greats of the game. Nowhere near.

I disagree with the rest as well obviously, as is tradition.

What KI means I think is he only won 1 CL, if he was around today he would be lambasted for it.

Hell Messi is roundly criticised everytime he doesn't win something, not saying it's right but in general star players are more scrutinised now than they were then.

When you look at Zidane's club career he wouldn't be remembered as fondly in this era with the same trophy haul because of the obsessive scrutiny that goes on.

He got to a ton of finals. Even with Bordeaux.

A player like Xavi, because the main part of his game was control pass, control pass, it is not what alot of people watching are looking out for, it is almost boring for some people, they would rather watch someone dribbling past everyone etc, that is more flashy and eye catching

They watch Xavi and think that anyone can do what he is doing, as if constantly controlling and passing the ball, never giving it away is somehow easy, anyone who has played the game at any level knows that it is definatley not!

I suppose everyone likes watching different styles of play.

When i played, i was a passer, which is probably why i sympathise more with those type of players.

Don't get me wrong, i love watching Messi and Ronaldo, but not as much as a great passer like Xavi, Scholes, Pirlo.

I am sad that those 3 are finished tbh.

I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at.

He still won everything there was to win almost, not that I consider trophies critical to how great a player is or was and while it’s a legitimate argument when comparing to others and perhaps why Messi not winning a WC may count against him in that regard in such debates, it shouldn’t or wouldn’t with me when assessing how great a player was/is.

If you need to include trophies and stats to back up an argument why x was better than y we could say Andy Cole was greater than Alan Shearer for example.

Zidane for me belongs to the greatest players to have ever played the game based on being able to play at a level that renders the dynamics of the game almost obsolete in a way that meant he could perform outside of all those elements regardless.

Xavi and Iniesta couldn’t control a game on sheer talent alone, because they didn’t have enough talent to be able to do that like a Ronaldo could or a Ronaldinho. Different players of course, but some players are so good they don’t need to be in an all-star conquering team or rely on a system or set of tactics for them to do their thing.

That’s why Messi is better than Cronaldo as an individual, at playing football, as a footballer.

It’s noticebale looking back through the history of the game at the true great greats they never had a definitive position or role and that’s because they were so good they didnt need one and doing so would have restricted their game anyway.

Great players play wherever they like on the pitch and don’t need to be up front or in midfield or out on the wing or need an enforcer alongside them to perform. Pele, Cruyff, Zidane, Maradona and even Ronaldinho didn’t have a role, they weren’t strikers or central midfielders, they weren’t wingers or whatever.

Wayne Rooney has been a great player, but could have been one of the greats had Fergie not restricted him or enforced a rule of discipline such as tactics, role in the team or position over his natural ability.

Ronaldinho’s attitude prevented him from reaching that level, but even then his talent was so great, he has to be mentioned in that breath.

Ronaldo of Brazil was a centre-forward, but he was like no-one else we’ve seen in that position before or since and likely never will see and that’s why he’s considered.

Xavi and Iniesta will go down as legends and greats of Barcelona, their national team and of their era and position, better than most, but they won’t go down as two of the greatest players to have ever played the game of all-time in the way Zidane is and rightly so IMO.

Opinions and all that jazz of course...

I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at.

I don’t know if he could play that role as such, but he has shown time and time again he can play those kind of passes and many a time better than they ever could and that’s why he’s so great among everything else he’s great at, because he can do it. He’s not too shabby in the air either for being cock height.

A player like Xavi, because the main part of his game was control pass, control pass, it is not what alot of people watching are looking out for, it is almost boring for some people, they would rather watch someone dribbling past everyone etc, that is more flashy and eye catching

 

They watch Xavi and think that anyone can do what he is doing, as if constantly controlling and passing the ball, never giving it away is somehow easy, anyone who has played the game at any level knows that it is definatley not!

 

I suppose everyone likes watching different styles of play.

 

When i played, i was a passer, which is probably why i sympathise more with those type of players.

 

Don't get me wrong, i love watching Messi and Ronaldo, but not as much as a great passer like Xavi, Scholes, Pirlo.

 

I am sad that those 3 are finished tbh.

Really well said 1892. I feel the same way.  when I play(and I mean at the park in 5 a side and 8 a side, real football scares me) I also like to pass. I get just as much satisfaction from pinging a diagnol than skilling 3 or four players. But the true reason I play deeper is because I'd rather be a cog in the team and win than be the main man and lose. If I missed a chance or miscontrolled a pass, it could rock me and I might hide the next time. I like to play deep so I can set up chances for others. It's safer.

I guess that's why the Zidanes of the world stick out. Their heads don't drop and they continue inventing.

He still won everything there was to win almost, not that I consider trophies critical to how great a player is or was and while it’s a legitimate argument when comparing to others and perhaps why Messi not winning a WC may count against him in that regard in such debates, it shouldn’t or wouldn’t with me when assessing how great a player was/is.

 

If you need to include trophies and stats to back up an argument why x was better than y we could say Andy Cole was greater than Alan Shearer for example.

I think we're going around in circles here. I'm not judging players solely on stats, I was just saying that if Zidane is the all-controlling God you say he is, you'd maybe expect there to be a level of consistency that resulted in an amount of honours more in line with other players who are considered to be the greatest of all time. But as it happens his honours are pretty paltry in that regard. That's the beginning and end of my point really.

Anyway, we're having a discussion so we're undoubtedly boring everyone now.

I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at.

Workrate?

He still won everything there was to win almost, not that I consider trophies critical to how great a player is or was and while it’s a legitimate argument when comparing to others and perhaps why Messi not winning a WC may count against him in that regard in such debates, it shouldn’t or wouldn’t with me when assessing how great a player was/is.

 

If you need to include trophies and stats to back up an argument why x was better than y we could say Andy Cole was greater than Alan Shearer for example.

 

I think we're going around in circles here. I'm not judging players solely on stats, I was just saying that if Zidane is the all-controlling God you say he is, you'd maybe expect there to be a level of consistency that resulted in an amount of honours more in line with other players who are considered to be the greatest of all time. But as it happens his honours are pretty paltry in that regard. That's the beginning and end of my point really.

I didn’t quite say he was this all controlling God like

I actually think your point is valid, if they were that good why didn’t they score more goals, win more stuff etc. but it’s a weak one that takes away how good they were as footballers on their own which can only be judged on how good a footballer they were. Xavi and Iniesta were obviously very good footballers, great footballers, but Zidane was better and so good he belongs in that small category of al-time greats.

Greats where trophies and personal honours and stats don’t and never could define how good a footballer is or isn’t otherwise Butt again would be up there or someone like Beckham.

I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at.

 

I don’t know if he could play that role as such, but he has shown time and time again he can play those kind of passes and many a time better than they ever could and that’s why he’s so great among everything else he’s great at, because he can do it. He’s not too shabby in the air either for being cock height.

Of course he could, even Xavi says he could do it better than himself.

Zidane's dominance at Euro 2000 is something that Iniesta never reached, imo. He was a boss.

I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at.

 

Workrate?

His football intelligence means he doesn't need to  have a high work rate. he is always in the right place. He isn't lazy mind

I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at.

 

Workrate?

 

His football intelligence means he doesn't need to  have a high work rate. he is always in the right place. He isn't lazy mind

I meant if he were to play Xavi's role, technically yes, but to play CM you have to constantly cover ground, and you can't just switch it on and off.

I'm massively biased like, but Messi could play the role that those 3 did if he needed to. Passing's just another attribute that he's the best I've ever seen at.

 

Workrate?

 

His football intelligence means he doesn't need to  have a high work rate. he is always in the right place. He isn't lazy mind

He closes down as part of a group. never seen him tackle mind but he intercepts the ball a lot.

Zidane's dominance at Euro 2000 is something that Iniesta never reached, imo. He was a boss.

Would agree with this.

The great Barcelona and Spanish teams are marked by superb teams in the truest sense. I don't rank them individually as high as I rank the unit.

I don't like how footballers wages in the UK are (a) not public domain - not that we have a right to know, it's just interesting and (b) why it's often calculated in weekly pay. Who thinks of their wage/contract/salary in terms of weeks? Unless you are paid by the day / hour?

When I played FM I would switch the wages to a year. A £100k p/w contract was something like £5.1m a year. 3 year deal, £15m. Can quickly look at the other finances to decide whether it was worth it or not. Much easier to compare to other players too.

Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so.

I don't like how footballers wages in the UK are (a) not public domain - not that we have a right to know, it's just interesting and (b) why it's often calculated in weekly pay. Who thinks of their wage/contract/salary in terms of weeks? Unless you are paid by the day / hour?

 

When I played FM I would switch the wages to a year. A £100k p/w contract was something like £5.1m a year. 3 year deal, £15m. Can quickly look at the other finances to decide whether it was worth it or not. Much easier to compare to other players too.

Because for the vast majority, the weekly pay rate was somewhat relatable, but now even that's getting out of hand. We might begin to see pay by day soon enough tbh.

Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so.

Squires nailed him

https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2018/may/01/david-squires-on-peter-drury-commentator-what-is-football-if-not-for-dreaming

Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so.

 

Squires nailed him

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2018/may/01/david-squires-on-peter-drury-commentator-what-is-football-if-not-for-dreaming

Normally don't like Squires but that's brilliant.

Peter Drury is a shit commentator. He seems to be constantly attempting to come up with some sort of Oscar Wilde-esque football related saying in his commentary and seems condescending when doing so.

Aye.

He’s another fucking melt.

Very few commentators I can take these days.

I want us to go down.

Whilst not really an opinion, reading the Other Games thread, this would appear to be an unpopular thing to want.