Andrés Iniesta

kostasgtc

New member
I don't agree with you Kostasgtc . But I get what you are saying .
There are certain aspects of game that I think Xavi and Iniesta are unrivaled.
1. awareness 2.quick passing with ball retention .Iniesta has even better speed ,dribbling technique and shot as compared to Xavi .
Zidane was a unique player who probably had no weakness.Yet not a devastating attacker ,he is a midfielder utilizing all his strengths to fullest.The reason why he is talked among all time greats is 1. Aesthetics of his play which comes from technique 2.strength 3. Range of passing and vision 4 . His innate ability to pop up in the biggest occasions and get a goal .He was a rare combination of Xavi,Iniesta and someone like Fellaini in my opinion.
1.imo xavi is something else not comperable with iniesta and zidane but if i have to make that id say more or less what footyfan said.
2.i can recognize some aspects like strength,leadership-personality, shot or heading and that looks maybe more integrated(dont now if its the right word,google help me;)) but he played and developed all this abilities in a different era,maybe not many years ago but with teams that played a football totally different from what barca is playing and that helped him a lot to stand. i believe that if he played ypothetically in barca right now he would have more or less surely a big role in the team but just a click under iniesta or xavi.maybe like what cesc have now.
3.about the technique matter which is the thing that characterize them we agree but i say iniesta=2 x zidane because iniesta do his things in so much smaller space which zidane never had to deal with as much as i can remember.
e.g. sorry for my english :p
 

misterplatin

New member
1.imo xavi is something else not comperable with iniesta and zidane but if i have to make that id say more or less what footyfan said.
2.i can recognize some aspects like strength,leadership-personality, shot or heading and that looks maybe more integrated(dont now if its the right word,google help me;)) but he played and developed all this abilities in a different era,maybe not many years ago but with teams that played a football totally different from what barca is playing and that helped him a lot to stand. i believe that if he played ypothetically in barca right now he would have more or less surely a big role in the team but just a click under iniesta or xavi.maybe like what cesc have now.
3.about the technique matter which is the thing that characterize them we agree but i say iniesta=2 x zidane because iniesta do his things in so much smaller space which zidane never had to deal with as much as i can remember.
e.g. sorry for my english :p

I think as Zidane has himself said many times the style of play has changed a lot .The tactics and role of players from similar position have also changed . Obviously to judge any player we have to watch the matches where they played their best football. After watching Zidane's few matches I came to a conclusion that Zidane had a few strengths which could help him in the modern game but a few weaknesses as well that Iniesta or Xavi do not have.For example I can't imagine Zidane as a Barca player under Pep because I think in his times teams did not press that well and defenses were more static .But whatever was ahead of him ,he dominated it.Probably if he was playing today he would have modified his game. I think it is fair to say that both are the best midfielders of their times and have their own strengths and weaknesses .
This is a clip from 97-98 vs Inter which was probably 1 of the greatest derby ever played between Inter-Juve.I have watched the match -1 of the most important match of his career so I thought of posting a short youtube video.Here you can note the strong presence he had on the field .Vision,Movement,first-touch all so good and everything looked so casual .There are some moves which we don't see everyday ,unique moves .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAIGu47rOpk
Another point is that many SerieA fans from that time don't rate Zidane as the best of his position.Players like RuiCosta had better impact on teams in goals/assists .So what makes Zidane so great ? It has to be his style, first-touch, ball-control ,vision.
But 1 thing I agree is that Zidane is over-rated among fans while Iniesta doesn't get that recognition even if the difference is small. People consider Zidane and Ronaldo on same level or Zidane even better but the people who saw them both during 1996-99 know that Ronaldo was a much more devastating player.He was the only incomparable one just like Messi is now.
 
Last edited:
M

Malappapper

Guest
For all his brilliance, Zidane was lazy-ass and inconsistent.

Iniesta has outperformed him, both in terms of consistency and in terms of trophies, but not in hype. The Iniesta of 08/09 (his best ever season) was far ahead of anything Zidane could ever do.
 

Stric

New member
I'm not knocking it, I remember watching Zidane as a kid and loving him, like everybody else did, but looking at the posted video now, it looks almost amateurish comparing to Iniesta. :icon_neutral:

*puts on flamesuit*

Frankly, as much as I loved him, I must admit he's a bit overhyped.
 

lessthanjake

New member
I think there's a difference between aesthetics and effectiveness. People tend to hold Zidane in incredibly high regard because of the aesthetic value of his game. He was certainly an effective player as well, but the reason he is thought SO highly of is how graceful he looked and such.

And I think aesthetic value is important when one thinks of who their favorite players are to watch. However, it is not important when talking of effectiveness. If two players do the exact same things, with the exact same results, but one looks great doing it and the other looks awkward, they are actually equally effective players and IMO equally good.

If you judge players based on effectiveness, Zidane does not look nearly as good. He was quite inconsistent, and while he was a good playmaker who could boss a game, he was not actually an exceptionally decisive player if we judge him compared to other legends. A lot of his great moments involve having some amazing first touch or something but not doing anything with it after that. This shows skill, but is less of an indicator of effectiveness (although an amazing first touch can allow you to keep possession when a lesser player would not have, so it can be effective, even if it's not really decisive).

To some degree, I think Iniesta gets too much credit based on aesthetics too. He looks like he is gliding across the pitch, and people like to watch that, but looking like you're gliding doesn't make you a better, more effective player. Similarly, a lot of his great moments involve keeping possession in tight spots, but then playing a simple non-dangerous pass afterwards. This is effective in the sense that it allows his team to keep possession and may create some extra space, but it typically is not a decisive moment that leads to any sort of goalscoring chance. Contrast this with Messi's dribbling, which also typically brings defenders towards him, but which very frequently ends in some kind of direct, decisive pass. Similar to Zidane as well, Iniesta is not entirely consistent.

So I think Iniesta and Zidane are both a tad overrated. However, I think Iniesta is the better player. While Iniesta is not insanely consistent, there is something to be said for the fact that, at the very least, he helps Barcelona boss the midfield EVERY single match. He may not produce magic every match, but he is always an important part in Barca having the majority of possession and setting up shop in the opponent's third. Zidane did not produce magic every match, but also was not bossing the midfield every match either. Furthermore, Iniesta is a better dribbler than Zidane (not that Zidane wasn't a great dribbler), so he can be more decisive.

I think Xavi is better than both of them. I think it's odd that Iniesta gets more plaudits than Xavi. Xavi's game is less magical looking, but is more effective. He absolutely controls the midfield of EVERY match he plays in a way that neither Iniesta nor Zidane could dream of. No one has ever averaged as many passes a match as Xavi. One can say it's because of the Barca system, but Xavi IS the Barca system. Furthermore, I think he's a more decisive player than either one if you look at his exceptional ability to give a through ball. He does it less now, since Messi has become a fantastic passer and the team has decided it's better to have him try a decisive pass further up the pitch when players are drawn to him and others have lots of space. However, if you look back to 2008-2010, Xavi was making a laughably large number of ridiculously good through balls.
 
Last edited:
M

Malappapper

Guest
Both Iniesta and Zidane cannot be evaluated through statistics. They did not score or assist as much as other midfielders. But that is only part of the story. Football is not basketball or baseball where you can explain 99% of the game through statistics. Football has aspects to it that are extremely difficult to quantify. Therefore there is an epistemological problem in football. Even though I take football statistics extremely seriously, in the case of Iniesta and Zidane, I believe that they must be left in the background. Both these players brought to their teams a certain X-factor, and I am not saying this in any mystical kind of way (ooh, this player has this aura about him and all this stupidities)
I am only saying that Iniesta for example, brings something very concrete to our game, even if that does not show in goals or even assists. It is difficult to measure, but I will attempt at describing it. I think that Iniesta brings first of all a calmness to our midfield, he is a reliable outlet both for relieving pressure from opposing markers, and for launching forays into the opponent's third. He links midfield with attack in a brilliant and reliable way. He maintains possession, that is our number one mode of defending. He draws players onto him, therefore creating space. He can interrupt the game when it is not going our way and so on. He can dribble or maintain possession in the tightest of spaces and sometimes makes fools of the opponents which results in fouls and yellow cards, and/or has a negative effect on their morale. He makes our game more effortless and less tiring. He can also carry the ball forward (Pirlo, Xavi and Cesc cannot do that) He also comes up occasionally with some epic goals and some awesome assists, but his end product is the least of his attributes.

Some of his best games:

Against Munich (4-0 in 08/09)

Against Madrid (the 1-3 in Madrid)

Against United (the Rome final)

Against Chelsea (both semis in 08/09)

Against Madrid (the 5-0 kickassico)

Against Shaktar (5-1, CL QF 2011)

Against Arsenal (3-1, CL Last 16)

Against Madrid (Supercopa first leg 3-2)

Against Italy (both the GS game and the final)

Against Russia (Euro semi 2008)

Against Paraguay (WC QF 2010)

Against Chile (WC GS 2010)

Against Holland (WC final 2010)

He was also absent when we lost to Inter in 2010.

Those are the big games that I can now readily think of. There were many others, but I cannot recollect them at the moment.
 

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
The bias of our forum towards our players is natural. And many of the current members haven't even seen Zidane play. Then you have the fanboys and the fact Zidane played for our bitter rivals and in the times when they dominated us. Plenty of reasons to dislike or disregard the great Frenchman but I still remember his game very well and have to say that Zidane was a better player than Iniesta is.
And I am sure you'll find this is a predominant opinion among majority of neutral fans.
 
M

mitkoa7x

Guest
Zidane and Figo were part of the reason I started watching football. I still love Zizu to this day, he was spectacular, frankly he still is. As much as I admire him I can say with a clean heart that Iniesta is better. I like to think I say so without bias but im not sure.
 

Ursegor

World Champion
When Zidane was 20, he got relegated with Cannes to Ligue 2. When Iniesta was 21, he came on at half time and completely changed Barcelona's game in a CL final where 2 times World Player Of The Year Ronaldinho was bottling it pretty hard, playing the throughball for the winner.

When Zidane was 25, he failed to make any sort of impact in a CL final with reigning champions Juventus and got owned 1-3 by Dortmund. When Iniesta was 25, he played with an injured leg in a CL final and wasn't even allowed to shoot. For a Barcelona team with a complete makeshift defense. Manchester United, reigning champions with the reigning Ballon d'Or winner Cristiano Ronaldo were all over Barcelona in the first 10 minutes. Until Iniesta glided through their midfield like a hot knife through butter to assist the opening goal which shell-shocked United for the rest of the game. Needless to say whose goal brought Barcelona to that CL final in the first place of course. Needless to say that he was a star peformer in Spain's EC winning team the year before as well.

At 26 both won their first World Cups. Zidane missed 2 1/2 games of the tournament for stomping on a player (one of 14 red cards in his career) and scored the winner against a Brazil side whose star player Ronaldo was unfit to play. Some say Nike forced him to play for marketing reasons. Whatever it was: Brazil's attack wasn't functioning "without" Ronaldo (the player of the tournament) and Zidane scored from 2 corner kicks. Iniesta scored against a Netherlands team which was kicking the shit out of him and his teammates.

At 27 Iniesta won his third Champions League trophy. At 27 Zidane was still waiting for his first.

At 28 both won a EC (in Iniesta's case his second), being voted players of the tournament.

Iniesta with 28 is on course to win his 6th domestic league title as one of the top 3 performers in what is described by many as the best team of all times. Competing against the most expensive Real Madrid team of all time coached by one of the best coaches of all time according to many. Zidane at 28 had won 2 domestic titles in Italy where he was involved in doping alongside other Juventus players. He admitted taking Creatine, analgesics, Esafosfina and other intravenous drugs.

With 29 Zidane joined Real Madrid where he got booed by the Bernabeu for being an inconsistent and lazy bastard, winning a total of 1 CL and 1 league title in 5 years, in a project that is knows as the "Galactico failure 1.0". Let's see what Iniesta will do in the next 5 years from now on.

Conclusion: Come at me, Zidane fanboys. :iniesta:

The bias of our forum towards our players is natural. And many of the current members haven't even seen Zidane play. Then you have the fanboys and the fact Zidane played for our bitter rivals and in the times when they dominated us. Plenty of reasons to dislike or disregard the great Frenchman but I still remember his game very well and have to say that Zidane was a better player than Iniesta is.
And I am sure you'll find this is a predominant opinion among majority of neutral fans.

According to you this forum:

- is biased
- hasn't watched Zidane
- is full of fanboys
- and hating on Zidane for playing for Real Madrid and dominating us

And only you remember him. This is a very solid basis to discuss.

I also remember Zidane. He was really "dominating us" when his team regularly finished 3th and 4th bar 2003 and behind Barcelona in 3 of his 5 seasons in Spain. He was totally beasting it up week in week out I'm sure. Fact of the matter is: He was a player who produced on a few big occasions. But unlike Iniesta, who did the same, he wasn't unlucky enough to play in the same generation as Messi. So his 2 WC goals brought him a Ballon d'Or. Iniesta's didn't. His volley against Leverkusen brought him another Ballon d'Or. Iniesta's Iniestazo didn't. He retired and is being romaticised. Iniesta didn't yet. He was an asshole and a "character". Iniesta isn't. That's life.
 
Last edited:

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
If you're gonna look at stats only then you'll get a limited picture. Zidane often carried his teams himself whereas Iniesta has always been a system player.
And what Zidane fanboys? There aren't even 5-6 non-Barca fans on this board let alone Zidane's fanboys.
 
M

mitkoa7x

Guest
If you're gonna look at stats only then you'll get a limited picture. Zidane often carried his teams himself whereas Iniesta has always been a system player.
And what Zidane fanboys? There aren't even 5-6 non-Barca fans on this board let alone Zidane's fanboys.

:lol:
 

raskolnikov

Well-known member
Wc 1998 is remembered so badly by some, Zidane wasnt epic the whole tournament, he became legendary in the final but until that point he was average.
Ronaldo was dissapointing as well, i think he made claims about scoring 10-15 goals beforehand and then didnt do much till he scored vs the Netherlands.
Player of the tournament up until the final was Bergkamp who was as talented as Zidane, a similair gracious player but is rated lower cause he lacks accomplishments that Zidane had.
It was Euro 2000 where Zidane was at his absolute best bossing it for France.
 

Home of Barca Fans

Top