Iniesta vs Zidane (revisited)

A lot of people hold Zidane up as some mythical mf that can never be reached. What is the general opinion of this forum. Please use actual logic and don't resort to myths.

90 % of the people who will write in this thread will have Barca or Madrid badges and therefore have completely biased opinions. This can only become a somewhat interesting thread if neutrals could voice their opinions.

I will begin: Iniesta for me.

I am neutral. Iniesta for me

Most of this forum never watched Zidane consistently and the rest see him as a living God due to nostalgia lmao.

You won't get level headed opinions here. Both are overrated due to how pleasing on the eye they are though, I'll say that.

'both are overrated' lol

That's such a Mole thing to say.

It is also, of course, complete and utter nonsense.

Zidane for me.

One is asked to make the difference in the final 1/3 and or from one side while the other is asked to control the flow of the game across the pitch. Xavi played Zidane's role and now Rakitic. Iniesta doesn't play Zidane's role. You're not comparing the right players.

Scholes - Pirlo- Xavi - Zidane - Schweini - etc.... these are proper comparisons.

For me, Zidane is better at leading a team but Iniesta is the better player.

Hapless_Hans wrote:'both are overrated' lol

That's such a Mole thing to say.

It is also, of course, complete and utter nonsense.

In the sense that neither can do no wrong in the eyes of most people, i have defended Iniesta on here many times but it's a fact the general public will never get on him for bad performances like they didn't for Zidane.

And he had a lot of them, despite what history wants you to believe *Cough* Paul Lambert *Cough*.

Most people are incapable of being balanced critically for players they like and Iniesta and Zidane are prime examples.

Modric and Silva to a lesser extent now and when they perform badly there's always an excuse, i do wish people wouldn't be like this but alas it's not to be.

Zidane for me

sportsczy wrote:One is asked to make the difference in the final 1/3 and or from one side while the other is asked to control the flow of the game across the pitch. Xavi played Zidane's role and now Rakitic. Iniesta doesn't play Zidane's role. You're not comparing the right players.

Scholes - Pirlo- Xavi - Zidane - Schweini - etc.... these are proper comparisons.

Stop pushing this crap please, unlike most of these idiots i'm not too young to have watched Zidane from his *bleep* Juventus days so you can't fool me. He was never any of those players at any stage.

He was better at controlling the tempo from an advanced position than Iniesta is that's true, but please don't act like he was ever like Xavi or Pirlo. Absolutely ridiculous. He was a 10 for France and Juventus and played on the left *bleep* wing with a free role for Madrid. Because he had an ability to drop deep and was better at controlling the pace of the game than most 10s doesn't mean he was a bloody CM.

Can you get any more ridiculous lmao? actually don't answer that because i already know the answer.

How about you go watch some games Mole... it might actually educate you.  

With France, you initially had 2 DMs that recovered the ball in Deschamps/Petit and Zidane was given the ball and asked to organize the the midfield... you had Djorkaeff as the 10 (great one too).   After Djorkaeff became less used starting in 2002, they pushed Zidane more forward on NT, that's true.  But Viera supported him a lot as the B2B and Makelele covered the DM duties.  Viera and Zidane jumped into the attack when it was necessary... which wasn't often.  Pires, Henry, Trezeguet, Ribery, Malouda, etc. handled most of it.

With club... at Juventus you had Del Piero as the 10 and Inzhagi as the CF.  Enough said.  At Madrid, you had Guti play the advanced midfielder role while Raul played the SS and Morientes followed by R9 were the CFs.

I hope that clears it up

both play or played at the stacked team

both have some clutch moments in the important match

i can't decide

guest_07 wrote:both play or played at the stacked team

both have some clutch moments in the important match

i can't decide

Just say it, I know you want to

Except Zidane did it with 4 different club teams and drastically different NT teams... in different countries with different systems. Excelled in ever single scenario.

What Zidane did with France in 06 is enough for me to put him over iniesta. Iniesta is way more consistent though, so its tough. Slight edge to Zidane.

Zidane for me IMO. He's the better scorer, the better big game player (derbies, finals, tournaments), had every collective trophy available to back it all up, also won every major individual award available (Balon d'or, onze d'or, FIFA WPOTY etc) and oh, insert more eye candy too.

Btw, zidane was the only midfielder who managed to win the fifa world player of the year, an award dominated mainly by strikers and forwards..

Bankz wrote:Zidane....the better big game player (derbies, finals, tournaments)

Some enlightened individual on reddit has the perfect response to this:

at least zidane got to 2 world cup finals to begin with, all despite having far inferior suards..

Multiple titles? Lol, so u think zidane wouldn't beast it up in dem pepcelona teams? Try putting iniesta in that galactico team and the 03 - 06 french team and see him do the hazard ghosting impression.

Saying iniesta was one of the best players in those finals in just lol worthy tbh, every big game player is always ONE OF the best players in almost every game they play, so I don't see how saying iniesta was one of the best players at so and so final is proving anything or has there being a final where zidane wasn't one of the best players?

Moreso, loosing more finals doesn't make one player inferior to the other.
Again, zidane was equally the man of the match against brazil in the 98 & 06 world cup finals,
was a 2002 CL final MVP,
was euro 2000 MVP,
was world cup 06 MVP,
was a 3 time FIFA wpoty winner,
was a one time balon d'or winner,

Btw, didn't iniesta loose the confederations cup final by a neymar designed 0 - 3 dishwashing? Wasn't spain disgraced out of the 2014 world cup?

In conclusion, there's nothing, and I mean nothing that iniesta has done/achieved that zidane hasn't and then some.

Bankz wrote: at least zidane got to 2 world cup finals to begin with, all despite having far inferior suards..

Clueless. The France 98 squad is one of the best and they did just fine without him in the World Cup itself. France 06 is as good as Spain 14.

Bankz wrote:
Multiple titles? Lol, so u think zidane wouldn't beast it up in dem pepcelona teams? Try putting iniesta in that galactico team and the 03 - 06 french team and see him do the hazard ghosting impression.

Conjecture. Nowhere near consistent enough to say for certain.

Bankz wrote:
Saying iniesta was one of the best players in those finals in just lol worthy tbh, every big game player is always ONE OF the best players in almost every game they play, so I don't see how saying iniesta was one of the best players at so and so final is proving anything or has there being a final where zidane wasn't one of the best players?

Yes there have been finals where Zidane wasn't one of the best players. WC06 Final for instance. Going to the best team in the world and promptly losing the next two CL finals.

It's also a bit difficult because he hasn't been in that many finals (relative to Iniesta) to begin with.

Bankz wrote:
Moreso, loosing more finals doesn't make one player inferior to the other.
Again, zidane was equally the man of the match against brazil in the 98 & 06 world cup finals,
was a 2002 CL final MVP,
was euro 2000 MVP,
was world cup 06 MVP,

Sure, but still not enough to make him a better big game player than Iniesta. Also, the match against Brazil in 06 was not the final.

Bankz wrote:
was a 3 time FIFA wpoty winner,
was a one time balon d'or winner,

Useless statistic. He wouldn't win a single one of those in Messi-Ronaldo era. And yes, this is obviously conjecture but I'd say much more of a certainty than saying Zidane would beast it up in pepcelona teams.

Bankz wrote:
Btw, didn't iniesta loose the confederations cup final by a neymar designed 0 - 3 dishwashing? Wasn't spain disgraced out of the 2014 world cup?

I'd say getting knocked out every single year in R16 of CL is worse.

Bankz wrote:
In conclusion, there's nothing, and I mean nothing that iniesta has done/achieved that zidane hasn't and then some.

You need to read what I quoted you on. Nothing on this post actually supports your point that Zidane was a better big game player than Iniesta.

I don't find this debate a 'wrong' comparison at all.
Stylistically they are both similar.

I can't tell for sure because I have watched Zidane consistently only when he was into his 30s.

But one thing is for sure,this comparison is close to call now than say, 2-3 yrs ago.I think once a top player gets older, you start to recognize him for what he is and what he's achieved in his best yrs.This is the thing that's happening with Iniesta and even though I dislike him , he's at worst , in the same bracket as Zidane if not better.

How did France cope without Zidane in the 02 world cup ?

if u're looking at who's team won what, iniesta has a case. skill for skill, based on abilities imo (just my opinion before people start waving the axes), zidane without a doubt. iniesta's a great player, but he's not necessarily been burdened with carrying his team...i could see zidane fitting well in the sides iniesta played for, not sure about iniesta fitting well in galacticos. iniesta would definitely have fit well in france i think, in central midfield

Valkyrja wrote:How did France cope without Zidane in the 02 world cup ?

Was waiting for this post to come up. Surely France did not do well without Zidane. They lost to Senegal and drew with Uruguay. But Zidane played the final group game and even then lost to Denmark 2-0.

Bringing up France 02 paints the picture that France was useless without Zidane during his time with the team. But France was still eliminated by the Czechs in Euro 96 and the Greeks in Euro 2004 despite having Zidane in both those tournaments.

Even in World Cup 06, France was on the brink of elimination from a group containing South Korea, Switzerland and Togo. Having received yellow cards amid poor performances in both draws against the Swiss and Koreans, Zidane was suspended for the final must-win group game against Togo. France ultimately qualified, and it was clear that Ribery was the best player in the team, atleast until the end of the Spain R16 game.

Then came the Brazil QF and with it the hype overload.

Both are in the same brackett for sure. Now who is better ? It's a matter of personnal choice and let me remind you that it's a collective sport so depending of the others players around one could be better than the other.

Personnal choice : Iniesta but had Zidane played for Barca I may have said Zidane. Also I didn't see Zidane play on a weekly basis.

I totally understand why Zidane is more popular tho.