Iniesta and henry both have their uses. If teams pack out the midfield we can play a long ball out wide to henry (he is utilising his height much more at fcb than he did at arsenal). He can also rotate with sammy in the centre and do a great job. Iniesta cant do that..he is not a great finisher. Plus henry will help bring in other players much more. He will receive the ball and keep it moving slowly. He is very useful for teams that pack the midfield.
Iniesta on the other hand is very direct and likes to get towards goal as quick as possible. He has great ball control and can get past 2 or 3 men. This is useful against teams that pack the defence.
Both are of course useful against teams that pack neither the defence or midfield. They can both help change defence into attack very quickly (ie counter attack). In fact i would say henry is probably better at doing this, while iniesta is better at turning our possession around the midfield into a quick chance on goal.
Henry didnt have a great debut season. Even someone like myself would have no problem admitting that. He scored goals but wasnt on the same wavelength as the rest of the team (although i was calling for him to play inside left as opposed to outside left for the majority of the season). However this season i noticed big improvements in his play and felt he deserved to start (away from home) even when he was being slated by many fans...although he still didnt seem to be on the same wavelength as his teammates. Now thats all changed and over the past 1.5 months both parties (henry and the rest of the team) have adapted to each other and seeing henry on the pitch makes us feel like a real force.
My votes go to:
messi--eto'o--henry
messi--eto'o--AI