Made this post before, thought it's a interesting topic that hasn't been discussed yet.

Collblanc wrote:The definition of 'the top 3 players'  in the world is different for everybody. One might find vision and passing much more important then off the ball movement and scoring, hence why there is a voting system, so everybody gets their say in the final results. Even if you would look at only statistics, its still a open discussion. You have goals + assists, but what leads to a assist? Was that also a contribution to the goal? There is no right or wrong in these discussion, only opinions and other views on what players need to be the 'best'.

For somebody who is a fan of players with high futbol intelligence and vision perhaps Pirlo or Xavi is the best player in the world. For someone like rwo- a goalkeeper is the best player in the world. Someone who likes dribbles and vision, Messi is the best player in the world. And another one would say Ronaldo is the best in the world because he scores from ridiculous ranges like no other. Messi doesn't have Pirlo's vision, Pirlo doesn't have Messi dribbling abilities, both dont have Ronaldo's long range shooting and vice versa. How can you decide for the whole wide world who is the better player? You cant, only your opinion on what makes someone the best can decide.

So, for me personally, i enjoy vision combined with high intelligence passes, dribbling skills and finishing. Again, for me (!!) Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Ribery and Neymar have these abilities more then Ronaldo and Robben. On other aspects, like finishing; headers; freekicks, Ronaldo and Robben might stand out more against earlier named players, but I dont take that in consideration because that is not what I look for in a player. The number 1 player in the world for me is the one who combines and balances all these factors from week to week matches, and for me that is Messi.

So, what is that you look for in a player?

If they can fit seamlessly into a tiki taka attacking football tactical system

My position is, and always has been, that you cannot decide on a universal 'best player'. As you say, players in different positions need different attributes to be the best in that position. It is ridiculous to compare the best GK to the best ST. Who is better, Manny Neuer or Giu Rossi? It's actually an impossible comparison. The positions require players with different capabilites. Yet, people continue to be obsessed with "the best player".

It is this kind of flawed logic that is behind the Ballon d'Or. I think that within a team, you can say that player X is the best player because it is easier to quantify each player's relative importance to the team as they have played the same games as every other player on the team throughout the season. However, when it comes to comparing every player, from every position, in the entire world, the "result" becomes so abstract and meaningless. You could be the greatest GK the world has ever seen and have a season where you concede 0 goals even though your defence consists of a bunch of scrubs and still not win the Ballon d'Or or be thought of as the "best" player.

Quite wisely, the question posed at the end of the OP is not "who is the best player in the world?", but "what do you look for in a player?", recognising that there is no objective test for being "the best". Still, I find it difficult to say that I really appreciate registas like Pirlo when, at the same time, I also have huge respect for class players in other positions.

I will list one criterion though, a player's personality definitely has an impact on whether I think a player is "the best" in their position. For example, if a player dives at the slightest touch, I think that isn't worthy of respect and it will lower my opinion of that player overall. Busquets is a great example; a player who is great at performing his role, but is also ugly to watch because of his antics. Not one of my favourites for sure. And so the Barca brigade don't get on my case, Ronaldo also falls into this group for me. They are also first to whinge when an opponent makes a strong tackle or a penalty is given against them. That's my opinion, and I understand that other people will disregard this when they consider who is "the best", but I definitely prefer players who have more integrity than that.

Best players are the ones who can create and make their teammates better. the ones who make things easier for others around them.

When they have the ball you are relaxed and confident cuz you know they are going to do the best with the ball and make the best possible decision.

I prefer technical players who can pass, dribble and have high intelligence etc. Players like Isco, Modric, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi, Ozil, Cazorla, Silva, Aguero, Ribery etc.

Best player for the best team is the best player for that season... pretty simple. Why do i say that? Because the best team probably has a ton of WC players playing at their top level individually and collectively. For one to be considered the best on a team like that means that you're better than a lot of the best players out there.

Best must be extraordinary. he does things that nobody can do

For me the world's best player would be the theoretical player, who, when inserted into a theoretical team, makes this team the most likely to win (not necessarily by improving the team as a goal, a fantastic individual goal scorer could do that, as well, though it will probably mean I'd prefer some kind of playmaker), as opposed to other players who could be inserted into that same theoretical team to a smaller effect.

The 'best player' is the player most likely to win you games. Whether it is by pulling the strings, serving up assists so fine not even the version of Benzema this forum imagines him to be can miss them, or by scoring goals without any service, basically dribbling from deep in his own half way up ot the opposing goal and firing in a hat-trick. Or even if it's a GK that can't be beat, or a defender that ensures your team always regains possession within seconds.
It is, for me, about results.

This also means I have an incredibly difficult time to judge who's "best" - because the players competing with each other don't play in the same teams. Who knows, maybe Messi would suck at Madrid, theoretically, if that question helps bring my point across.

Pirlo of the last 3 seasons and a Prime Xavi because they require the most intelligence for their position. They make their job look easy but when your'e playing it is far harder then they make it look. incredible vision and intelligence both of them riquelme was good at this too

There are so many criteria to define the best.... but for me its mainly either the player can influence and prove to be the key consistently in games, someone who scores or makes the scores, or prevents them effectively. These players have a big influence game in game out, and probably has good link up with teammate and good tactically.

The other type is individually so good they also affect a game hugely. Fat Ronaldo probably is the best ever player I seen, but hes probably best individually and not other in other areas compared to say Zidane or Messi who also has other areas of strength more.

Best players can be defenders too. Though lately here havent been much world class defensive stars

Too bad this topic dead; in Every other topic everyone has a opinion on who is better at [insert quality], who is the better player, etc, but when asked what it is people are looking for practicly nobody replys lol

Well, to have a workable understanding of what everybody is talking about would make those discussions possibly productive - we can't have that now, can we?

For me it's either one who can influence a game not matter the situation. Anyone can be the best if their attributes suggest they are. Weather they win or not is usually based on the team around them. But the best players tend to decide matches.

Those who wash cars at the age of 15.

I am not sure the unquestionable & undisputed best ever player term can exist , even though someone obviously has to excell in some aspects of the game amongst other elite players , even if you take your pick from the absolute best in history. What is certain , absolutely unavoidable i would say , is that ever existed or will exist a player who will be a jack-of-all-trades and also be the best in everything. It's just not possible. Anyhow , i doubt if we can scientificaly or objectively specify any player as the best of the best. Even if we limit any judgement and criteria to position by position , it still remains very hard and personally i find this attractive . People always talked about who might be the best ever man who played the game , but imo there can simply be no such player and what that thankfully means is that there will always be room for improvement in the game.

Aside from any theoritical talk , from the very few i regard as the best in the history of the game , i have always looked for them to meet certain requirements & standards ; absolutely and at all costs.

N1 without a single shred of doubt is for me the footballing virtue of taking the right decision at any given moment and especially at the right time. Even the best can't always reproduce that and for me it will always remain the main factor to judge players , be it the worst , the mediocre , the good or the great ones. For example . When Maradona was in the middle of the park in DAT game , dribbling past everyone he could find in his way to the opponents posts wasn't the right decision , but because he was fkn Maradona it made it become the right decision.  

The amount of calma , athleticism , composure , intelligence and practiced skill it takes for said player to take the right decision with or without the ball, whatever that may be during a game , is something which trully sets apart players , the n1 reason which puts them into categories. Taking the right decision . If the best players in the history of the game ever had anything in common , this is it.

You can become a laughing stock in football by just playing the simplest pass wrong , just like you can become a living legend by playing the simplest pass like no other.

You can throw in everything you want after that , be it consistency , longevity , talent , technique , cups , records , influence , whatever you want . All come 2nd to me before what i mentioned . As far as influencing a game goes , it isn't always down to what a player actually does. Kaka came in against Sampdoria earlier in the season and we looked like another team , he really influenced the game there. But he didn't exactly do who knows what out of this world. He did influence the game towards our favour , but criticaly speaking , his performance wasn't anything to take with you forever , just a good moment.

Just saying , there are many ways to influence the game , with or without the ball ; but the absolute best one is the virtue to take the right decision and then see it through , no matter the position said player has been playing or the opponent . Because influence can go either way , Materazzi influenced the WC final , should we praise him ? no . Was he anything close to the best ever ? no . But was it the right decision for his team ? Again no . He was just lucky. Had Zidane kept his temper , who knows what may have happened. That was a risk , a risk anyone who would be the best ever or one of the best ever would never have taken , but despite all odds , he influenced the game and was a big reason Italy won the final.

*not taking the slightest credit away from Italy , i was with them in the WC ffs. Just what it is. Oh and ze Germans in dat WC

best ballers were, zidane,pele,cruff,maradonna and raul

Depends on the position and skills and what's ask of him what his role is ...

Currently for me its Cristiano Ronaldo esp this year

In my opinion it is players who play in front of the defence and haveto pass through and around players someone like modric,pirlo xavi etc because in real life it is way harder then it looks on tv to have vision like that and they make complicated plays and passes look easy.

marottalad wrote:In my opinion it is players who play in front of the defence and haveto pass through and around players someone like modric,pirlo xavi etc because in real life it is way harder then it looks on tv to have vision like that and they make complicated plays and passes look easy.    

Basically you're saying that mid/n10/playmaker/dictator/DLP or such are the most importants players. right ?

Bénin wrote:

marottalad wrote:In my opinion it is players who play in front of the defence and haveto pass through and around players someone like modric,pirlo xavi etc because in real life it is way harder then it looks on tv to have vision like that and they make complicated plays and passes look easy.    

Basically you're saying that  mid/n10/playmaker/dictator/DLP or such are the most importants players. right ?

yes because if you have played football before you will realise how hard it is to do the things guys like pirlo do and make it look easy