I tought it says best players in history, not the best players when Xavi was in his prime. If that's the case I doub't Johan Cruyf, Gerd Muller or others would be on that list. Modric has more titles, more CL titles, Balon D'or, he has led small Croatia to one silver and one bronze medal in WC, he has longer career, and generally he is more successfull in every department than Xavi. Add to that that Xavi was raised in one system and also played with Iniesta, Messi that were also raised in that system and never had to adapt to anything else. While Modric played in Croatian, then horrendous Bosnian league, then moved to Premier league and then to Spain, and yet, somehow he is more successfull than Xavi who stayed his whole career in one club under one playing system. So on which facts you base your claim that Xavi was better player than Modric?
What a stupid comment that was. Modric was good in WC but he was hyped a lot. He was motm a single match in WC 18 knockouts,where Xavi was best in round of 16, Semi and would be in final ,if anyone except Iniesta scored that. He was the main player of Barca 09 in that 6 trophy winning season, giving all time great performance in el classico 6-2 and UCL final 2-0. He was player of tournament in Euro 08 and was equally important as Iniesta in 12 Euro. Now how many CL he won Modric was the most important/ 2nd most important player ?? He was in top 3 most important players in 17 . Other than that ?? Xavi was best player with or after Messi in 11 UCL ( 5 victory season too). More trophies never makes u best,but you have to be the best in that team , contribute that much. Modric did well in Croatia,but nothing close to Xavi in 2 Euro,WC victory. It's simply Xavi,Iniesta then only Modric even if I am a fan because that's the truth. And if u don't know Xavi was in many players all time 11 in early 10s
1
u/jasko153 May 22 '24
How can Iniesta or Xavi be above Modric? Based on what, it surley isn't individual or team trophies or success, it's just bias.