All time best XI

JakeC said:
Busquets, seriously? No way, in hell, if team was so good, why not just smack Alves Pique and Puyol.
Click to expand...

Surely if you just think about it you'd be able to answer that yourself. I agree with him in a sense, it's a case of making a team out of the best players, or making the best team. Keane, for example, is a better player one for one than Busquets. But Keane would be wasted on the Barca system required to bring the best out of Iniesta and Xavi, and the system would be wasted on him.

As a midfield unit, I'd bet on Busquets-Xavi-Iniesta beating Keane-Xavi-Iniesta more times than vice-versa. It sounds odd, but I think it's true. Keane would win the ball back, go for a brilliant driving run, and no-one would have gone with him because that's not how the other two play.
 
Luis Ronaldo is overrated.
 
Brightonian said:
Surely if you just think about it you'd be able to answer that yourself. I agree with him in a sense, it's a case of making a team out of the best players, or making the best team. Keane, for example, is a better player one for one than Busquets. But Keane would be wasted on the Barca system required to bring the best out of Iniesta and Xavi, and the system would be wasted on him.

As a midfield unit, I'd bet on Busquets-Xavi-Iniesta beating Keane-Xavi-Iniesta more times than vice-versa. It sounds odd, but I think it's true. Keane would win the ball back, go for a brilliant driving run, and no-one would have gone with him because that's not how the other two play.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I mean, it's an all time best XI, the best players, Busquets wouldn't be fit to shine Keanes boots
 
------------Schmeichel--------------
Cafu---Baresi---Kohler---Maldini
-----------Keane---Xavi--------------
---------------Zidane----------------
-----Messi-------Ronaldo---Ronaldinho

That's a very drunken and very hurried attempt at my best XI since I've been watching football circa 1990ish. Didn't see enough of Maradona to include him.

- A mixture of lack of seeing them and bias allows me to include Keane ahead of Matthaus and Rijkaard. He's better than any other defensive-minded midfielder I've seen.
- Cafu over Zanetti and Thuram is a difficult pick but they were all incredible.
- From what i've seen rather than objective reality, I could almost have included McGrath ahead of either Baresi or Kohler. He was incredible.
- There's no room for Baggio, who is my favourite non-Utd player ever, or Stoichkov, but they were both exceptional.
- Cristiano Ronaldo is unreal, but he just doesn't seem to fit in these XIs. Any way I look at it, Ronaldinho will bring out the best from teammates, and Ronaldo doesn't really do so. Its all hypothetical, so noone can attack me that much.
- If it wasn't for Brazilian Ronaldo, this could be any of Henry, Romario Batistuta or RVN.
 
Banks
D.Santos Beckenbauer Scirea Maldini
Matthaus
Best Pele Cruyff Maradona
Messi​

Apologies to De Stefano.
 
Schmeichel
Cafu beckenbauer baresi maldini
Matthaus zidane
Messi maradona cruyff
Pele

Based on what I've heard from my dad/uncle/other family members, or reputation/YouTube and all that stuff. Only seen cafu, schmeichel, maldini, zidane, and messi from that list though.
 
Great to watch when you have the ball, but you would get slaughtered.

Edit: that's Fergus'son I'm talking about
 
I like to play this

--------------------Schmeichel

C. Alberto--Beckenbauer--Moore---Edwards

-------Cruyff---Zidane---Maradona

--------Di Stefano--Pelé--Best
 
Pat_Mustard said:
Genuinely curious as most of the line up are before my time, but whats wrong with it bar the strange formation?

If that was set out:

----------------------Banks--------------
D. Santos--Beckenbauer--Scirea---Maldini

-------------------Matthaus-------------------
-------------------------------Maradona------
---------------Cruyff-----------------------

-----Messi------------Pele----------Best----------

then whats the particular weakness defensively?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that you would basically be playing with one real midfielder.
 
I don't think you could really play Maradona in an orthodox midfield role or call him hard-working. Unless he was significantly more mobile/hard-working pre-ankle break? Pelé on the other hand hardly ever gets mentioned as a hard-worker but he was like Rooney in his defensive work. Cruyff's obviously going to defend no matter where he's playing and Matthaus is a one-man midfield. I think the midfield and attack would work but there's a lack of steel in the team in general and you can't help thinking someone like Kohler would contribute more than Scirea alongside Beckenbauer.

#Carl said:
The same reason people select Yashin etc. Because a lot of this is based on reputation.
Click to expand...

Well of course but you have people like Partizan and Jopub who've seen them all so I was interested in seeing where his reputation originated from. I didn't think he looked any more outstanding in '70 than Santos in '62, Leandro in '82, Josimar in '86, Jorginho in '94 or Cafu in '98 so it can't be that alone (unless that one goal defines his career?). Obviously he had a lengthy club career playing alongside Pelé but there's little info. on that from what I can see so I'm just interested in what his reputation is amongst those that saw him live.

European
Zoff
Bergomi Burgnich Baresi Facchetti
Breitner Beckenbauer Matthaus
Platini
Cruyff van Basten


South American
Fillol
Zanetti Ayala Passarella Marzolini
Rattín
Garrincha Didi Zico
Tostao Pelé
​
 
Pat_Mustard said:
If that was set out:

----------------------Banks--------------
D. Santos--Beckenbauer--Scirea---Maldini

-------------------Matthaus-------------------
-------------------------------Maradona------
---------------Cruyff-----------------------

-----Messi------------Pele----------Best----------

then whats the particular weakness defensively?
Click to expand...

Diego Armando Maradona. Cruyff will put in a shift but you could surely come up with an alternate XI which would dominate this one. There's no point having so many great attacking players if you are going to need some of them to primarily work on getting the ball back.

This same team would be better if it had Falcao instead of Maradona, which is not to say Falcao was better than him, but would be more suited to make this team less disfunctional.
 
Brwned said:
I don't think you could really play Maradona in an orthodox midfield role or call him hard-working. Unless he was significantly more mobile/hard-working pre-ankle break? Pelé on the other hand hardly ever gets mentioned as a hard-worker but he was like Rooney in his defensive work. Cruyff's obviously going to defend no matter where he's playing and Matthaus is a one-man midfield. I think the midfield and attack would work but there's a lack of steel in the team in general and you can't help thinking someone like Kohler would contribute more than Scirea alongside Beckenbauer.
Click to expand...

antohan said:
Diego Armando Maradona. Cruyff will put in a shift but you could surely come up with an alternate XI which would dominate this one. There's no point having so many great attacking players if you are going to need some of them to primarily work on getting the ball back.

This same team would be better if it had Falcao instead of Maradona, which is not to say Falcao was better than him, but would be more suited to make this team less disfunctional.
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff lads. Maybe I'm allowing the odd feisty tackle he committed to colour my judgement of Maradona's overall defensive output - I've seen very little of him in terms of full matches compared to you both.

Another question - both Frank Rijkaard and Matthaus peaked when I was young but I remember them both as being superb - who was better and why?
 
Pat_Mustard said:
Another question - both Frank Rijkaard and Matthaus peaked when I was young but I remember them both as being superb - who was better and why?
Click to expand...

I think if you were assembling a World XI when they were both at their peaks, Rijkaard and Matthaus would have formed a complementary partnership in the middle. Rijkaard as the positionally astute, deep-lying midfielder, always available for the pass, alongside Matthaus as the archetypal and best of the breed box-to-box midfielder. Matthaus wasn't a conventional playmaking midfielder, but one who married the defensive nous to nullify Maradona, with significant goal threat either from range or getting into the opposition's box.
 
JakeC]Busquets said:
Surely if you just think about it you'd be able to answer that yourself. I agree with him in a sense, it's a case of making a team out of the best players, or making the best team. Keane, for example, is a better player one for one than Busquets. But Keane would be wasted on the Barca system required to bring the best out of Iniesta and Xavi, and the system would be wasted on him.

As a midfield unit, I'd bet on Busquets-Xavi-Iniesta beating Keane-Xavi-Iniesta more times than vice-versa. It sounds odd, but I think it's true. Keane would win the ball back, go for a brilliant driving run, and no-one would have gone with him because that's not how the other two play.
Click to expand...

Aye, this. That midfield was all about its exceptional ball retention and composure. Busquets fits perfectly into this. I was trying hard to think of some other player over the years that had his defensive game and ability/composure on the ball but I struggled to think of anyone else. This thread may be an all time best XI, but I always assume in these threads that there is some sort of emphasis on picking a team in view of how the players would play together. If not, then it's Keane/Zidane every time.
 
----------------Schemichel------------------------------
Cafu----Baresi-----Paolo Maldini-----Roberto Carlos
------------Redondo---------Zidane------------------------
Messi-------------Maradona--------------C.Ronaldo
-----------------Ronaldo--------------------------------


Thats from 1984-to now. A bit attacking to say the least.

Harsh on van Basten and a few others.
 
Amazed that anyone would leave Schemichel out of their team, especially United-fans who have been lucky enough to see the great man live.
 
I'm always right said:
Nonsense, that's not how football works.
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate? I can see Beckembauer linking defence and attack and Cruyff helping Mattahaus out with that as well, so it's not as broken down the middle as it initially looks.

But the same backline and frontline with Matthaus-Rijkaard + either Maradona or Cruyff would most likely beat that side.
 
antohan said:
Care to elaborate? I can see Beckembauer linking defence and attack and Cruyff helping Mattahaus out with that as well, so it's not as broken down the middle as it initially looks.

But the same backline and frontline with Matthaus-Rijkaard + either Maradona or Cruyff would most likely beat that side.
Click to expand...

I agree with you in fairness but I had to get Best and Maradona in there somehow!

Swap him for Rijkaard, Didi, Charlton, Moore or Baresi and it's problem solved!
 
I'd have Jimmy Greaves up front. He scored 422 goals in 602 club games ... all in top flight football.

Not to mention 44 goals in 57 international appearances.
 
Gio said:
I think if you were assembling a World XI when they were both at their peaks, Rijkaard and Matthaus would have formed a complementary partnership in the middle. Rijkaard as the positionally astute, deep-lying midfielder, always available for the pass, alongside Matthaus as the archetypal and best of the breed box-to-box midfielder. Matthaus wasn't a conventional playmaking midfielder, but one who married the defensive nous to nullify Maradona, with significant goal threat either from range or getting into the opposition's box.
Click to expand...

Thanks mate - excellent post.
 
:lol: Some people trying to fit in 5 strikers into their teams. It does need balance, unfortunately.
 
Say Goodbye said:
:lol: Some people trying to fit in 5 strikers into their teams. It does need balance, unfortunately.
Click to expand...


Well, considering that this is an all-time topic... why does the formation have to be restricted to the modern era?
 
Brwned said:
I don't think you could really play Maradona in an orthodox midfield role or call him hard-working. Unless he was significantly more mobile/hard-working pre-ankle break? Pelé on the other hand hardly ever gets mentioned as a hard-worker but he was like Rooney in his defensive work. Cruyff's obviously going to defend no matter where he's playing and Matthaus is a one-man midfield. I think the midfield and attack would work but there's a lack of steel in the team in general and you can't help thinking someone like Kohler would contribute more than Scirea alongside Beckenbauer.



Well of course but you have people like Partizan and Jopub who've seen them all so I was interested in seeing where his reputation originated from. I didn't think he looked any more outstanding in '70 than Santos in '62, Leandro in '82, Josimar in '86, Jorginho in '94 or Cafu in '98 so it can't be that alone (unless that one goal defines his career?). Obviously he had a lengthy club career playing alongside Pelé but there's little info. on that from what I can see so I'm just interested in what his reputation is amongst those that saw him live.

European
Zoff
Bergomi Burgnich Baresi Facchetti
Breitner Beckenbauer Matthaus
Platini
Cruyff van Basten


South American
Fillol
Zanetti Ayala Passarella Marzolini
Rattín
Garrincha Didi Zico
Tostao Pelé
​
Click to expand...


Very interesting and well-balanced teams, Brwned!

Some questions/remarks though: first, I'm somewhat confused by Tostão's position. I'm guessing you're basing this off of his general role for Brazil (where he did start so advanced)? I was under the impression that for Cruzeiro he was more of a hybrid between a 10 and a second striker.

Although I've always liked Ayala, I think most South Americans would have Elías Figueroa as their 2nd best centre-back ever (after Passarella). From a historical viewpoint Santamaría should be ahead of him as well.

And lastly, no Nílton or Djalma Santos??? :eek: Although I'd personally keep Zanetti in there, so only Nílton at left(wing)back for me.
 
Skorenzy said:
Although I've always liked Ayala, I think most South Americans would have Elías Figueroa as their 2nd best centre-back ever (after Passarella). From a historical viewpoint Santamaría should be ahead of him as well.

And lastly, no Nílton or Djalma Santos??? :eek: Although I'd personally keep Zanetti in there, so only Nílton at left(wing)back for me.
Click to expand...

It's a tough one because Nilton Santos was no orthodox fullback. If you go back even earlier José Leandro Andrade by all accounts should have a place in the best XI, but the tactics back then were very different so his role was neither Zanetti's nor Rattin's. Shame that the first black player to play -let alone win everything- at international level is a bit of a misfit for modern tactics.

If you are going fullbacks Marzolini is a great shout, if you are playing wingbacks then the two Santos'.

CB and DM though are reasonably straightforward. I'm surprised to see Ayala in a South American Best XI Ever, not a chance.

Figueroa is one that obviously springs to mind but Brwned may be trying to balance the classy and the steel in that central partnership, Santamaría would certainly fit the bill as a partner though. Nassazzi and Lorenzo Fernández would walk into that ahead of Ayala as well, but there is of course not much to go on other than having won every tournament in sight, something Ayala never did.

For Rattin there's one obvious replacement head and shoulders ahead of him: Obdulio Jacinto Varela. Beast of a player and an exceptional leader.

The rest is pretty damn good and although I would like to fit Ronaldo ahead of Tostao, his tandem with Pele was awesome.
 
Skorenzy said:
Very interesting and well-balanced teams, Brwned!

Some questions/remarks though: first, I'm somewhat confused by Tostão's position. I'm guessing you're basing this off of his general role for Brazil (where he did start so advanced)? I was under the impression that for Cruzeiro he was more of a hybrid between a 10 and a second striker.

Although I've always liked Ayala, I think most South Americans would have Elías Figueroa as their 2nd best centre-back ever (after Passarella). From a historical viewpoint Santamaría should be ahead of him as well.

And lastly, no Nílton or Djalma Santos??? :eek: Although I'd personally keep Zanetti in there, so only Nílton at left(wing)back for me.
Click to expand...

How could you not see the trend, Skor?! Each line is one nationality! Just to keep these things interesting. For Europe it's: Back 5 Italy, midfield Germany, playmaker France and attack Holland. For the South American XI I couldn't think of enough players for any line from Uruguay, Chile or the like so it ended up being back 6 Argentina, front 5 Brazil! Varela fits in there nicely as the '1' instead of Rattin though, missed a trick there!

Overall (with a focus on balance) maybe...

Zoff
Brehme Kohler Scirea Cabrini
Matthaus Beckenbauer
Maradona Pelé Cruyff
Ronaldo​

Juve/Inter & Italy/Germany core looks pretty good at the back there. Is there a better stopper/more complimentary partner to a libero than Kohler? I can't think of one. Hard to leave out Rijkaard particularly when he'd give that discipline and balance but Matthaus will just play a more disciplined role as Beckenbauer does his thing in the middle. Maradona, Pele and Cruyff on the one hand looks like overkill but on the other you have the likes of Iniesta, Silva and Xavi in the Spain side and Rivelino, Tostao and Pele in Brazil's 70 so I think you could probably sneak all three in...ideally you'd have the Pelé-Garrincha axis but then you're putting Maradona in a different role entirely.

As for Tostao absolutely he was a #10, he said so himself manys-a-times and he's spoken at length about playing that position in the world cup in which he said he was just the foil for Pelé and a focal point for the team, but he could clearly play the role. Particularly with Pelé up there supporting him and Didi dropping back to open up that space in the hole for all three of Pelé, Zico and Tostao to drop into. It's a fluid attack just like Tostao likes it.
 
Brwned said:
How could you not see the trend, Skor?! Each line is one nationality! Just to keep these things interesting. For Europe it's: Back 5 Italy, midfield Germany, playmaker France and attack Holland. For the South American XI I couldn't think of enough players for any line from Uruguay, Chile or the like so it ended up being back 6 Argentina, front 5 Brazil! Varela fits in there nicely as the '1' instead of Rattin though, missed a trick there!

Overall (with a focus on balance) maybe...

Zoff
Brehme Kohler Scirea Cabrini
Matthaus Beckenbauer
Maradona Pelé Cruyff
Ronaldo​

Juve/Inter & Italy/Germany core looks pretty good at the back there. Is there a better stopper/more complimentary partner to a libero than Kohler? I can't think of one. Hard to leave out Rijkaard particularly when he'd give that discipline and balance but Matthaus will just play a more disciplined role as Beckenbauer does his thing in the middle. Maradona, Pele and Cruyff on the one hand looks like overkill but on the other you have the likes of Iniesta, Silva and Xavi in the Spain side and Rivelino, Tostao and Pele in Brazil's 70 so I think you could probably sneak all three in...ideally you'd have the Pelé-Garrincha axis but then you're putting Maradona in a different role entirely.

As for Tostao absolutely he was a #10, he said so himself manys-a-times and he's spoken at length about playing that position in the world cup in which he said he was just the foil for Pelé and a focal point for the team, but he could clearly play the role. Particularly with Pelé up there supporting him and Didi dropping back to open up that space in the hole for all three of Pelé, Zico and Tostao to drop into. It's a fluid attack just like Tostao likes it.
Click to expand...


Hah, I think you're operating on a level beyond us poor mortals.

Nice variation. That's the problem with making an all-time XI... once you've picked your players it could take a while before you need to make any changes :D I get a feeling that in a couple of years I might be inclined to maybe add Messi to these, but that's about it. Although you could argue about a player as "unique" as Xavi, even though he wouldn't rank that high as an individual (well, it's all relative, being #100 of all-time is still better than 99% of all footballers ever).

Re: antohan, thanks for your insightful post! I usually refrain from trying to rate players from the pre-WWII era, because of the scarcity of actual footage etc. But yes generally Nasazzi and Andrade I could be on that list as well for the SA team. I've read some accounts that claim Nílton Santos was equally as good at centre-back than at his usual wing role, but of course in such an attack-minded era it's hard to compare to later players.

On a sidenote, what do you guys think about this infatuation lately with Iniesta? It seems in every list of best players currently he's 3rd behind Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. Is this like a trend nowadays? Personally I don't think he should be anywhere near the top3 for 2012 (although these past 2 months he's actually performed better than Ronaldo), and his 2nd spot in 2010 Ballon d'Or was even worse! In this sense I do think he's like Zidane, mainly rated on the basis of an aesthetically appealing style and a misconceived notion of being "big-game players".
 
Brwned said:
How could you not see the trend, Skor?! Each line is one nationality!
Click to expand...

I did pick on that, you've done it before with the All-time Brazil side mixing different WCs :lol:

But once you start incuding Ayala and Rattin you should know better.

BTW, I find the amount of bumming Kohler is getting quite intriguing. Great player, no doubt, but can't help but feel he is getting there entirely on account of being a great foil to whoever the libero of choice is (and him being a contemporary of some of the very best ones). Surely there must be several better options for a Best XI?
 
Other than Santamaría I couldn't really think of a steely presence in the middle. Who else is there? I thought of pairing up Scirea, Gentile and Cabrini again but I don't think Gentile should be in there any more than Kohler should. Of course Kohler can't compare to Figueroa, Baresi and co. as individuals. I thought Burgnich looked outstanding from the little I've seen of him but he played in a pretty unique system so you wonder how he'd fare in a straight back four.

As for Iniesta/Zidane - completely agree on both accounts.
 
I was surprised by Kohler and Ayala too.

Brehme was a great shout though, forgot about him.
 
Ayala was only in there because of the synergies associated with having them from the same nation, that's it! There's not many top Argie centre-halfs. Although Santamaría would have fit in there with him speaking the same language and whatnot. Ayala's underrated for me anyway.
 
Yeah, just read that.

Certainly one of the greats of his generation but of all time? Not for me.
 
Brwned said:
Other than Santamaría I couldn't really think of a steely presence in the middle. Who else is there? I thought of pairing up Scirea, Gentile and Cabrini again but I don't think Gentile should be in there any more than Kohler should. Of course Kohler can't compare to Figueroa, Baresi and co. as individuals. I thought Burgnich looked outstanding from the little I've seen of him but he played in a pretty unique system so you wonder how he'd fare in a straight back four.

As for Iniesta/Zidane - completely agree on both accounts.
Click to expand...

Is that just based on world cups, mainly 1972? He never played in Europe did he which in my mind goes against him, but maybe I'm just being very Eurocentric. What do you think?
 
Yeah, but Figueroa's the kind of player than even a 5 year old could see is a bit special. Up against Beckenbauer he out-played and maybe even outclassed him. He was just a supremely elegant and intelligent footballer and of course an inspirational leader. Playing in South America shouldn't be held against anyone pre-90s, IMO. Most of the best ones did but in the world stage you could still see they were a class above 'proven' Europeans. I don't think there was a gulf in class between the two continents until the mid-80s at the earliest, certainly not in the 60s and 70s in my view.
 
Theon said:
Is that just based on world cups, mainly 1972? He never played in Europe did he which in my mind goes against him, but maybe I'm just being very Eurocentric. What do you think?
Click to expand...


WC 1974*

That and the fact that he was 3x South American Footballer of the Year, which is still a record today (well, jointly with Zico and... Carlos Tévez).

Also think Berti Vogts is quite underrated (even by Germans) and should be ahead of Brehme, though only slightly.
 
Brwned said:
Yeah, but Figueroa's the kind of player than even a 5 year old could see is a bit special. Up against Beckenbauer he out-played and maybe even outclassed him. He was just a supremely elegant and intelligent footballer and of course an inspirational leader. Playing in South America shouldn't be held against anyone pre-90s, IMO. Most of the best ones did but in the world stage you could still see they were a class above 'proven' Europeans. I don't think there was a gulf in class between the two continents until the mid-80s at the earliest, certainly not in the 60s and 70s in my view.
Click to expand...

Only just seen your edit, interesting stuff. Yeah I suspected I was doing a disservice to South American football back then, but still in my head I'd always kind of hold it against them.

Also it stops you watching them as much, I've seen a lot of Baresi, Beckenbauer etc but don't think I've ever seen Figueroa play a single game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.