both of them are slow and short they both need someone else to do the physical part , defending part . I didn't know xavi prior to 2006 , pep found a way to use xavi's strength and made him a world class , pirlo on the other hand was playing well untill Gatusso was playing well and you can say after that he wasnt good now juventus got vidal to do what gatusso used to do
1 game is never a good scale , every player has off day , i saw barcelona fans are keep bringing Euro final , i want to remind this quote from Goal.com about the game between Spain and Portugal, "he was crowded out to the extent that he was unable to exert his usual influence to the extent that he was subbed late in the game" but that doesn't make him superior to Pirlo either , football is a team game and performance of players depends a great deal on how they adapt to style of play

El Shaarawy wrote:

Donuts wrote:haha maybe so, but when I go to a football bar here in Mexico and we talk about midfield, everyone uses Xavi as an example how he is the peak in his position in todays game etc.
So me thinking Xavi may be bias but survey people around the world and they will say Xavi is also better.

Because football bars in Mexico are the best places to gather information at

Trust me, they are...

El Shaarawy wrote:

Donuts wrote:haha maybe so, but when I go to a football bar here in Mexico and we talk about midfield, everyone uses Xavi as an example how he is the peak in his position in todays game etc.
So me thinking Xavi may be bias but survey people around the world and they will say Xavi is also better.

Because football bars in Mexico are the best places to gather information at

I said Mexican bar because majority there have no bias whatsoever between Xavi and Pirlo I know your butthurt and desperate to defend your reasons but try to atleast comprehend what I am writing, I said survey people of the world and they will most likely say Xavi.

Donuts wrote:

El Shaarawy wrote:

Donuts wrote:haha maybe so, but when I go to a football bar here in Mexico and we talk about midfield, everyone uses Xavi as an example how he is the peak in his position in todays game etc.
So me thinking Xavi may be bias but survey people around the world and they will say Xavi is also better.

Because football bars in Mexico are the best places to gather information at

I said Mexican bar because majority there have no bias whatsoever between Xavi and Pirlo I know your butthurt and desperate to defend your reasons but try to atleast comprehend what I am writing, I said survey people of the world and they will most likely say Xavi.

1. I never took part in this arguement between Xavi and Pirlo
2. Butthurt about which reason? i just strolled in this topic
3. Hey if you think its a good place without bias then whatever floats your boat dude

merry christmas mates.
I will watch some best of videos from both geniouses with my friends after Christmas dinner. Celebrate football in style.

Love em both

billy_gr wrote:merry christmas mates.
I will watch some best of videos from both geniouses with my friends after Christmas dinner. Celebrate football in style.

Love em both

Merry Christmas!

I'm sorry but I'm dissapointed by some of the posters in this thread. Some of the drivel I have read here is astounding. Juve101 I don't really have anything to say to you, I don't think I have ever seen you come up with a logical arguement in my time here. I will give this one final go.

To analyse both these players we have to look at what they do. Pirlo is essentially a deep lying playmaker in the mould of Guardiola, Suarez (inter) and Alonso. This is exactly the position Xavi played before Rijkaard shifted him forward. Pirlo at his peak period in Milan played in a great Milan team with as many playmakers as I have seen, maybe excluding Barcelona. Pirlo played with Seerdoff, Kaka and Rui Costa, so 4 playmakers in the team.

Let me say this and I don't care if anyone agrees but Pirlo at the moment is playing the best football of his career. Should I tell you why? It is because he is the de fact playmaker and he is the man that Juventus look for to initiate moves. He did a similar thing for Milan but he wasn't as looked out for because of the players around him. So those saying that Xavi was a nobody before Pep, they really need to get a grip. He did not have the same responsibility. Under Aragines, he was given the ball all the time and the ball (the team) moved at Xavis pace so he was able to dictate the game and influence the game much more. If you have more touches of he ball, you have more chances to impose you footballing vision on a game, just like Messi has now, because he gest more touches than he did in 08-10, he is able to influence games far more and stamp his game on the match.

For those saying that Xavi depends on Messi get real. what happened when Aragones made Xavi Spains de fact man... EURO 08. It would have been interetsing to see Pirlo used in a similar way to Xavi when Milan had all the afformentioned playmakers, sadly, he wasn't so all I have to compare is that of Pilro in Juventus with the de facto main playmaker to that of Xavi as the defacto playmaker. It's no surprise that Italy's reJUVEnation occured when they made Pirlo the main playmaker. Watch Pirlo under Lippi in 2006 and Pirlo under Prandelli, same man different use, just like Xavi under multiple managers and Xavi under Pep.

No I have adressed the without Messi/Pep nonsense I will go with what I have seen, not what they COULD do, or how they are influenced by SYSTEMS, but what they have done. Pirlo is riskier so his passing percentages will obviously be lower, he used to initiate attacks from deeper and has the whole field ahead of him so in terms of playmaking, he is in an easier position, the front libero as Mazzone put it. Xavi is more mobile and moves to the ball as much as the ball moves to him. He gets into tighter pockets of spaces and for me is a bit better at positioning himself. Now Barcelona come up against packed defences so I can comfortbaly say that Xavi is better in tihter spaces. Comparing their respective 'vision' is difficult because that depends on multiple variables such as runners behind the defence for through balls, tringles formed for passing options, predicting runs of players (practiced through training, which we are not privy to). I would say maybe Pirlo has slightly better vision because he seems to attempt to pick out the runners more, but a counter arguement is that Xavi in 09 was ridiculous when he had Henry, Messi and Eto'o to pick out, so again it is far to tight. Decision making, well they are both excellent but I would say Xavi slightly edges it. Decision for me is doing something that works most of the time and since Pirlo attempts riskier passes, with the fail rate likely to be higher, I would say Xavi is better based on MY definition. Thats just me. Pirlo is better at positioning himself in defensive manner but I can argue that Xavi is actaually better at defending and taking the ball off people so noone has a particular defensive edge for me.

All in all I would say that Xavi slightly edges it and that is for me because Pirlo has/can be marked out and made completely ineffective because of his role. He moves within the same zones and games where he has been marked out like the Final in in the Euros, Emmanuelson in the Milan games last season, Oscar in the Chelsea game. These are just examples I am giving to you, but because they are the ones off the top of my head. In games where he is left unchecked, you get games like the England game, the Sienna game, the Atalanta game this season I thinl , . Xavi is extremely hard to man mark and the only man that I have seen out gun Xavi and take him out of the game is Banega, a man that only turns up for Barcelona games. So for me Xavi is slightly better, but the difference is not enough to say that he is utterly superior like some people are making it sound.

Ball control I would give it to Xavi slightly, Short Passing Xavi's passes are slightly faster and better weighted but Pirlo for me is better at long balls, but again the differences are not enough. I PREFER Pirlo's passing technique because he looks more fluid in his movements and is aesthetically better. Xavi is better at creating space for his team mates. Now dribbling is difficult, they both dribble in different ways but Xavi again is superior in the way he uses feints to people such as the pelopina. Pirlo a lot of the times attampts tricks but has a higher turnover rate, but he is also good with feints but not as good as Xavi. Set pieces they are even, maybe I will give Pirlo the edge in free kicks.

My conclusion is that Xavi is slightly better, but just by a tiny bit. So if I use an arbitary method of comparison, out of a 100 (being the perfect playmaker), Xavi is 92 and Pilro is 90. Differences are negligble.

Excellent post! Agreed with everything

+1

The Ostracised One wrote:I'm sorry but I'm dissapointed by some of the posters in this thread. Some of the drivel I have read here is astounding. Juve101 I don't really have anything to say to you, I don't think I have ever seen you come up with a logical arguement in my time here. I will give this one final go.

To analyse both these players we have to look at what they do. Pirlo is essentially a deep lying playmaker in the mould of Guardiola, Suarez (inter) and Alonso. This is exactly the position Xavi played before Rijkaard shifted him forward. Pirlo at his peak period in Milan played in a great Milan team with as many playmakers as I have seen, maybe excluding Barcelona. Pirlo played with Seerdoff, Kaka and Rui Costa, so 4 playmakers in the team.

Let me say this and I don't care if anyone agrees but Pirlo at the moment is playing the best football of his career. Should I tell you why? It is because he is the de fact playmaker and he is the man that Juventus look for to initiate moves. He did a similar thing for Milan but he wasn't as looked out for because of the players around him. So those saying that Xavi was a nobody before Pep, they really need to get a grip. He did not have the same responsibility. Under Aragines, he was given the ball all the time and the ball (the team) moved at Xavis pace so he was able to dictate the game and influence the game much more. If you have more touches of he ball, you have more chances to impose you footballing vision on a game, just like Messi has now, because he gest more touches than he did in 08-10, he is able to influence games far more and stamp his game on the match.

For those saying that Xavi depends on Messi get real. what happened when Aragones made Xavi Spains de fact man... EURO 08. It would have been interetsing to see Pirlo used in a similar way to Xavi when Milan had all the afformentioned playmakers, sadly, he wasn't so all I have to compare is that of Pilro in Juventus with the de facto main playmaker to that of Xavi as the defacto playmaker. It's no surprise that Italy's reJUVEnation occured when they made Pirlo the main playmaker. Watch Pirlo under Lippi in 2006 and Pirlo under Prandelli, same man different use, just like Xavi under multiple managers and Xavi under Pep.

No I have adressed the without Messi/Pep nonsense I will go with what I have seen, not what they COULD do, or how they are influenced by SYSTEMS, but what they have done. Pirlo is riskier so his passing percentages will obviously be lower, he used to initiate attacks from deeper and has the whole field ahead of him so in terms of playmaking, he is in an easier position, the front libero as Mazzone put it. Xavi is more mobile and moves to the ball as much as the ball moves to him. He gets into tighter pockets of spaces and for me is a bit better at positioning himself. Now Barcelona come up against packed defences so I can comfortbaly say that Xavi is better in tihter spaces. Comparing their respective 'vision' is difficult because that depends on multiple variables such as runners behind the defence for through balls, tringles formed for passing options, predicting runs of players (practiced through training, which we are not privy to). I would say maybe Pirlo has slightly better vision because he seems to attempt to pick out the runners more, but a counter arguement is that Xavi in 09 was ridiculous when he had Henry, Messi and Eto'o to pick out, so again it is far to tight. Decision making, well they are both excellent but I would say Xavi slightly edges it. Decision for me is doing something that works most of the time and since Pirlo attempts riskier passes, with the fail rate likely to be higher, I would say Xavi is better based on MY definition. Thats just me. Pirlo is better at positioning himself in defensive manner but I can argue that Xavi is actaually better at defending and taking the ball off people so noone has a particular defensive edge for me.

All in all I would say that Xavi slightly edges it and that is for me because Pirlo has/can be marked out and made completely ineffective because of his role. He moves within the same zones and games where he has been marked out like the Final in in the Euros, Emmanuelson in the Milan games last season, Oscar in the Chelsea game. These are just examples I am giving to you, but because they are the ones off the top of my head. In games where he is left unchecked, you get games like the England game, the Sienna game, the Atalanta game this season I thinl , . Xavi is extremely hard to man mark and the only man that I have seen out gun Xavi and take him out of the game is Banega, a man that only turns up for Barcelona games. So for me Xavi is slightly better, but the difference is not enough to say that he is utterly superior like some people are making it sound.

Ball control I would give it to Xavi slightly, Short Passing Xavi's passes are slightly faster and better weighted but Pirlo for me is better at long balls, but again the differences are not enough. I PREFER Pirlo's passing technique because he looks more fluid in his movements and is aesthetically better. Xavi is better at creating space for his team mates. Now dribbling is difficult, they both dribble in different ways but Xavi again is superior in the way he uses feints to people such as the pelopina. Pirlo a lot of the times attampts tricks but has a higher turnover rate, but he is also good with feints but not as good as Xavi. Set pieces they are even, maybe I will give Pirlo the edge in free kicks.

My conclusion is that Xavi is slightly better, but just by a tiny bit. So if I use an arbitary method of comparison, out of a 100 (being the perfect playmaker), Xavi is 92 and Pilro is 90. Differences are negligble.

One great post in this joke of a thread. Kudos!

PS: Damn you watch so many matches!

The Ostracised One wrote:I'm sorry but I'm dissapointed by some of the posters in this thread. Some of the drivel I have read here is astounding. Juve101 I don't really have anything to say to you, I don't think I have ever seen you come up with a logical arguement in my time here. I will give this one final go.

To analyse both these players we have to look at what they do. Pirlo is essentially a deep lying playmaker in the mould of Guardiola, Suarez (inter) and Alonso. This is exactly the position Xavi played before Rijkaard shifted him forward. Pirlo at his peak period in Milan played in a great Milan team with as many playmakers as I have seen, maybe excluding Barcelona. Pirlo played with Seerdoff, Kaka and Rui Costa, so 4 playmakers in the team.

Let me say this and I don't care if anyone agrees but Pirlo at the moment is playing the best football of his career. Should I tell you why? It is because he is the de fact playmaker and he is the man that Juventus look for to initiate moves. He did a similar thing for Milan but he wasn't as looked out for because of the players around him. So those saying that Xavi was a nobody before Pep, they really need to get a grip. He did not have the same responsibility. Under Aragines, he was given the ball all the time and the ball (the team) moved at Xavis pace so he was able to dictate the game and influence the game much more. If you have more touches of he ball, you have more chances to impose you footballing vision on a game, just like Messi has now, because he gest more touches than he did in 08-10, he is able to influence games far more and stamp his game on the match.

For those saying that Xavi depends on Messi get real. what happened when Aragones made Xavi Spains de fact man... EURO 08. It would have been interetsing to see Pirlo used in a similar way to Xavi when Milan had all the afformentioned playmakers, sadly, he wasn't so all I have to compare is that of Pilro in Juventus with the de facto main playmaker to that of Xavi as the defacto playmaker. It's no surprise that Italy's reJUVEnation occured when they made Pirlo the main playmaker. Watch Pirlo under Lippi in 2006 and Pirlo under Prandelli, same man different use, just like Xavi under multiple managers and Xavi under Pep.

No I have adressed the without Messi/Pep nonsense I will go with what I have seen, not what they COULD do, or how they are influenced by SYSTEMS, but what they have done. Pirlo is riskier so his passing percentages will obviously be lower, he used to initiate attacks from deeper and has the whole field ahead of him so in terms of playmaking, he is in an easier position, the front libero as Mazzone put it. Xavi is more mobile and moves to the ball as much as the ball moves to him. He gets into tighter pockets of spaces and for me is a bit better at positioning himself. Now Barcelona come up against packed defences so I can comfortbaly say that Xavi is better in tihter spaces. Comparing their respective 'vision' is difficult because that depends on multiple variables such as runners behind the defence for through balls, tringles formed for passing options, predicting runs of players (practiced through training, which we are not privy to). I would say maybe Pirlo has slightly better vision because he seems to attempt to pick out the runners more, but a counter arguement is that Xavi in 09 was ridiculous when he had Henry, Messi and Eto'o to pick out, so again it is far to tight. Decision making, well they are both excellent but I would say Xavi slightly edges it. Decision for me is doing something that works most of the time and since Pirlo attempts riskier passes, with the fail rate likely to be higher, I would say Xavi is better based on MY definition. Thats just me. Pirlo is better at positioning himself in defensive manner but I can argue that Xavi is actaually better at defending and taking the ball off people so noone has a particular defensive edge for me.

All in all I would say that Xavi slightly edges it and that is for me because Pirlo has/can be marked out and made completely ineffective because of his role. He moves within the same zones and games where he has been marked out like the Final in in the Euros, Emmanuelson in the Milan games last season, Oscar in the Chelsea game. These are just examples I am giving to you, but because they are the ones off the top of my head. In games where he is left unchecked, you get games like the England game, the Sienna game, the Atalanta game this season I thinl , . Xavi is extremely hard to man mark and the only man that I have seen out gun Xavi and take him out of the game is Banega, a man that only turns up for Barcelona games. So for me Xavi is slightly better, but the difference is not enough to say that he is utterly superior like some people are making it sound.

Ball control I would give it to Xavi slightly, Short Passing Xavi's passes are slightly faster and better weighted but Pirlo for me is better at long balls, but again the differences are not enough. I PREFER Pirlo's passing technique because he looks more fluid in his movements and is aesthetically better. Xavi is better at creating space for his team mates. Now dribbling is difficult, they both dribble in different ways but Xavi again is superior in the way he uses feints to people such as the pelopina. Pirlo a lot of the times attampts tricks but has a higher turnover rate, but he is also good with feints but not as good as Xavi. Set pieces they are even, maybe I will give Pirlo the edge in free kicks.

My conclusion is that Xavi is slightly better, but just by a tiny bit. So if I use an arbitary method of comparison, out of a 100 (being the perfect playmaker), Xavi is 92 and Pilro is 90. Differences are negligble.

great post..
agree with everything you said except set pieces, where's not even close.. Pirlo's free kicks and long shots in general are way better than xavi's.

I actually agree with most of what you said, except the commsnt about me of course and a few other things. Firstly, Xavi has been man marked out of many games as well. Secondly, i think Pirlo is pretty much back to his best, but still not as good as 2006. He was alai noticeably better for us last year. Pirlo is also a better dribbler, better at set pieces, and shooing. Hes just so slow that hell dribble a player, but then that player will jus chase him and catch him so quickly so he gets crowded out.

The fact is though, you cant aay Xavi was on Pirlos level pre-2008. Pirlo was the main man behind a WC win in 2006, and 2 CL wins. Xavi had a great Euro 08, but the rest of the time, he was not the main man like Pirlo. Xavi had Ronaldinho, Deco, Inieata, Messi, Etoo, and Henry around him. Pirlo had Seedorf, Kaka, and Sheva. See the difference? Its very simple, how can you say its thanks to Xavi that Spain and Barca won those thngs when he won nithing pre-2006 and nothing from 06-08. Is it just a coincidence that from 05-06 was by far Ronaldinhos best years, and then 08 was Nesaia breakout year? Im just trying to say, when Pirlo has won titles, its been becaue of him usually first and foremost. The only time Xavi can say that is Euro 08.

juventus101 wrote:
The fact is though, you cant aay Xavi was on Pirlos level pre-2008. Pirlo was the main man behind a WC win in 2006, and 2 CL wins. Xavi had a great Euro 08, but the rest of the time, he was not the main man like Pirlo. Xavi had Ronaldinho, Deco, Inieata, Messi, Etoo, and Henry around him. Pirlo had Seedorf, Kaka, and Sheva. See the difference? Its very simple, how can you say its thanks to Xavi that Spain and Barca won those thngs when he won nithing pre-2006 and nothing from 06-08. Is it just a coincidence that from 05-06 was by far Ronaldinhos best years, and then 08 was Nesaia breakout year? Im just trying to say, when Pirlo has won titles, its been becaue of him usually first and foremost. The only time Xavi can say that is Euro 08.

what's the difference? they both had WC players around them with the difference being that Xavi was not utilized in his optimal possition. I like how you diminish Pirlo's teamates contribution while at the same time you only attribute Barca's success to Dinho. Also I'd love some Milan fans to confirm that all their titles were Pirlo's work alone. Forget Kaka's golden years, forget Sheva being one of the 3 best strikers of his prime years, forget gAtuso and Seedorf being midfield machines. The Ostr One sumed it perfectly, while your post tends to be disrespectful even

Im noz diminishing anyones accomplishments. You guys are completely misinterpreting my statements, thats the problem. I never said Pirlo did it alone. I said he was the most important (though its a tossup between Buffon, Canna, and Pirlo in 2006). Of course there were other huge stars, but in my opinion Pirlo was the most important player. Xavi though was never the biggest star except in Euro 08.

Just to add flame to this old fire I decide to post this:

Pirlo v Xavi in 2012-13: G 15/16, Gls 4/3, Assists 3/3, passes 1224/1607, key passes 47/23, thru balls 17/3

... succesfull crosses 29/8, stolen balls 39/8, interceptions 30/16, shots 31/23, succesful dribbles 22/14, lost balls 15/9, fouls vs 15/9

Arquitecto wrote:Just to add flame to this old fire I decide to post this:

Pirlo v Xavi in 2012-13: G 15/16, Gls 4/3, Assists 3/3, passes 1224/1607, key passes 47/23, thru balls 17/3

... succesfull crosses 29/8, stolen balls 39/8, interceptions 30/16, shots 31/23, succesful dribbles 22/14, lost balls 15/9, fouls vs 15/9

omg pirlo twice as good almost everywhere..

key passes 47 -23 pirlo

I guess now peopleare ready to accept Messi as the best ever as he shits on your favorite legend's stat sheet (well, excluding this african legend with 11.000 goals in a calendar year, who isalso better than your favorite legend).

Anyways, first stat I read is wrong as Xavi has 4 goals not 3. I am too lazy to verify the other ones

billy_gr wrote:I guess now peopleare ready to accept Messi as the best ever as he shits on your favorite legend's stat sheet (well, excluding this african legend with 11.000 goals in a calendar year, who isalso better than your favorite legend).

Anyways, first stat I read is wrong as Xavi has 4 goals not 3. I am too lazy to verify the other ones

you're right xavi is 4, i guess that stat was before barca's last game, anyway i guess goals are not relevant for a regista or playmaker..
Anyway, it's funny that some people believe that pirlo can't defend and he had twice interceptions as Xavi, while both teams, juve and barca are posession teams ...

And messi is probably the best in history, and there's nothing to do with stats... Is enough to watch barcelona regularly ... No one has ever been this consistent. He's the best player on the field in every game, that's something incredible, and he plays in a top league..

The Franchise wrote:

Diego Armando Maradona wrote:I find it funny that you dont want to admit its an unfair comparsion

I think you need to lay down, I have no idea what your on about.

Some dude said xavi was better than pirlo at the euros based on stats ratings. Thats what im talking about and you still havent condemend it. But when some dude said pirlo is better because he has better stats over a season you where quick to comment on it.

Arquitecto wrote:Just to add flame to this old fire I decide to post this:

Pirlo v Xavi in 2012-13: G 15/16, Gls 4/3, Assists 3/3, passes 1224/1607, key passes 47/23, thru balls 17/3

... succesfull crosses 29/8, stolen balls 39/8, interceptions 30/16, shots 31/23, succesful dribbles 22/14, lost balls 15/9, fouls vs 15/9

Stats prove everything...

Diego Armando Maradona wrote:

The Franchise wrote:

Diego Armando Maradona wrote:I find it funny that you dont want to admit its an unfair comparsion

I think you need to lay down, I have no idea what your on about.

Some dude said xavi was better than pirlo at the euros based on stats ratings. Thats what im talking about and you still havent condemend it. But when some dude said pirlo is better because he has better stats over a season you where quick to comment on it.

No, some dude (RG) said he didnt agree Pirlo "dominated" Xavi and used those stats to show it. The stats dont have to be the entire story because he is only disproving a point, not making one of his own.

Maybe you should read whats going on here?

I'm sorry but anyone that uses stats as an indicator is just, to be frank, a moron. Theres no way I can mince my words. Key passes is the biggest load of rubbish iI have ever seen. Of course Xavi is not going to have anywhere near Pirlos because Messi has been dropper deeper and is now the man that does all the final passes @ Barcelona. Did you know that it counts as an assist if a parried shot is tapped in by another player?

The goal Messi scored against Getafe from his own half, did you know that that counted as an assist fro Xavi? LOL are you kidding me? Like Dani said the best way to see these things is with your eyes.

Stats, not even once...

Wow people actually took my stats post seriously? Read the sentence before the numbers as it was meant to be a polite way of trolling in this rather silly thread. People who know me here already know my opinion on this.

And how this thread is going on is beyond me.

Arquitecto wrote:Wow people actually took my stats post seriously? Read the sentence before the numbers as it was meant to be a polite way of trolling in this rather silly thread. People who know me here already know my opinion on this.

And how this thread is going on is beyond me.

LOL Not you Arq. Just people in this forum that use whoscored ratings as the be all end all tbh.

I don't use stats in my arguments. I didn't post them either. Some guy said pirlo destroyed xavi in that italy spain game and since they can't remember the game at all (making absurd remarks ) i just used them stats to prove that xavi had a good game. I remember the game and i personally don't need to bring out any stats but if there is no other way to say it to them apart from making them watch the whole game again, might as well throw in some stats since they understand that more.

Stats are like mini-skirts, they give you good ideas but hide the most important parts.

I believe you can use stats to support your argument, but stats cannot be your only argument.