Xavi vs Iniesta

chiboygeorge wrote:

arsenalap11 wrote:

Sean wrote:

arsenalap11 wrote:

Sean wrote:I think they're more different than people give them credit for.

Xavi is a better passer in my opinion, he's got a much better range of passing. Iniesta is a better dribbler, he doesnt get enough credit for how quick his feet are or his technique.

Overall though, I'd plump for Xavi

What? That's what he's known for and why people consider him to be so good..

Not really, most people just see them as a carbon copy of each other.

Hmm.. don't think so myself. Anyone that knows a reasonable amount about football knows that they're different.

Well said.

Chris wrote:Fabregas > both of them.

Danny wrote:Fuck choosing between these 2.

Xavi's always seemed to be the player who sits back more (obviously not as much as Busquets/Mascherano), and he doesn't seem as energetic on the field as Iniesta. But I don't think he's as quick footed as Iniesta, he actually dribbles the ball quite well.

Jamie wrote:

Danny wrote:Fuck choosing between these 2.

Xavi's always seemed to be the player who sits back more (obviously not as much as Busquets/Mascherano), and he doesn't seem as energetic on the field as Iniesta. But I don't think he's as quick footed as Iniesta, he actually dribbles the ball quite well.

Xavi runs more than any player on the Barcelona team.

Jamie wrote:

Danny wrote:Fuck choosing between these 2.

Xavi's always seemed to be the player who sits back more (obviously not as much as Busquets/Mascherano), and he doesn't seem as energetic on the field as Iniesta. But I don't think he's as quick footed as Iniesta, he actually dribbles the ball quite well.

Xavi runs more than any player on the Barcelona team.

Chris wrote:

Jamie wrote:

Danny wrote:Fuck choosing between these 2.

Xavi's always seemed to be the player who sits back more (obviously not as much as Busquets/Mascherano), and he doesn't seem as energetic on the field as Iniesta. But I don't think he's as quick footed as Iniesta, he actually dribbles the ball quite well.

Xavi runs more than any player on the Barcelona team.

Thats interesting.

Not for long though seeing he's hitting his 30's.

luke. wrote:Xaviesta.

VivaRonaldo wrote:Xaviesta.

Jamie wrote:

Danny wrote:Fuck choosing between these 2.

Xavi's always seemed to be the player who sits back more (obviously not as much as Busquets/Mascherano), and he doesn't seem as energetic on the field as Iniesta. But I don't think he's as quick footed as Iniesta, he actually dribbles the ball quite well.

Xavi runs more than any player on the Barcelona team.

mauro=beast wrote:you tire more as fullback of alves ilk than any other position

u do not run the same distance over entire game as midfielders

but

u do more sprints with the ball and without the ball going forward and retreating....i never knew that(i never play fullback) i always assume that midfielder is the most exhaustive position but its not apparently according to sport instititute of milan who researched these stuff a few year ago

obviously it depend what kind of fullback u are. if u are a gary neville then u dont do as much sprints. if you are alves or cole then you do this a lot

grenade187 wrote:

Jamie wrote:

Danny wrote:Fuck choosing between these 2.

Xavi's always seemed to be the player who sits back more (obviously not as much as Busquets/Mascherano), and he doesn't seem as energetic on the field as Iniesta. But I don't think he's as quick footed as Iniesta, he actually dribbles the ball quite well.

Xavi runs more than any player on the Barcelona team.

You watch them more so I could be wrong but isn't that Alves ? He's always running up and down and never tires lol.

XxBradKennedyxX wrote:yeah xavi is always moving at a steady pace, alves is occasionaly making sprints forward and then backwards, what alves does is more tiring although xavi covers more ground. also the reason imo that xavi covers so much ground is because his role is to always be available for whoever has the ball to pass to him, iniesta doesnt quite have the same job, hes supposed to sit a little bit further up the field, I dont think that just because xavi covers mroe ground than iniesta it neccessarily means he has more stamina.

AriseForLife wrote:I didn't say he needed Xavi to perform, I said he couldn't carry Barcelona and that much is true. Barcelona could toss another player into Andres' role and still be just fine, but without Lionel or Xavi they are just another good team.

Jamie wrote:Personally I think Iniesta's injury in 2009/2010 is a big reason why they didn't win the Champions League.

I agree that Xavi is more important, but you're underrating Iniesta who has, in Xavi's absence, ran games before.

arsenalap11 wrote:

AriseForLife wrote:I didn't say he needed Xavi to perform, I said he couldn't carry Barcelona and that much is true. Barcelona could toss another player into Andres' role and still be just fine, but without Lionel or Xavi they are just another good team.

Fixed