Haven't seen anything of Figueroa but I remember reading a quote from Beckenbauer where he called himself the "European Figueroa".
All time best XI
- Thread starter Cling Bak
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
-During my time-
Schmeichel
Cafu Nesta Baresi Maldini
Matthaus Zidane
Maradona
C.Ronaldo Ronaldo Messi
-All time best-
Schmeichel
D.Santos Moore Edwards
Beckenbauer
Cruyff Maradona Platini Best
Di Stefano Pelé
Schmeichel
Cafu Nesta Baresi Maldini
Matthaus Zidane
Maradona
C.Ronaldo Ronaldo Messi
-All time best-
Schmeichel
D.Santos Moore Edwards
Beckenbauer
Cruyff Maradona Platini Best
Di Stefano Pelé
It's a fair point if you want a steely presence. The "steely presence" more often than not is a rather limited footballer and not Best XI material, but it's a real shame you end up with one slot for the likes of Scirea, Baresi, Passarella, Moore and Figueroa as a result. All significantly better footballers to any of the "steely" options. It is lucky of Beckenbauer he can take up a midfield position!
Nothing in it really. I would have preferred Maldini at LB but see what you were doing there.
I reckon Santamaría is probably the only standout for that steely role. I would have any out of of Goncalvez or Perfumo at Ayala's level. Great solid players but not Best XI Ever material. Personally, I don't rate Ayala any higher than Montero TBH. Ayala being better at what he did best, Montero being more complete, but his reputation and red card record does him no favours.
It does tell you something when Juve fans themselves pair Scirea with Montero in their all-time XI though.
The Kohler debate's an interesting one because almost invariably the 'best defender of his generation' is an elegant sweeper/libero type, so we have to dig a little deeper to identify a complementary central defensive partner. As in Pat Mustard's team, Kohler's the standout from his generation to partner Baresi, but beyond that it's not easy to find anyone who stands above him in that specific role.
Can't believe you didn't mention Nelinho.
Whenever I've watched some of the old footage, Vogts stands out as a proper, uncompromisingly ugly defender.
Agreed. From 1950 to 1980 South America won 5 World Cups to Europe's 3. The fact three of those come from an all conquering Brazilian generation shouldn't hide the fact both Argentina and Uruguay were very competitive in that period (in the 66 semis Argentina got robbed by a German ref and Uruguay by an English one!). At club level the great South American sides had nothing to envy their European counterparts. It follows the same holds for the legendary players from those days. Eusebio for instance had nothing on Alberto Spencer, but the latter was from Ecuador, so I doubt most of you ever heard of him, while anyone will tell you what a great player Eusebio was.
In fact, it was very common for the top players to turn down the likes of Real Madrid, much like Figueroa did to join Inter de Porto Alegre instead. Why? Because the best attacking players he could measure himself up against were in Brazil. Simple.
I would say in the 70s Europe edged ahead in terms of tactical developments and sophistication, the disparity only started showing in the 80s once it became widespread beyond a few revolutionary sides. Then, attracted by that and an increasing financial disparity, the very best South Amercian players would get cherry-picked to move to Europe in the 80s. But teams still had quotas -which limited the scope for creating supersides- and the financial disparity was not yet as significant. By the 90s it was game over for South American football though, by the 00s it was a right mess and only Brazil's recent economic resurgence is keeping it afloat and remotely interesting.
Passarella also said something about how he only accepted Beckenbauer and Figueroa as superior players to him.
But my favourite quote is the one that describes him 100%: "The area is my home, and I decide who enters it"
That's where the steely thing bugs me. You could argue he was the classy one and Goncalvez the steely one for Peñarol, but South American defenders back then where all really tough cookies. I wouldn't have a problem pairing Figueroa with the other greats mentioned before.
Yeah, the lack of exposure goes both ways really. Definitely means people like Figueroa get somewhat lost in the history books but it also means people place more importance on achievements and stories so there's a few who get overinflated reputations. Tevez being the joint record holder for South American POTY awards shows just how misleading awards can be without context.
That's true. Not like you could say Passarella lacked steel either. To be honest I think the "two liberos can't work" theory is only really true in the case of a pairing like Beckenbauer/Scirea. I'd happily partner Baresi with any of them and not think much of it.
Agree with Gio on Vogts but I just haven't watched enough of him to be sure. Plus Brehme obviously offered that bit more going forward.
I was going to mention that same point about Passarella. How about Gentille for a stopper alternative to Kohler?
Why do you say that Beckenbauer/Scirea won't work but either of them would work with Baresi. Is is that they were more 'sweeper-ish', or am I missing something?
Yeah Gentile's one, not sure what others think but I reckon Schwarzenbeck deserves a shout too particularly if you've got Beckenbauer there already.
Beckenbauer for me wasn't a defender, he just read the play well enough to play anywhere in any kind of role. If he was born in the 80s then there wouldn't be the same opportunity to play as a libero and he'd have just been a full-time midfielder. Scirea was more of a ball-player than Baresi but still first and foremost a top class defender, but one very much in the Rio mould - forcing him to be the one attacking everything while Franz sweeped up really wouldn't bring out the best in him, IMO. Beckenbauer's one of the few who I think really couldn't/wouldn't do that side of things.
Beckenbauer for me wasn't a defender, he just read the play well enough to play anywhere in any kind of role. If he was born in the 80s then there wouldn't be the same opportunity to play as a libero and he'd have just been a full-time midfielder. Scirea was more of a ball-player than Baresi but still first and foremost a top class defender, but one very much in the Rio mould - forcing him to be the one attacking everything while Franz sweeped up really wouldn't bring out the best in him, IMO. Beckenbauer's one of the few who I think really couldn't/wouldn't do that side of things.
Yeah, which is why Beckenbauer is better deployed in midfield, which leaves you free to choose between Figueroa-Passarella or Scirea-Baresi, subject to what fullback pair you go for.
There's a great story on Figueroa when he played for Peñarol (think it was in the Intercontinental Cup Winners Cup), he lunged himself head first to disposses a striker, getting hit on the head in the process. When he came back to his senses (much like when you come back from a drunken blackout/stupor) he found himself in the changing room and asked what the final scoreline was, only to be told he should know, as he had just completed the 90 minutes
Would anyone go for Fachetti over Maldini? Haven't seen much of the former to be honest.
Why those partnerships Anto?
Schmeichel
Beckenbauer Baresi Maldini
Matthaus
Zidane Maradona
Garrincha Messi Puskas
Pele
Beckenbauer Baresi Maldini
Matthaus
Zidane Maradona
Garrincha Messi Puskas
Pele
special mentions to Di Stefano, Ronaldo, B. Charlton and Cruyff
The blue side of Milan certainly would. There's nothing in it really, both were mainstays of hugely successful sides, both the longest serving captains for both club and country (or thereabouts). Every ounce of admiration our contemporaries have for Maldini would be matched by Facchetti's status 40 years ago. Facchetti probably edges it marginally in terms of steel, athleticism and attacking contribution, although the latter never at the detriment of a defence-first mentality.
Just sticking with Brwned's preference for pairs/lines from the same countries/clubs or at the very least continents and language. Ideally also the same football philosophy.
I guess it's a reasonable way to draw the line when you have ~10 players in with a good shout for Best Ever at CB.
Based on similar eras: you can rule out Nasazzi, Domingos Da Guia and Santamaria, leaving you with Figueroa-Passarella. Sure Nasazzi-Da Guia would likely be every bit as good, if not better. They actually played together at Nacional, but they didn't play with flat-four backlines. I wouldn't go beyond those five for a South American pair and doubt anyone would make a strong case for anyone beyond these.
In Europe you conveniently get rid of Moore because he can't communicate with the others (bloody harsh, I know), Beckenbauer goes to midfield as he is hard to pair up, leaving the door open for an Italian CB partnership of Scirea and Baresi. Sure, it could be with Kohler or Gentile who partnered him for club and/or country, but Baresi really is the better defender, isn't he?
I see, thanks. The Italians really do have an abundance of defenders don't they? I remember a similar thread asking the greatest ever 11s of particular nations which threw up some great teams.
Very interesting, I'm starting to realise how little I know of the great South American players compared to the Europeans. Never even heard of Nazzazi. How about Ruggeri as another option for the SA team?
Yeah I agree, you need Baresi in there. I would go with the Scirea/Baresi combination as well I think, but it would be interesting to see the different partnerships work in practise. For example Gentile is a 10/10 when it comes to marking so he might work well with Scirea.
Scirea-Gentile did work very well! Although being the man-marker that he was he couldn't always play alongside Scirea - that famous match when he marked Maradona out of the game he played at right back and then in the final he set up the 1st (?) goal with some nice right back play, but in the rest of the games he played at centre back iirc and that was usually how it worked. Centre back for the normal games and then let someone else take his place in the middle as he goes out and destroys the opposition's best player in the big games.
Yeah I realised that mistake before when I was reading about that Juve side! Where do you watch all these games Brwned?
Nasazzi's record as captain and defensive bedrock for a decade:
-4 Copa America's (out of 5)
-2 Olympic Golds (out of 2)
-1 World Cup (out of 1)
Ruggeri is not fit to shine his boots.
It was more a case of what you describe at the end: someone else taking his CB slot and him nominally at RB although in fact being all over the defensive line hunting down his man.
Superb at it, but doesn't make him the best CB or RB, just arguably the best man-marker (no minor merit).
Just had a look and he was playing in the 1920's.. no wonder I had never heard of him. Football back then would be a completely different thing, surely the standard wouldn't be what it was in the 50's onwards.
Are you Uruguayan?
Yes, didn't you know that already? Anyway, it was different, which is precisely why I discard him and Da Guia as THE partnership although by all accounts they were every bit as good as the other three I mention.
Argies will tell you Passarella was their best ever defender, Brazilians that it was Da Guia, Chileans that it was Figueroa and Uruguayans that it was Nasazzi. Santamaria is the only one of the set who was also hugely successful in Europe and in Spain they would likely say he was better than any of the other four.
So that leaves you with things nicely spread around and with three ball-playing defenders and two stoppers.
As far as South American CBs goes don't look beyond them, complete waste of time. Peruvians would argue Chumpitaz belongs in there but I reckon he just about misses out. Everyone else is out.
Nope, I knew you lived there because of your location but presumed you were English as you could speak it so well. Thought you moved over there or something.
Okay, that all makes sense. There seems to be less great CB's for SA as there are for the European team, but going off what you say there won't be much between the actual 'best of each continent'.
Okay, that all makes sense. There seems to be less great CB's for SA as there are for the European team, but going off what you say there won't be much between the actual 'best of each continent'.
No, I just lived in England for 15 years.
I wouldn't say the difference is massive. If you rule out all the Ayala-level CBs (i.e. World Class but not Best Ever material) the European list is not significantly longer. Italians making defending an art form populates it a bit more and the greater tactical diversity in Europe also makes it harder or more contentious to come up with a definite pair, but the true greats are not a lot more.
I tried to put mine together and found it is mostly the CBs and fullback pairs that I struggle to fit something I agree with overall.
The array of attacking talent also is inconsistent with playing a flat back four (leaves a monster job for one chap in midfield).
So I'm going old-school!
The array of attacking talent also is inconsistent with playing a flat back four (leaves a monster job for one chap in midfield).
So I'm going old-school!
Brwned do you have any full match footage of Figueroa? Would like to know more about him.
Not a great set of opponents but you can see elements of what he possesses.
Also a random vid but which illustrates the great players who stayed in South America during their peak point...
Not a great set of opponents but you can see elements of what he possesses.
Also a random vid but which illustrates the great players who stayed in South America during their peak point...
I'm surprised at the lack of Santos twins in both full-back positions. The modern fullback was heavily influenced by the style of Nilton and Djalma Santos, thus initiating that great tradition of Brazilian fullbacks which goes up to this day.
Ideally you would get something from his days at Peñarol or Inter PA as he was surrounded by better players than with Chile.
Below you can find a clip with his interventions in their game against Germany in 1974. Watch at ~1:20 or so, that was a classic Figueroa ruse. Sounds incredibly risky, but when closed down by a forward he would often knock the ball off him, just as you do if you want it to go out for a goal kick or outball, but the nutter would do that in the middle of the box.
It was supposed to confuse the other player, which I don't buy as a great trick. I was always of the opinion it was more a case of him dissing the forward and showing him how composed and in complete control he was.
I really wanted to play the Santos' but couldn't see a 4-1-2-3 working with only Cruyff doing much to help the one holding.
My next best was three at the back but it made the choice of the other defender very difficult as most never played in a three with two attacking fullbacks. I was going for either Baresi or Santamaria in that scenario but it felt like a car crash TBH. It's not like I would be lacking width with Garrincha and Best upfront
When I finally went for 2-3-2-3 I badly wanted to fit N. Santos but Breitner just looked 100% the appropriate choice for that role and alongside Beckenbauer it was a no-brainer.
I've got full games of both the West Germany and Australia games posted plus his game v East Germany in the same World Cup + his appearances in '66 and '82 and a few games of him for Internacional (when he was reigning South American FOTY). The rapidshare links are dead but I can upload them myself if you're interested?
Pretty good team...I'd have Di Stefano, Messi and Eusebio ahead of Zidane, Baggio and Matthaus but can't really argue with the rest.
What is it about Carlos Alberto that impressed you so much Mujac, if you don't mind my asking? Did you think he looked better in '70 than any other Brazil right back you've seen? I think you're right in that any team without Di Stefano is incomplete, it's just where to fit him in.
Schmeichel
D. Santos Scirea Baresi Maldini
Beckenbauer
Cruyff---- Di Stéfano
Messi----Pelé----Maradona
D. Santos Scirea Baresi Maldini
Beckenbauer
Cruyff---- Di Stéfano
Messi----Pelé----Maradona
Not putting Messi in an all time best XI is just silly to say the least. I think some on here try to show off their football knowledge by only selecting footballers from 15+ years ago.
I'd sneak Keane into the XI insted of Matthaus also to give you that intimidation factor and a warrior leader to inspire the team even if Mattheus was technically more gifted.
Iniesta and Xavi have to be in there instead of Zidane also as those two have created the most dominating midfield act in football history therefore have to be picked!
And there has never been a better striker in history then when Fat Ronaldo was at Barcelona so he has to be in there even if Pele had way more longevity and luck with injuries
--------------Schmeichel/Kahn-------------
Cafu - Beckenbauer - Baresi - Maldini--------
---------------Keane ----------------------
------Iniesta-----------Xavi----------------
--Messi-------------------Maraddona-------
------------Fat Ronaldo--------------------
I'd sneak Keane into the XI insted of Matthaus also to give you that intimidation factor and a warrior leader to inspire the team even if Mattheus was technically more gifted.
Iniesta and Xavi have to be in there instead of Zidane also as those two have created the most dominating midfield act in football history therefore have to be picked!
And there has never been a better striker in history then when Fat Ronaldo was at Barcelona so he has to be in there even if Pele had way more longevity and luck with injuries
--------------Schmeichel/Kahn-------------
Cafu - Beckenbauer - Baresi - Maldini--------
---------------Keane ----------------------
------Iniesta-----------Xavi----------------
--Messi-------------------Maraddona-------
------------Fat Ronaldo--------------------
I am going for a very unbalanced side, because there are so many wonderful attacking players that is a shame to leave them outside of the team.
Anyway,
-----------------------Yashin--------------------
Carlos Alberto --- Beckenbauer --- Moore ---Maldini
Xavi -------------Maradona(c) --------------Zidane
Messi --------------Pele-------------------- Cruyff
Messi, Cruyff and Beckenbauer to help the midfield. Maradona playing deeper than usual. Don't know how it could have worked, but I think that is quite great.
About positions, Yashin is the undisputed best No.1 of all time, Carlos Alberto comes before Cafu, Beckenbauer comes by default while Moore beats Baresi. Maldini has a tough contest with Roberto Carlos.
In midfield, Xavi as the best playmaker of all time beats Matthaus and Pirlo, he is playing together with Zidane and Maradona. Both of them are more deep than their usual No.10 position. Platini came close but in the end he was beaten by Zidane.
In attack, Cruyff beats C.Ronaldo, while Pele beats Luis Ronaldo. Messi is Messi. Honorable mentions here comes for other giants, like Di Stefano, Best, Puskas and Eusebio.
Maradona is the captain of the team (beating Carlos Albero, Maldini, Moore and Beckenbauer, all of them could have been captains). Pele cries for it but in time he will understand the decision.
It would be interesting to see Brwned judgement about this.
Anyway,
-----------------------Yashin--------------------
Carlos Alberto --- Beckenbauer --- Moore ---Maldini
Xavi -------------Maradona(c) --------------Zidane
Messi --------------Pele-------------------- Cruyff
Messi, Cruyff and Beckenbauer to help the midfield. Maradona playing deeper than usual. Don't know how it could have worked, but I think that is quite great.
About positions, Yashin is the undisputed best No.1 of all time, Carlos Alberto comes before Cafu, Beckenbauer comes by default while Moore beats Baresi. Maldini has a tough contest with Roberto Carlos.
In midfield, Xavi as the best playmaker of all time beats Matthaus and Pirlo, he is playing together with Zidane and Maradona. Both of them are more deep than their usual No.10 position. Platini came close but in the end he was beaten by Zidane.
In attack, Cruyff beats C.Ronaldo, while Pele beats Luis Ronaldo. Messi is Messi. Honorable mentions here comes for other giants, like Di Stefano, Best, Puskas and Eusebio.
Maradona is the captain of the team (beating Carlos Albero, Maldini, Moore and Beckenbauer, all of them could have been captains). Pele cries for it but in time he will understand the decision.
It would be interesting to see Brwned judgement about this.
I think it is more a case that once you want to put certain players there Messi becomes a bit surplus to requirements.
If you go with a more modern option like yours -playmaking from centre midfield- Messi absolutely has to be there, indeed. He is without a doubt the most complete one-man-band package you could play upfront.
Personally, I love wide players, and strictly as wide players Garrincha and Best are better options. Once you put Maradona in, much of what Messi brings to the table is also catered for. Then as a centreforward I'd rather a Pelé, Ronaldo or Muller.
It's not exactly a case of jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none, that would be ridiculous, but Messi does not reach the heights those do at what they did best, while being World Class at a lot more things. If I needed to field only 2-3 attacking players then Messi certainly would be one of them.
There was a discussion earlier on this, Keane may not be the best fit for those two.
The tough thing with that act is that they need an appropriate DM for that act to work and Messi has to be there, so you end up taking up four slots out of the Best XI to bring Barca into it. Good as Barca have been, some of us feel it is a disservice to leave only six outfield slots for the rest of football history.
Ronaldo was the hardest one to leave out. Similar scenario, once you settle for other creative and wide options you just drool at the prospect of them linking up with Pelé. As an out and out striker though Ronaldo is second to none.
It really is a choice between footballing styles, and there sure is some romanticism involved. I think no one would dispute World Cups used to be much better and more fun, yet you could argue Spain (my preferred pre-2010 one) would beat, if not twat, most World Cup winning sides from the 70s and 80s.
There has been a shift from individual brilliance being given the freedom to express itself to brilliance emerging WITHIN A SYSTEM. The problem with the latter is to reproduce the brilliance you need to preserve the system and you end up having to incorporate players in bunches rather than individuals, which is a bit crap when you want to field a Best Ever XI.
As a modern Best XI yours takes some beating though, albeit with Keano needing a replacement that better suits Xavi and Iniesta.
For me, Iniesta ahead of Cruyff is madness, as is Keane over Rijkaard or Matthaus.
Even in a modern version I'm not sure I'd have Keane in there, probably Redondo.
Even in a modern version I'm not sure I'd have Keane in there, probably Redondo.
And as I write that Revan provides a great example of trying to fit too many individuals and completely forgetting about having any sort of system or tactical discipline.
What's the point of fielding so many greats if Messi, Cruyff and Beckenbauer end up needing to support the midfield because there isn't really a midfield?
What's the point of fielding so many greats if Messi, Cruyff and Beckenbauer end up needing to support the midfield because there isn't really a midfield?
With Xavi and Iniesta? Rijkaard.
To be fair I admitted it. But I think that it could have worked, considering that Beckenbauer is not a CB, he is a libero. The midfield trio of Xavi, Zidane and Maradona is not balanced, but with the help of Beckenbauer and Messi who can track back IMO could work.
If I would have gone for a more balanced team, then I would have gone with:
Back 5
Matthaus Xavi Zidane
-----Maradona---------Cruyff
----Messi
That would mean that Pele is out, something I didn't want.
I know, didn't mean to sound overly critical, it's a natural temptation we have seen throughout the thread.
You provide a great example of what I was saying, once you start playmaking in midfield Messi is a dead cert for that side as he provides you no end of options upfront.
You are probably still overdoing the creative elaboration though. I would argue Zidane ends up being surplus to requirements there and you could easily ditch him to pick a centreforward and go 4-2-3-1.
Not sure Matthaus-Xavi is the best two though, that's when it gets to the point that you wonder whether Xavi is worth it without his entourage. Matthaus-Rijkaard would be a far better platform to let Messi-Maradona-Cruyff and Pelé/Ronaldo focus on what they do best.