Which of these iconic defensive players did more for their club?

And which was greatest in their prime? And most importantly, WHY?

Javier Zanetti
Fernando Hierro
Paolo Maldini
Carles Puyol
Maldini
Costacurta

Maldini (bias)

Maldini is so amazing that he's twice a time in this pole ...

In Before The Ninja Edit !

Puyol, for most of his career, has been a rock at the back. For the last 5 years, I have considered him to be one of the most important players in Barca.

Personally I think Maldini was the greatest at his prime of the guys mentioned, but it's hard to say who did more for their club because all were amazing servants for their respective clubs. I think I can only say Maldini did more for milan than Castacurta, the rest is difficult to compare because they didnt play for the same team.

Maldini.

StevieRayVaughan wrote:Puyol, for most of his career, has been a rock at the back. For the last 5 years, I have considered him to be one of the most important players in Barca.

a rock is a bit too much,he has been consistent but not a rock.


Maldini for me

@Stevie.

If you say 4 years prior to this year...you're 100% right.

Le Samourai wrote:@Stevie.

If you say 4 years prior to this year...you're 100% right.

Ya, this year, he has some immense games. But other times, he plays really poorly. I didnt count this year, because he is getting old now. But, I have mad respect for Puyol.

And Ganso, I do consider him to be a "rock". Also, Maldini is the obvious choice. I didnt pick him because its too obvious of a choice, and I wanted to admire the other players.

Moreover, special mention to Zanetti, who I think is as good as anyone else in his prime.

Good question, Travis.

First of all, I wouldn't include Puyol in the discussion. I'm not denying that he's a Barcelona icon, I'm denying that's he's a defender that deserves to be mentioned with those other elites. Why? Mainly because Barcelona monopolizes possession and spends most of the game in the opponents half. When they lose the ball, cue the organized pressure from the Barcelona midfield and strikers and Barca are back in possession. Clearly Puyol does not have to defend nearly as often as the other guys did, especially Maldini, Zanetti, Costacurta, who's teams played more in a counter-attack mode. Basically what I'm saying is that Puyol rarely has to deal with sustained attacking pressure on him, it's almost always a counter-attack, therefore he doesn't deserve the defensive reputation as the other guys.

Hierro, I will not include in my analysis because the only time I have ever seen him play live was in the Champions League years ago, probably in the 90s, which was before what I call my "football consciousness" developed. It would be unfair to judge. Though I do recognize he is probably the greatest Spanish defender ever. Next, I eliminate Costacurta. Not because of lack of ability or anything of the sort, but because when I think Milan I think Maldini. Most rational folks would agree with that. I definitely recognize the importance of Costacurta, especially for Sacchi and Capello's Milan sides.

So that leaves me with Zanetti and Maldini. Both are easily the epitome of a club icon. It's also important to note that Inter was not Zanetti's first club. It would have been very easy for Zanetti to go to Real Madrid when they came knocking in the later part of the 90s but Zanetti wanted to stay at Inter, despite a domestic drought. For me Zanetti really epitomizes the spirit of Inter by usurping the gentlemanly role of Giacinto Facchetti. I remember when he got his first red card earlier this season he shook the referees hand before he left the field. He's a die-hard through good and bad. A Milanisti would say the same for Maldini in a different way, it's impossible to discern between them IMO. Both had longevity at the top level, both had success and both loved their club. Unfortunately for Maldini, Milan has not offered him a spot in the boardroom, hence his talks with PSG. Zanetti has already been guaranteed a position at Inter after retirement. So as you probably guessed by looking at my profile picture at the start of this, I say Zanetti.

PS: Also take note that Zanetti, despite being the oldest player on Inter, is still THE BEST player on Inter. The other guys apart from Milito don't even belong on the same field as him.

For me Maldini. Then its Zanetti. Two of the best defenders I have ever watched. And it was been a privilege to watch them. Costacurta of course is up there as well.

Tomasso wrote:Good question, Travis.

First of all, I wouldn't include Puyol in the discussion. I'm not denying that he's a Barcelona icon, I'm denying that's he's a defender that deserves to be mentioned with those other elites. Why? Mainly because Barcelona monopolizes possession and spends most of the game in the opponents half. When they lose the ball, cue the organized pressure from the Barcelona midfield and strikers and Barca are back in possession. Clearly Puyol does not have to defend nearly as often as the other guys did, especially Maldini, Zanetti, Costacurta, who's teams played more in a counter-attack mode. Basically what I'm saying is that Puyol rarely has to deal with sustained attacking pressure on him, it's almost always a counter-attack, therefore he doesn't deserve the defensive reputation as the other guys.

Hierro, I will not include in my analysis because the only time I have ever seen him play live was in the Champions League years ago, probably in the 90s, which was before what I call my "football consciousness" developed. It would be unfair to judge. Though I do recognize he is probably the greatest Spanish defender ever. Next, I eliminate Costacurta. Not because of lack of ability or anything of the sort, but because when I think Milan I think Maldini. Most rational folks would agree with that. I definitely recognize the importance of Costacurta, especially for Sacchi and Capello's Milan sides.

So that leaves me with Zanetti and Maldini. Both are easily the epitome of a club icon. It's also important to note that Inter was not Zanetti's first club. It would have been very easy for Zanetti to go to Real Madrid when they came knocking in the later part of the 90s but Zanetti wanted to stay at Inter, despite a domestic drought. For me Zanetti really epitomizes the spirit of Inter by usurping the gentlemanly role of Giacinto Facchetti. I remember when he got his first red card earlier this season he shook the referees hand before he left the field. He's a die-hard through good and bad. A Milanisti would say the same for Maldini in a different way, it's impossible to discern between them IMO. Both had longevity at the top level, both had success and both loved their club. Unfortunately for Maldini, Milan has not offered him a spot in the boardroom, hence his talks with PSG. Zanetti has already been guaranteed a position at Inter after retirement. So as you probably guessed by looking at my profile picture at the start of this, I say Zanetti.

PS: Also take note that Zanetti, despite being the oldest player on Inter, is still THE BEST player on Inter. The other guys apart from Milito don't even belong on the same field as him.

The "system" shit again..

on topic... Maldini all the way.

Maldini

the rest

Maldini, but Hierro is very very underrated (scored 162 goals from his CB/DMF position)

.

James0311 wrote:

Tomasso wrote:Good question, Travis.

First of all, I wouldn't include Puyol in the discussion. I'm not denying that he's a Barcelona icon, I'm denying that's he's a defender that deserves to be mentioned with those other elites. Why? Mainly because Barcelona monopolizes possession and spends most of the game in the opponents half. When they lose the ball, cue the organized pressure from the Barcelona midfield and strikers and Barca are back in possession. Clearly Puyol does not have to defend nearly as often as the other guys did, especially Maldini, Zanetti, Costacurta, who's teams played more in a counter-attack mode. Basically what I'm saying is that Puyol rarely has to deal with sustained attacking pressure on him, it's almost always a counter-attack, therefore he doesn't deserve the defensive reputation as the other guys.

Hierro, I will not include in my analysis because the only time I have ever seen him play live was in the Champions League years ago, probably in the 90s, which was before what I call my "football consciousness" developed. It would be unfair to judge. Though I do recognize he is probably the greatest Spanish defender ever. Next, I eliminate Costacurta. Not because of lack of ability or anything of the sort, but because when I think Milan I think Maldini. Most rational folks would agree with that. I definitely recognize the importance of Costacurta, especially for Sacchi and Capello's Milan sides.

So that leaves me with Zanetti and Maldini. Both are easily the epitome of a club icon. It's also important to note that Inter was not Zanetti's first club. It would have been very easy for Zanetti to go to Real Madrid when they came knocking in the later part of the 90s but Zanetti wanted to stay at Inter, despite a domestic drought. For me Zanetti really epitomizes the spirit of Inter by usurping the gentlemanly role of Giacinto Facchetti. I remember when he got his first red card earlier this season he shook the referees hand before he left the field. He's a die-hard through good and bad. A Milanisti would say the same for Maldini in a different way, it's impossible to discern between them IMO. Both had longevity at the top level, both had success and both loved their club. Unfortunately for Maldini, Milan has not offered him a spot in the boardroom, hence his talks with PSG. Zanetti has already been guaranteed a position at Inter after retirement. So as you probably guessed by looking at my profile picture at the start of this, I say Zanetti.

PS: Also take note that Zanetti, despite being the oldest player on Inter, is still THE BEST player on Inter. The other guys apart from Milito don't even belong on the same field as him.

The "system" shit again..

on topic... Maldini all the way.

Maldini

the rest

Barcelona's defenders don't have sustained attacking pressure on them like the other guys do, that is a fact. You can't argue with it. Now do you have an actual football reason why you disagree or is the Barca victim card more your style?

Tomasso wrote:Good question, Travis.

First of all, I wouldn't include Puyol in the discussion. I'm not denying that he's a Barcelona icon, I'm denying that's he's a defender that deserves to be mentioned with those other elites. Why? Mainly because Barcelona monopolizes possession and spends most of the game in the opponents half. When they lose the ball, cue the organized pressure from the Barcelona midfield and strikers and Barca are back in possession. Clearly Puyol does not have to defend nearly as often as the other guys did, especially Maldini, Zanetti, Costacurta, who's teams played more in a counter-attack mode. Basically what I'm saying is that Puyol rarely has to deal with sustained attacking pressure on him, it's almost always a counter-attack, therefore he doesn't deserve the defensive reputation as the other guys.

Sure when you think about it you would think barca control the whole game and the defenders are sitting and not having to do any work but that is in now way true,countless of times has puyol saved our asses,with his covering,last ditch tackles,clearing headers,etc

You say that it is easier for puyol because most of the attacks on him are counters but how does that make it easier?

Dealing with counters means the defenders is more exposed so it would demand more abillity from him to stop that counter

Its no coincedance that we only lost 1 game with puyol in the last 2 seasons.

kabarca wrote:

Tomasso wrote:Good question, Travis.

First of all, I wouldn't include Puyol in the discussion. I'm not denying that he's a Barcelona icon, I'm denying that's he's a defender that deserves to be mentioned with those other elites. Why? Mainly because Barcelona monopolizes possession and spends most of the game in the opponents half. When they lose the ball, cue the organized pressure from the Barcelona midfield and strikers and Barca are back in possession. Clearly Puyol does not have to defend nearly as often as the other guys did, especially Maldini, Zanetti, Costacurta, who's teams played more in a counter-attack mode. Basically what I'm saying is that Puyol rarely has to deal with sustained attacking pressure on him, it's almost always a counter-attack, therefore he doesn't deserve the defensive reputation as the other guys.

Sure when you think about it you would think barca control the whole game and the defenders are sitting and not having to do any work but that is in now way true,countless of times has puyol saved our asses,with his covering,last ditch tackles,clearing headers,etc

You say that it is easier for puyol because most of the attacks on him are counters but how does that make it easier?

Dealing with counters means the defenders is more exposed so it would demand more abillity from him to stop that counter

Its no coincedance that we only lost 1 game with puyol in the last 2 seasons.

You answered your own question. Barcelona dominating game = very few chances for other team = Puyol being tested less than the other stated defenders. I'm not saying Puyol is bad by any means, I think he's the best central defender in Spain. I'm only saying that at Barcelona, emphasis is on the attack and possession, whereas with Maldini and Zanetti had teams that would gift possession away, and have to rely on containment and a counter. Saying you lost only 1 game with Puyol could mean anything, bub. It could mean you won every game 5-4, so that's not really valid. BTW, who was that one game against?

Just because he gets attacked less though doesn't undermine his ability he still has a lot to deal with and over the last few years our defense hasn't been so good without puyol, you make it seem that anyone can be a CB for barcelona but thatjust isn't true,the defenders at barcelona still have to deal with a lot and puyol is the man that saves the teams us. Yes he doesnt get attackd as much as others but he is also more exposed so I dont really agree that Puyol shouldnt be compared to those players because of Barcelonas system.

And when people talk about those great Italian defenders they make it seem that their teams always parked the bus and they had to do al the wor,run all game and tackle 500 times a match bt thats also not true. If puyol gets attacked less than other defenders thn so do Maldini,Zanetti,Costacurta,etc because they also played with some of the bst players ever.

What i'm saying is that even though Barcelona hold possesion for 70% of most games that doesnt make the job of the defenders any easier but it actually makes it harder as they wil be exposed to counters. Its also not like Barca control the 90 minutes of every game they play we et pressured a lot of the time and when barca are pressured and they need some one to be a hero in the defense we allknow who that will be,none other than Puyol

kabarca wrote:Just because he gets attacked less though doesn't undermine his ability he still has a lot to deal with and over the last few years our defense hasn't been so good without puyol, you make it seem that anyone can be a CB for barcelona but thatjust isn't true,the defenders at barcelona still have to deal with a lot and puyol is the man that saves the teams us. Yes he doesnt get attackd as much as others but he is also more exposed so I dont really agree that Puyol shouldnt be compared to those players because of Barcelonas system.

And when people talk about those great Italian defenders they make it seem that their teams always parked the bus and they had to do al the wor,run all game and tackle 500 times a match bt thats also not true. If puyol gets attacked less than other defenders thn so do Maldini,Zanetti,Costacurta,etc because they also played with some of the bst players ever.

What i'm saying is that even though Barcelona hold possesion for 70% of most games that doesnt make the job of the defenders any easier but it actually makes it harder as they wil be exposed to counters. Its also not like Barca control the 90 minutes of every game they play we et pressured a lot of the time and when barca are pressured and they need some one to be a hero in the defense we allknow who that will be,none other than Puyol

You're missing the point. Puyol is tested MUCH less than the others. And against Barcelona, a strong counter-attack very rarely makes it into the Barca final 3rd because they play such a high line. But the point is mute, if you don't get it you don't get it.

I know Barca gets attacked much less than other team although not as much as you make it seem to be but just becase a team ges attacked less that doesnt mean that the defenders are less capable or have any less effect on their team. Yes barca gets attacked less but they still get attacked and a lot of the time they are in dangerous situations and there is where Puyol has work to do and he does it perfectly, so what I am saying is whether barca gets attacked les o not that doesnt undermine the effect or ability of the defenders because they still have work to do and just watch when chygrynski was at barcelona 2 years ago or when milito would play for us last season and see how big of a difference puyol makes