I'm being serious Kamran, Iniesta isn't that amazing. He appears to have all the talent but he doesn't produce enough.

He produces amazing things.

His ball retention, touch, creativity and technical ability is second to only Messi. Do you think only goals and assists show productivity? Are there any stats for how many chances he creates, how many times he assists the assister, creates space for his team mates, glues the ball to his feet with 4 balls surrounding him etc?

players *

My word I find for once in my life I am having to agree with an Arsenal fan. Iniesta is a special player, you only have to look at his individual awards to see that.

Anyway I am just going to the toilet to throw up

you can't judge midfielder's based on goals and assists, there's more than one form of productivity

midfielders *

I've watched Barcelona on a very regular basis over the last 6 or so years and I can tell you without even look at stats that both his key passes and assists would be well below Xavi, not even close. I understand the limitations of stats I'm just not fooled by what he's capable of and his stylish play.

I look at what he actually does.

If you look at what he actually does, then it's not difficult to see what he brings to Barca/Spain. No other player in the world could do what he does.

If you look at what he actually does, then it's not difficult to see what he brings to Barca/Spain. No other player in the world could do what he does.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's probably true, but the same can be said for Fabregas and Xavi both of whom I think would fare better outside of tiki-taka based play than Iniesta would.

Their creativity far exceeds Iniesta's and both have a more complete set of midfield qualities.

The best club side in history and the best international side in history both play tiki-taka football, neither side would've become the best in history without Iniesta. The system would be a hell of a lot weaker with Iniesta.

Their creativity certainly isn't better than Iniesta's. Maybe their direct goals/assists are though.

Their creativity certainly isn't better than Iniesta's. Maybe their direct goals/assists are though.
----------------------------------------------------
It is, by a wide margin in terms of creating play and creating goals.

Don't get me wrong I think Iniesta is great but he's a specialist who's limitations would be exposed in other setups. Fabregas and Xavi would be great for any team in any system.

Xavi and Fabregas creativity is on a whole different level to anyone else except messi I think.

I can see where AU is coming from, but it is true that Cesc is inferior to Iniesta in this Tiki taka system. However if you put Cesc in another team where he's the main man, then I think there isn't much between them. I really doubt Iniesta could play as a no 9 if asked too. Cesc is a more intelligent footballer than Iniesta but as said the tiki taka system is not suited as well as it is too Iniesta.

I'd put Zidane and Xavi as the greatest mids of the past 2 decades. Scholes, Pirlo and Iniesta just behind. Lampard and Gerrard are great players. They don't fit as well as others in the team ethic but they can take games by the scruff of the neck with fine, individual driving performances. Lampard scoring well over 200 goals is just insane. And he assists his fair share as well. He's the most underrated between himself, Gerrard and Scholes.

Iniesta would shine in any team

Sheriff all those players you've mentioned are special. They all have abilities the others doesn't posses in high command. Agree with the post.

Rui Costa

If you go by stats of goals scored, chances created and assists, Zidane and Iniesta would be behind quite a lot of players. There are intangibles that make them the great players they are. Iniesta's drifting runs between the lines does a lot of damage in unbalancing the opposition back line and midfield shape as well as his peerless ability to switch the pace of the attack. It's just so unique. His elegance and balance is amazing. Those gliding runs with the ball magneted to his foot are only matched by Messi - and not nearly as beautifully as Iniesta does it.

Carra is better than most pundits out there, but his reasoning here is a load of tosh, regardless of opinions.

He uses the reason that Gerrard and lamps 'won more big games' than Scholes. Well he must have forgot the assist to take the lead in the 99 FA Cup final, his CL semi final goal vs Barca, as well as the fact Mev motions about scoring not being the only factor in winning a game.

comment by Kamran. (U1204)
posted 27 minutes ago
The best club side in history and the best international side in history both play tiki-taka football, neither side would've become the best in history without Iniesta. The system would be a hell of a lot weaker with Iniesta.

Their creativity certainly isn't better than Iniesta's. Maybe their direct goals/assists are though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't know Iniesta played for AC Milan

Carra just got excited because he had a chance to say how great Gerrard is and how Scholes isn't. Neville remained calm.

The thing that Gerrard has, that Lampard and Scholes do not, is the ability to play pretty much every position bar LB and CB for club and country.

Just saying.

I'd put Zidane and Xavi as the greatest mids of the past 2 decades. Scholes, Pirlo and Iniesta just behind. Lampard and Gerrard are great players. They don't fit as well as others in the team ethic but they can take games by the scruff of the neck with fine, individual driving performances. Lampard scoring well over 200 goals is just insane. And he assists his fair share as well. He's the most underrated between himself, Gerrard and Scholes.
-----------------
That looks completely fair to me, can't disagree with any of that. Lampard and Gerrard are not technically at the level of any of those mentioned above (not to say they are technically devoid) but they still provide excellent qualities that Chelsea and Liverpool have massively benefited in the last 12 or so years.

Has much more to his game
=========================
Some people may take Scholes over Gerrard, but the above reason is the least likely reason for doing so. Gerrard has far more to his game and reached a higher level in his peak.

No one referred to technical ability here. Don't jump the gun.

Who was in the top 5 then? 2008ish time.
No particular order:
Xavi, Iniesta, Cesc, Kaka & someone else. Gerrard's not in there though. That's for sure.
=============================
Gerrard's peak was in 2006 and he was the best player in his position.

Reporter: "What's it like being the best guitar player in the world"

Jimi Hendrix "I dunno, ask Paul Scholes"