Nearly two years ago, the Daily Mail’s Matt Lawton published a piece under what should surely be considered one of the most dunderheaded headlines in recent football journalism: “The best players of the world (and Xavi): Ronaldo crowned king of football.” In the wake of Cristiano Ronaldo’s ascension as the world player of the year in 2009, Lawton took the time to cheekily ridicule Xavi Hernández, a player whose patience, measure, and impeccable sense of the tempo in attack and defense has helped to make Barcelona the best club side in Europe (arguably) and Spain the best national side in the world (most certainly). If Paul Scholes—the closest thing England has produced to a Xavi—had equal success on the international stage, some of the British press would spend less time taking the piss and more raising a glass.
Xavi has been and is the fulcrum and paradigm of both his nation’s and club’s high pressing/quick passing philosophy, which has won his teams the European Championship, the World Cup, two La Liga titles, and the Champions League. And while there might have been flashier and more prominent displays from his teammates during those title runs (Marco Senna was arguably Spain’s best player in 2008, David Villa in 2010, and Lionel Messi for Barcelona) Xavi was both blueprint and architect for these achievements. If there was ever an occasion to award the Ballon d’Or for a career-long legacy then giving it to Xavi this year is surely it.
I was in Iran last May watching Barcelona beat Sevilla on their way to a second consecutive title, when my cousin remarked in Persian, “Xavi makes Barcelona rotate.” His choice of words struck me as simultaneously lyrical and coldly mathematical, but nonetheless appropriate with respect to Xavi’s influence. Something near the “carousel” Sir Alex Ferguson invoked when describing the demoralizing aspect of being passed to death by Xavi and Iniesta, or the Guardian’s James Richardson’s “Matrix” analogy after Spain made Germany’s talented group of youngsters look their age in the semifinal of the World Cup.
Where midfield play in the Premier League often seems gruelingly effortful, Xavi simply skates or spins into space and pushes the ball onto dangerous areas with minimal exertion. Indeed, while Xavi’s compatriot and possible future understudy Cesc Fàbregas is more direct and most definitely more goal-prolific, he so far lacks the ability to orchestrate the course of a match simply by keeping the ball. In the first leg of last years quarterfinal between Arsenal and Barcelona, Xavi completed 95 passes—62 more than Arsenal’s top passer that evening. In the return leg he completed 105, 59 more than Arsenal’s top passer. And where possession statistics are incidental to Arsenal’s intricate passing game and elaborate finishes, they are fundamental to Barcelona’s and Spain’s, and both squads exploit Xavi’s ability to keep the ball until the right moment for him or the group’s other playmakers to supply the final pass.
My favorite image of Xavi is a caricature. A downturned mouth that somehow evokes supreme calm rather than despair offsets saucer-sized eyes. The image bespeaks an almost comical ordinariness to his athletic prowess. Perhaps this makes him an easy target for detractors like Lawton, who are evidently besotted by the hyper-vigor and power of the Ronaldos and Drogbas and Gerrards. But this besottedness also smacks of boastful philistinism and disregard for the less blunt or less spectacular aspects of the game. And it is on the wrong side of history.
Sam Fayyaz is a PhD student at UMASS, Amherst where he studies political science when he’s not anoraking about soccer.
Read More: Ballon d'Or, Barcelona, Spain, Xavi
by Sam Fayyaz · January 8, 2011
Xavi is a true maestro of the midfield, he embodies everything that is beautiful about this sport.
How exactly do you say, ” Xavi makes Barcelona rotate” in Persian? My Persian friends would drop dead if I were to say it!
He would definitely deserve it. And I think it’s now or never for him as he has had some little injury problems lately. I know it’s easier when you start your career in a club like Barcelona but I find it terrific he has remained faithful to his team all these years and been able to play with the same core of players (Iniesta, Messi,…) in the same system for the same club. Sometimes 1+1+1 equal more than 3 and that’s called chemistry. I would still give the trophy to Iniesta instead for passing is decisive but scoring goals is how you win trophies and he has scored so many crucial ones these last few years (Chelsea game) including 2010′s most important goal.
There’s a rather good article in El Mundo Deportivo today – now there’s a sentence I never thought I’d write – about how the pass is at the core of Barcelona’s entire culture, and particularly how Xavi has made the pass an art form. The piece includes this fine description of just one in-many-ways-unremarkable, run-of-the-Masía goal (against Athletic Bilbao in the Spanish cup the other day):
All of that takes 116 words to describe in reasonable detail. It took Xavi under a second to weigh up his options, come to a decision and make the goal that he had in his head happen.
(My translation. Original article here
Speaking of the Guardian, I’ve always loved Sid Lowe’s description of Xavi as the “ideologue” of tiki-taka. Its a fitting way of describing how he imposes the ‘Barca style’ on both his team and the opposition
I think there is a case to be made that Iniesta should get the Ballon d’Or; Xavi depends on Iniesta’s intuitive movement to open up the patterns that he choses, and without Iniesta’s decisive goals…
@Sancrucensis I’ve heard this argument before but it doesn’t ring true. Iniesta is obviously a great player and works well with Xavi, but has never been Xavi’s job to score, but to create with his passing. Yes, Iniesta’s movement is important but so is Messi’s, Alves’s ect. For this year Xavi deserves the Ballon D’Or infinitely more than Iniesta.
Wonderful article by the way, describes how artful Xavi can be without the usual stat attack (though the stats are incredible)
Xavi has his role in the Barcelona system (which he does better than anyone in the world right now), that of the metronome, that keeps Barca ticking and in tune. Messi, however, must execute several roles to the same perfection as Xavi’s one for Barca’s machine to work. He must alternate between being a conventional 10, a conventional 9, and an unconventional right winger, constantly adapting to outsmart the defense, who target him more than any of Barca’s other superstars. Xavi plays his triangles in the middle third, while Messi plays his in the much more crowded final third. Xavi performs most of his defensive work in keeping possession, but can be vulnerable if forced back. Messi (for his position) is the better defender, constantly creating easy chances through interceptions and tackles in critical areas. Solely in the context of Barcelona, Messi is the more important and influential player.
@matt
that’s a very strong argument you’ve made.
It’s the oppostie: Barcelona by far the best club team in the world (most definitely), Spain maybe the best in the world under a set of fortuitous circumstances (questionably).
@M.G. Yeah, they got really lucky with that whole “winning the last two major international tournaments to bookend a 35-game unbeaten streak that included 15 wins in a row” business.
As much as I love intricate play, I’m a little over the drooling on this site about tiki-taka, a mostly ineffective form of play in an attacking sense (although ironically effective in a defensive one). Why is Barca so much more effective than Spain, when they are almost the same team? Because of the directness of Messi’s attacks.
The best players are the direct ones, the Drogbas, the 05 Ronaldinhos, the Eto’os, the Messis, the CR7s who take it upon themselves to break through the opposition’s iron curtain, not the Xavis who hope and pray that the curtain chinks open once or twice every 90 minutes.
Xavi is indeed a caricature, of a national team that was utterly one-dimensional. Still, I love his work in making Barca tick the way they do.
@M.G. yeah tika-taka is really ineffective, with its two main components Xavi and Iniesta having won every trophy possible between 2008 and 2010. Your arguments about it and Xavi’s playing style being one- dimensional and indirect are utter nonsense. Waiting for the defence to open is the point of the whole style, and Xavi is a master of ‘direct’ passes to exploit the opening. On what grounds are ‘Barca so much more effective than Spain’? Both have been equally successful! You claim Xavi is a lesser player because he doesn’t ‘take it upon himself to break down the oppositions Iron Curtain’, but that’s exactly what he does! Comparing him to Ronaldo/Eto’o/Messi is ridiculous. They are all forwards, Xavi is a creative midfielder! Please start watching football before commenting on it.
@M.G. Chacun son goût. To my taste, Xavi mesmerizes.
@M.G. What an utter load of bollocks. Besides Messi, whom I’ll get to below, what kind of World Cups did your direct players have? Eto’o: didn’t qualify; Ronaldinho: didn’t make the 2010 squad, and underwhelmed in 2006; Drogba: out in the first round. “CR7″: out in the round-of-16, scored one goal – the 7th goal in the 7-0 win over North Korea (aka “the least significant goal in the entire tournament”). And if Spain were one-dimensional, that was in no small part because Torres, Spain’s most direct forward, had a shocker of a tournament. Like Ibra with Barca, Torres was supposed to be the “direct” alternate route, and he was quite, quite poor.
@matt But Messi suffers far more without Xavi than Xavi does without Messi. Without Messi, Xavi won the Euros and the World Cup. Without Xavi, Messi hasn’t won anything (Olympics and U-20 World Cup aside, neither of which are senior-level).
More importantly, without Messi, Xavi is still a midfield maestro. He doesn’t have to change how he plays, because his patient passing will always, in the end, unlock the defense, and give whomever’s playing up a chance on goal. Without Xavi, Messi has to change his style of play entirely. With Argentina, he becomes the creator, the starter, rather than the finisher of the attacking move. In other words, without Xavi, Messi has to become Xavi.
Ding ding ding @ James D .. Messi is the best he can be when Xavi is there. I honestly think Xavi will bring the best out of any player with his perfect passes.
@James D Worth adding to that, though, that Messi is actually surprisingly good in that role—he had a weirdly great World Cup providing the only link-up play between himself in midfield and himself up front. Not his fault Argentina was a basket case otherwise. Also, to be pedantic, Eto’o did qualify for the tournament (he scored vs. Denmark), but Cameroon lost all their games and finished at the bottom of their group.
@Brian Phillips Ah, damn, I knew I’d mess up one of those – got Cameroon mixed up with Egypt as the “African power that didn’t make it.” As for dropping back, Messi was superb for Argentina, no doubt about it. (It’s also worth noting that Messi has always played more of a creative role for Argentina since becoming a regular, going back to the ’07 Copa America.) That he changed his game successfully is in fact a strong argument that he’s individually a better, more complete player than Xavi, since it’s unlikely Xavi could play Messi’s role as well as Messi plays his. (But their respective international performances show, for the team, that the midfield creator is generally more important to a team than a #9 or #10 or a winger, and while Messi is a very good creator, Xavi is extraordinary. Messi is the better player, but Xavi is the better team.)
@James D
The question is not whose game suffers more in the absence of the other. The question is: Who contributes more to the Barcelona collective play, who would Barcelona miss more? I’ve stated my reasons why I believe the answer is Messi. There are arguments for Xavi, but I believe Messi’s combination of creative play and ruthless finishing outmatch not just Xavi, but every player bar a select few all time greats (Pele, Di Stefano, Cruyff, Maradona, and a few others. Messi’s consistently transcendent play over the last 3 years absolutely puts him on that pedestal.).
Your following paragraph is an indictment of Maradona, and the other Argentine creators, not Messi. The fact that Messi was forced to adapt to an unfamiliar role by Maradona’s archaic tactics, yet still created huge numbers of chances, says a lot about his ability as a player.
@Footballing Brain
Xavi and Messi are both creators with their respective strengths (Xavi dominates buildup, Messi creates chances and also finishes them). Messi actually assists just as many goals as Xavi (actually a lot more this season, but that’s slightly unfair due to Xavi’s struggles with fitness).
@matt I agree with much of that, and last night’s match against Depor was a case in point. When Xavi’s not there, Messi rifles through his dressing-up box and puts his Xavi costume on. The result: three assists (one disallowed as offside) and a goal. And even the goal was a Xaviesque goal, not a typical Messi one – the best most gob-openingly perfect free kick we’re likely to see this season. (The only one of the four goals that Messi played no part in was Iniesta’s, because while Messi was playing Xavi, Iniesta was seconded to play Messi. He cut in from the right-hand corner of the box, moved the ball horizontally along the line, found his gap and rifled the ball into the corner of the net.)
Nobody – least of all Barcelona’s coaching staff and the other players – can doubt that Messi is irreplaceable, unmatchable, inimitable. And that’s precisely why Xavi is far more useful as the model to be aspired to. Let’s face it, how can you realistically tell a young player coming up through the system – even a brilliant one – to “play like Messi”. You can’t. You can’t even define what that means. But “play like Xavi” does mean something, and it’s something that, although certainly not easily achieved, can at least be attempted. Xavi is the beacon that shows the way.
@M.G. “Tiki taka [...] the most ineffective form of play in an attacking sense”. Barcelona have won all of their last ten Liga matches, scoring forty-three goals (and conceding four). You were saying?
@Footballing Brain: “On what grounds are ‘Barca so much more effective than Spain’?”
Barca are an unstoppable force of 5-0s and Messi hat-tricks; Spain barely scrape each of their matches (if they aren’t losing them 4-0, ahem). Granted, Barca have more regular matches to prove themselves, but Spain’s WC 2010 tally of eight goals in seven matches and the repeated extended 0-0 scorelines were damning. Barca don’t have this goalscoring dilemma.
Exclude Spain’s two games vs. Russia, in which they perhaps matched up well against a particular opponent. Take most of their key games over the successful spell:
Spain 0-0 Italy 08
Spain 1-0 Germany 08
Spain 1-0 Portugal 10
Spain 1-0 Germany 10
Spain 1-0 Holland 10
For all the power of their semi-final performance vs. Germany, these matches were quite featureless and barely included a shot on goal at all (I’ll concede extra time vs. Holland in which Spain flexed some muscle).
Look, I’m happy a ball-playing, elegant team like Spain is winning so many international trophies now, and they are nominally stronger than the other national teams. But, if they can’t force the issue in the penalty box then are they truly stronger than the others, or are they struggling at the same level as them? If they win two tournaments (pleasingly, but…) without playing all comers (ie. Brazil, and yes I’ve read “Against Brazil”* like 10 times and agree with it), are they undisputedly the best, worthy of the ‘most certainly’ label that Mr. Fayyaz claims?
*
http://www.runofplay.com/2009/09/07/against-brazil/
@Shann What I remember my cousin saying was “Xavi team-e Barcelona ro micharkhooneh,” which translated directly into English means “Xavi rotates/spins/turns Barcelona,” but implies that he makes the team tick or operate.
@M.G. You make a good point about Spain’s lack of goals compared to Barca, but as you conceded they spend radically different amounts of time together (and Spain don’t have Messi. Any team could do with Messi). Spain spend sporadic, small amounts of time and occasional intense periods for tournaments. To compare them is somewhat futile anyway, but given the time costaints ect. Spain’s achievments on the international stage are equal to Barca’s on the club stage. That they have been the best international team in the world since 2008, winning all the tournaments possible (let’s be honest Confederations Cup is irrelevant) proves this. Your’e argument that they didn’t ‘play all comers’ is ridiculous. Neither did Barca in winning the Champions League it’s the way a tournament works! A Spain Brazil game would have been fascinating, but Brazil’s lack of a plan b saw them rightly eliminated. Spain beat Holland, Portugal and the tournaments best team in Germany so undoubtedly deserved to win the tournament. They are undisputedly the best.
He who denies that Xavi is one of the 10 best players ever, shows either stupidity or lack of every knowledge regarding soccer.
The idea of Spain as a one-dimensional team grinding out 1-0 wins is largely an artifact of Torres’s terrible World Cup. They scored plenty at Euro 2008 (where they beat Guus Hiddink’s Russia, the breakout team of that tournament’s early stages, by six goals in two games) and won their three Confederations Cup group games by a combined 8-0 before that [grits teeth] fluky loss to the U.S. in the semifinal.
They also scored more goals in their World Cup qualifying rounds (where they went 10-0-0, scoring 28 goals) than any UEFA team except England. And by comparison, it took Brazil 8 more games to score 33 goals in CONMEBOL. Argentina only managed 23 in 18. Spain weren’t the most super-high-octane attacking team in South Africa last summer, but over the past two and a half years they’ve scored as well as anyone.
@Archie_V Very nicely put there, Archie. A player like Messi comes along once every 20 years; he is the exception, the freak, the black swan.
@M.G. Exactly. You can’t tell me that Spain didn’t have luck on their side in the WC.
Xavi’s undeniable talent aside, isn’t “best players of the world” a grammatical disaster?
Anyone else winning would be criminal. Xavi epitomizes modern football. Like the author said, this should be a symbolic appointment as well.
@Toni
I nodded in agreement when i read your post the first time, thinking it said “best passers” (its late). Lets be clear, Xavi is not one of the 10 best players ever. He is one of the best central midfielders ever (on par with Matthaus, Neeskens, Rijkaard, Pirlo, Falcao, Tardelli and a few others), but below the level of the great number 10s (Pele, Maradona, Di Stefano, Platini, Zico, Cruyff…).
@Brian Phillips But doesn’t Spain’s inability to mesmerize without a fully functioning Torres agrees with M.G.’s argument for direct players? At the end of the day, no matter how much possession you have or how precise your passing is, you still need someone who will see the ball through the goal line.
Without Torres, Spain seemed to lack such a player in the World Cup (although Villa did remember to play the part sometimes.) The result was one memorable game, against a sadly Mueller-less Germany, and lots of close calls. (What if Robben had taken just one of the two great chances Sneijder offered him during the final? What if Cardozo hadn’t missed that penalty?)
On the “best player in the world” issue, I think Xavi would be much less noticed, and noticeable, in a less stellar squad, while Messi was amazing even in that amorphous thing Argentina sent to South Africa. I’d go with Messi.
@Lucas Murtinho Oh, I’d vote for Messi too, for what that’s worth. I just think it’s nuts to call Spain “ineffective” on any level. They could certainly have used a fully functioning Torres at the World Cup, but that doesn’t prove anything about direct vs. indirect players—how would they have done if Torres had been brilliant but Xavi had been terrible, etc., and they still won the tournament, after all—if that’s even a meaningful distinction.
Would it not be fair to say that Messi simply has more to his game, while Xavi is a master in one part of it – vision. The expression “he has a footballing brain” could have been invented for him. However, Messi is the finest player in the world because he has a wider range of talents.
It’s like someone split Maradona into two people.
@Footballing Brain : And how much of a Plan B did Spain have? Both times they conceded the first goal in the last few years (vs. USA and Switzerland) they were cooked. They were consistent enough to avoid that scenario, but it would have killed them. (Speculation!)
I actually like Xavi a lot and think he’s the main reason behind Spain’s success. He is unstoppable in his way, but collateral damage in my anti-Spain arguments because his and Spain’s styles are so similar.
Regards,
@M.G. Spain’s Plan B was having Jesus Navas, Fabregas and Fernando Llorente on the bench. When they brought them on they could play a more direct style. To quote from ZonalMarking ‘three of the four goals Spain scored in the knockout stages came after they had made a substitution, and shifted their system slightly. Their substitutes bench was comprised of players who gave them a different option, rather than being lesser versions of their first choice XI: Cesc Fabregas gave them driving runs that are not Xavi’s forte, Fernando Llorente was a traditional targetman and thrives on balls in the air, not a particular feature of David Villa or Fernando Torres’ game, and Jesus Navas was an old-fashioned winger that liked to get to the byline, whereas Villa, Andres Iniesta and Pedro Rodriguez liked to come inside’ http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/09/03/fifa-2010-technical-report-summary/ (last point)
A true great is measured by success, and remains in history for THAT reason. Xavi and Iniesta, in the past four years, has won every major competition. Messi hasn’t – and as it’s a World Cup year, I feel they have an advantage. (Xavi edges it – for the reasons you have listed)
However, I think Messi deserves it. In the modern game a footballer must be adaptable, I believe it was Mourinho who one said – a striker must be more than a strike (Please correct me if I’m wrong) , and Messi is that – he is a more complete player.
That said you can argue that without the cool head of Xavi, with intricate, accurate passing, would Messi take as many risks by bombing forward (leaving gaps) to collect a ball – that he knows will get to him? He has perhaps struggled for Argentina because Cambiasso was missed and had to settle for a Veron (who’s not really in the same class) – nor are they as technically gifted as Xavi.
It’s difficult.
As “Footballing Brain” just mentioned Spain has exceptional ability & resources in having Plan B and Plan C’s.
This MG guy is coming off as Football illiterate to me in all honesty.
Name a team which tried to play “Football” with Spain in WC except Chile?
Its all park the bus lets hit ‘em on the counter.
And lets not talk about the “Heck they are too good lets just kick the shit out of them” Dutch strategy.
As Arrigo Sacchi proved,
The best possible attackers can’t defeat an organized attack, even when the defense has fewer players
His famous 5 v 10 experiment at AC Milan, with van basten, guillet etc.
Learn some football.
This Spain side among the greatest ever, along with Hungary Brazil and Dutch sides of the past.
2 official Defeats in last 4 years. Beat that suckers.
“Why is Barca so much more effective than Spain, when they are almost the same team? Because of the directness of Messi’s attacks.”
Maybe Barcelona appears more effective because they play in a league with 2 or 3 good teams, and the Spain you remember is the one which played against the World’s best national teams is South Africa? If you watched Spain during qualifying and friendlies, they were nearly as dominant as Barcelona in La Liga I think, despite not having the experience playing together (another important factor to consider).
Xavi is tremendous, there is no question about that. However, I disagree. I think that Messi deserved the award. I am a Barcelona fan, and I love Xavi. But when people talk about his greatness, all they refer to is his passing. Passing is great; in fact its my favorite part of the game. But if it doesn’t lead to goals, what good is it to kick the ball about? So far this season, Messi is second in La Liga behind Ronaldo with 18 goals. Consider that his teammate David Villa is 3rd in La Liga with 12. Real rely far more on Ronaldo than Barcelona do on Messi to score goals. Without David Villa on the team he would undoubtedly have more. The closest player to Ronaldo on Real is Mesut Ozil who has only 5.
More importantly, Messi is leading La Liga in assists with 12. Xavi only has 3. Consider that Messi is one of the top goal scorers in the world AND he’s also leading La Liga in assists. Incredible.
Statistically speaking, it’s not even close. According to the Castrol Rankings, Messi has 1256 points this season, good for number one in the world. Ronaldo is number two with only 965. Xavi has only 785 and Iniesta has 740. The Castrol Rankings cover all domestic league and Champions League matches for the 5 major leagues in Europe. Remember that the Castrol Index tracks every pass, tackle, goal, and movement on the field. So it captures all of Xavi’s orchestrating brilliance and his passing. That said, Messi is ahead of all his competition by a mile.
If we look at the World Cup, Xavi ranked 52nd with a rating of 8.77. Messi was 53rd with a rating of 8.76. Aside from the fact that Xavi won the World Cup with Spain (which is a team award), their statistical performance was virtually identical.
I know people want to attach more importance to the World Cup than to the domestic league season. On some level that makes sense because the World Cup is the biggest stage in the world. But let’s keep in mind that it’s only an 8 week tournament. Do we want to give an award to Xavi or Iniesta based on 8 weeks? If they were having similar domestic league and Champions League seasons to Messi then I would say give the award to Xavi. But Messi is so far ahead of anyone else in the world for his domestic and Champions League season, and aside from the World Cup victory so close to Xavi in his performance at the World Cup, that I think he deserves it.
@Jason Platzer
“Remember that the Castrol Index tracks every pass, tackle, goal, and movement on the field. So it captures all of Xavi’s orchestrating brilliance and his passing.”
I think i just saw Ray throw up a little bit.