Aren't comparisons between two players unfair, especially if both players are top players in their own right ?

Question

Whenever there is a comparison question, I make it a point to mention that such comparisons are unfair on the players and their fans .. But I also add we all are guilty of that; I mean, which of us hasn't posted a comparison question on here .. These questions seem to be very popular especially in this section ..

In the English football section, once someone was comparing Cuauhtemoc Blanco with Totti .. I said Totti may be slightly better than Blanco as a player but as far as importance goes Totti is no more important to AS Roma and Italy than Blanco is to Club America and Mexico ..

But then that's more or less a justifiable comparison as the players played in SIMILAR POSITIONS ( CAM / Second Striker ) and had SIMILAR PLAYING STYLES .. Players can play in the same position but may have different playing styles which is the reason why I capitalized those words ..

Now, what irks me are comparisons between two great players who played in different positions and also had different playing styles .. Yes, I'm talking about the comparisons between Xavi and Zidane as posted earlier in this section ..

Now, the Madridistas in this section are not too familiar with the differences between positions and playing styles .. Xavi is a deep-lying Central Midfield play maker while Zidane was a Central Attacking Midfielder ..

While I'm in no way trying to deny the fact about Zidane being one of the all-time greats in football and that he was technically better than Xavi, the question arises: was the comparison fair ?? ..

Deep-lying CM play makers are a luxury .. Hell, nowadays proper play makers are a luxury .. The only current player I would say resembling Xavi in playing style would obviously be Pirlo ..

Madridistas complain how Xavi can't beat 3-4 defenders like Zidane used to .. How many times did you see Pirlo do so ?? .. Tell me, how many times ?? .. I'm telling you, it's not their ( deep-lying CM ) style ..

If you are indeed comparing players with different playing styles, why not compare a defensive CM like De Jong with Xavi ?? .. We might say 'Oh, De Jong can only tackle', 'he doesn't have Xavi's vision' .. But then, is that not his job ?? .. De Jong's job is to break up play and if he's good at it, he is a good player .. That would be the logical end to the debate: De Jong is a good defensive CM while Xavi is a good CM play maker .. End of ..

Same logic applies in the comparison between Xavi and Zidane ..

Answer 1

Football is a game of opinion.



My opinion and your opinion will differ at times and we would agree at times.



I have playing experience and serious coaching experience and qualifications but that doesn't make my opinion any more valid than yours.



This is what makes OUR game great, this is why we should never sanitise it by outlawing contact & tackling.



My one concern is why referees opinions differ, there should be greater consistency when it comes to them, that's why video technology can help clean up the game.



Finally to use your brilliant XAVI v De Jong example. They cannot be compared, it cannot be established who is better, this perfectly sums up your point.

Answer 2

Well technically if you throw out all stats and records the comparison is always going to be unfair because as humans we will most likely no doubt favor one of the players over the other and try to show that they are better even though we're doing a "comparison". So to answer your question yes it is unfair, but hey it's fun arguing with friends about it :)

Answer 3

Kobe and D Wade. They are both great players but their styles are totally different. Kobe is mainly a jump shooter while D Wade does all of his attacking around the rim. Plus Wade cant shoot the three, he is more like Jordan in that he was free throw line and below like Kobe said in an interview last yr on TNT.