Kerrybai
New member
Agreed, my response to the initial question had nothing to do with success.
Agreed, my response to the initial question had nothing to do with success.
slim boogy
New member
Yeah iniesta plAys sexier but xavi is the key.
Deco 20
Scandinavian 101
khorne
New member
Xavi is more important for the system. Hell, he IS the system sometimes. But the thing with iniesta is this: euro 2008 was total dominance from spain, no other team could even come close to touch them, because no one could take their tiqui taca midfield head on. But starting with wc 2010 and ever since the tactic against spain is either to surrender possession entirely and lock up the final third of the pitch, or to interrupt their passing with very aggressive and physical play. And spain was really struggling at the world cup, and it was literally iniesta every time who broke through the deadlock (maybe the goal against germany is the exception. He did produce the corner kick, but DAT corner is all Xavi' and puyol's). while xavi has to hold it all together for 90 minutes, iniesta can produce the one magic moment to finally break through. Or let's put it that way: xavi is the maestro who conducts the orchestra. But sometimes they face a really tough crowd, who just won't be awestruck by the music. Xavi is busy with keeping everyone playing normally, so the virtuoso iniesta comes up with an amazing solo that moves everyone to tears.
Elite-BkD
New member
Yeah uhmm...taking away Iniesta from the side during Pep's tenure would have been a huge big deal in terms of how badly the team was affected, very much comparable with taking Xavi out and that legendary run would have played out very differently. Likewise Puyol and Messi. This sentiment that there's absolutely no comparison and Xavi was massively more important is a little bit delusional.
footyfan
Calma, calma
If we really had to remove 1 player of our trio, Iniesta for me would be the first to go even though he's the most eye-catching player. We have Messi in the forward line, to complement him we need Xavi at his absolute peak.
After Cruyff, Xavi was the player who created the most chances in a single World Cup tournament ever. (He was also the player who created the most chances in Euro 2012) The chances Iniesta created were more obvious, dribble vs Paraguay, pass to Cesc in final, goal in final, goal vs Chile. Spain were struggling to create chances because their forward line (which included Iniesta) was uninspiring most of the time.
Really underrating Xavi here. Spain's midfield was untouchable in the world cup and Xavi was a huge reason for that. Directly and indirectly, he was far more responsible for Spain's defensive solidity than Iniesta. He deserved Ballon D'Or as much as Messi in that year. Look at this video and note the difference to the current Xavi.
[video=vimeo;14261814]http://vimeo.com/14261814[/video]
After Cruyff, Xavi was the player who created the most chances in a single World Cup tournament ever. (He was also the player who created the most chances in Euro 2012) The chances Iniesta created were more obvious, dribble vs Paraguay, pass to Cesc in final, goal in final, goal vs Chile. Spain were struggling to create chances because their forward line (which included Iniesta) was uninspiring most of the time.
Really underrating Xavi here. Spain's midfield was untouchable in the world cup and Xavi was a huge reason for that. Directly and indirectly, he was far more responsible for Spain's defensive solidity than Iniesta. He deserved Ballon D'Or as much as Messi in that year. Look at this video and note the difference to the current Xavi.
[video=vimeo;14261814]http://vimeo.com/14261814[/video]
SEvolution
New member
khorne
New member
I agree with you, i'd also remove iniesta out of the three in the hypothetical scenario. it's the logical choice after all. And even so, there would be situations where'd think to myself "damn, it sure would be nice to have the pale little guy around, because messi keeps running into 4 defenders, and xavis passes are all intercepted"
the second one is a bit shaky an argument, because it sort of proves that iniesta creates the chances which are more likely to lead to a goal
But hey, don't get me wrong, i'm not taking away from xavi on the contrary. Sin xavi, ni mundial, ni pollas!
NIESTA'S FATHER ON RADIO
TODAY.
=> Jose Mourinho has no respect
nor shame.
=> Iniesta spoke about Iker and
not Mourinho because he has an
infinity towards Casillas.
=> Jose Mourinho always starts a
fight. Madridistas supported him
but gradually their finding out
who he really is.
=> If what's happening to Iker
happened in Germany or England,
Mourinho would be long gone.
=> What's happening to Casillas,
who's an institution to Spanish
football and Real Madrid, never
happened before.
=> [Iniesta's affection towards
Casillas] regardless to who you
play for, you must have respect
for your peers.
TODAY.
=> Jose Mourinho has no respect
nor shame.
=> Iniesta spoke about Iker and
not Mourinho because he has an
infinity towards Casillas.
=> Jose Mourinho always starts a
fight. Madridistas supported him
but gradually their finding out
who he really is.
=> If what's happening to Iker
happened in Germany or England,
Mourinho would be long gone.
=> What's happening to Casillas,
who's an institution to Spanish
football and Real Madrid, never
happened before.
=> [Iniesta's affection towards
Casillas] regardless to who you
play for, you must have respect
for your peers.
Vapor
New member
I don't know if you were talking about Euro 2012 here but I think Iniesta's performance on the front line was far from uninspired. Winning player of the tournament should back that up as well. Not that I disagree with the rest of the post but I definitely don't think that his 2012 euro performance was uninspired, I thought it was amazing, even though he is still probably capable of better.
footyfan
Calma, calma
I was talking about the World Cup. Even in the World Cup, Iniesta himself wasn't uninspiring, quite the opposite. He played his usual game despite just recovering from injury. I framed my statement improperly.
In response to the comment that Spain was struggling at the World Cup (which was totally true), I just said that it wasn't the midfield that contributed to the struggle but the forward line.
I agree with you, i'd also remove iniesta out of the three in the hypothetical scenario. it's the logical choice after all. And even so, there would be situations where'd think to myself "damn, it sure would be nice to have the pale little guy around, because messi keeps running into 4 defenders, and xavis passes are all intercepted"
the second one is a bit shaky an argument, because it sort of proves that iniesta creates the chances which are more likely to lead to a goal
But hey, don't get me wrong, i'm not taking away from xavi on the contrary. Sin xavi, ni mundial, ni pollas!
Yeah I agree with your general sentiment
But again, I used the wrong choice of words. What I really meant was that Iniesta's chances were more 'obvious' because they stuck in the memory. And that had to do with the fact that they turned out to be productive. To his credit, his chances were also more pleasing on the eye.
In the video I posted, and in a few others I saw, Xavi also created quite a few chances that were likely to lead to a goal but even I didn't remember them because not many of the chances were taken.
Iniesta missed a huge and important chunk of the 2009/10 season, yet we managed to win La Liga that year, dominating the opposition and setting up our record haul of 99 points. As far as the Inter Milan game goes, obviously we missed Iniesta - but there's no telling if he would've been enough. At the time I definitely believed that if we had Iniesta, we would've won(my opinion has since changed). There's also an argument to be made that we should've won anyway, considering Bojan's disallowed goal and Milito's offside goal.
There is no doubting that Iniesta is a supreme player. We're definitely a weaker team without him. His goal got us into the 2008/09 final when all hope was lost. Yet, we have shown that we can cope without him - since Pep has taken over, we have won every Clasico that Iniesta missed (including the pivotal 2-0 win at Bernabeu). However, we haven't yet shown that we can be as dominant without Xavi. It may be that we may even be better if he's not playing but recent evidence points to the contrary. And as somebody pointed out, his decline has corresponded to our decline. Spain played their best game at Euro 2012 when Xavi really turned it on. Although it must be said that correlation does not imply causation.
Without Messi, I don't think we would've won any title whatsoever. To put Iniesta and Messi on the same level is absurd IMO. As for Puyol, I honestly don't know. It seems he was much more important than I anticipated previously. Not just footballing wise, but with his presence and authority
Last edited:
Home of Barca Fans
