Rivaldo V Zidane

Alive and Kicking wrote:

sheva7 wrote:Like Pierre said before, ZZ golden moments at WCs are overrated. They all came from dead ball situations. IMO Rivaldo performances at WCs are much better than his performances.

Yes, right. It's funny to hear that from a Brazilian guy. Lol!
Zidane's moments in the world cup aren't merely his two goals in Brazil, it's more the way he played, the way he orchestrated the game in crucial moments. You have to remember that before the world cup 2007, no one gave a slight chance for France winning it. But when Zidane (and also Makelele) decided to come back to the national team, the team changed their way of playing and were again successful mainly because he had such a big influence on others.

Alright, he was brilliant in a match against a ridiculous Brazil squad that sooner or later would concede a goal and would lose to any single squad that reached the quarter finals, except England.

Let's remember his decisive moments at WCs...two goals from cks in the final, fk assist agaisnt brazil, penalty against Portugal, penalty against Italy.

Now think about Rivaldo decisive moments at WC...I will give you a little help...Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, England and Germany. Just compare.

sheva7 wrote:

Alive and Kicking wrote:

sheva7 wrote:Like Pierre said before, ZZ golden moments at WCs are overrated. They all came from dead ball situations. IMO Rivaldo performances at WCs are much better than his performances.

Yes, right. It's funny to hear that from a Brazilian guy. Lol!
Zidane's moments in the world cup aren't merely his two goals in Brazil, it's more the way he played, the way he orchestrated the game in crucial moments. You have to remember that before the world cup 2007, no one gave a slight chance for France winning it. But when Zidane (and also Makelele) decided to come back to the national team, the team changed their way of playing and were again successful mainly because he had such a big influence on others.

Alright, he was brilliant in a match against a ridiculous Brazil squad that sooner or later would concede a goal and would lose to any single squad that reached the quarter finals, except England.

Let's remember his decisive moments at WCs...two goals from cks in the final, fk assist agaisnt brazil, penalty against Portugal, penalty against Italy.

Now think about Rivaldo decisive moments at WC...I will give you a little help...Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, England and Germany. Just compare.

This is getting a little unfair now. Brazil were clear favourites for the World Cup in 2006!!

sheva7 wrote:

Torrente wrote:

sheva7 wrote:At least he didn't end his career after 3 straight trophyless seasons at the so called "biggest club in the world"...

No, but Rivaldo ended it with 2 straight trophiless seasons in Barcelona, then making a fool of himself in Seria A where Zidane was king, and going to a pathetic league because no big team could be bothered with him.

And of course, Zidane won the CL, unlike Rivaldo

So ZZ was the king of Serie A? Maybe that's why Juve couldn't win the league and even played in the Intertoto when he became their main player.

You can't blame Rivaldo for Barca's lack of sucess. Even being sorrounded by mediocre players he played very, very well. In fact he scored a hat trick at Bernabeu but the referee disalowed a legitimate goal and the game end tied.

Rivaldo also had excellent performances in the UCL. But there's a difference between playing with players like Roberto Carlos, Raul and Figo at their prime and average players.

sheva7 wrote:

Torrente wrote:

sheva7 wrote:At least he didn't end his career after 3 straight trophyless seasons at the so called "biggest club in the world"...

No, but Rivaldo ended it with 2 straight trophiless seasons in Barcelona, then making a fool of himself in Seria A where Zidane was king, and going to a pathetic league because no big team could be bothered with him.

And of course, Zidane won the CL, unlike Rivaldo

So ZZ was the king of Serie A? Maybe that's why Juve couldn't win the league and even played in the Intertoto when he became their main player.

You can't blame Rivaldo for Barca's lack of sucess. Even being sorrounded by mediocre players he played very, very well. In fact he scored a hat trick at Bernabeu but the referee disalowed a legitimate goal and the game end tied.

Rivaldo also had excellent performances in the UCL. But there's a difference between playing with players like Roberto Carlos, Raul and Figo at their prime and average players.

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Alive and Kicking wrote:

sheva7 wrote:Like Pierre said before, ZZ golden moments at WCs are overrated. They all came from dead ball situations. IMO Rivaldo performances at WCs are much better than his performances.

Yes, right. It's funny to hear that from a Brazilian guy. Lol!
Zidane's moments in the world cup aren't merely his two goals in Brazil, it's more the way he played, the way he orchestrated the game in crucial moments. You have to remember that before the world cup 2007, no one gave a slight chance for France winning it. But when Zidane (and also Makelele) decided to come back to the national team, the team changed their way of playing and were again successful mainly because he had such a big influence on others.

Alright, he was brilliant in a match against a ridiculous Brazil squad that sooner or later would concede a goal and would lose to any single squad that reached the quarter finals, except England.

Let's remember his decisive moments at WCs...two goals from cks in the final, fk assist agaisnt brazil, penalty against Portugal, penalty against Italy.

Now think about Rivaldo decisive moments at WC...I will give you a little help...Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, England and Germany. Just compare.

This is getting a little unfair now. Brazil were clear favourites for the World Cup in 2006!!

Played awfully in 4 of 5 matches at the 2006 WC. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Alive and Kicking wrote:

sheva7 wrote:Like Pierre said before, ZZ golden moments at WCs are overrated. They all came from dead ball situations. IMO Rivaldo performances at WCs are much better than his performances.

Yes, right. It's funny to hear that from a Brazilian guy. Lol!
Zidane's moments in the world cup aren't merely his two goals in Brazil, it's more the way he played, the way he orchestrated the game in crucial moments. You have to remember that before the world cup 2007, no one gave a slight chance for France winning it. But when Zidane (and also Makelele) decided to come back to the national team, the team changed their way of playing and were again successful mainly because he had such a big influence on others.

Alright, he was brilliant in a match against a ridiculous Brazil squad that sooner or later would concede a goal and would lose to any single squad that reached the quarter finals, except England.

Let's remember his decisive moments at WCs...two goals from cks in the final, fk assist agaisnt brazil, penalty against Portugal, penalty against Italy.

Now think about Rivaldo decisive moments at WC...I will give you a little help...Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, England and Germany. Just compare.

This is getting a little unfair now. Brazil were clear favourites for the World Cup in 2006!!

Played awfully in 4 of 5 matches at the 2006 WC. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Torrente wrote:

sheva7 wrote:At least he didn't end his career after 3 straight trophyless seasons at the so called "biggest club in the world"...

No, but Rivaldo ended it with 2 straight trophiless seasons in Barcelona, then making a fool of himself in Seria A where Zidane was king, and going to a pathetic league because no big team could be bothered with him.

And of course, Zidane won the CL, unlike Rivaldo

So ZZ was the king of Serie A? Maybe that's why Juve couldn't win the league and even played in the Intertoto when he became their main player.

You can't blame Rivaldo for Barca's lack of sucess. Even being sorrounded by mediocre players he played very, very well. In fact he scored a hat trick at Bernabeu but the referee disalowed a legitimate goal and the game end tied.

Rivaldo also had excellent performances in the UCL. But there's a difference between playing with players like Roberto Carlos, Raul and Figo at their prime and average players.

ZZ was not the king of Serie A, he was definately one of the best players there at the time though. Juve had a bad season in 98-99, but why do you have to blame Zidane for the lack of success? Juve had no real replacement for Del Piero, while some of the older players (Di Livio, Deschamps etc.) were losing their form. The 2 seasons after that, Juve were right up there and they only marginally lost out on the Scudetto. I don't think you can blame Zidane for that. More that you need a bit of luck to win the title, and Juve didnt get it.

You've got to be joking if you think Barca had mediocre players. Luis Enrique, Figo, Kluivert, De Boer, Overmars etc. hardly mediocre is it?

Zidane also had excellent performances in the CL with Real AND Juve.

sheva7 wrote:

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Alive and Kicking wrote:

sheva7 wrote:Like Pierre said before, ZZ golden moments at WCs are overrated. They all came from dead ball situations. IMO Rivaldo performances at WCs are much better than his performances.

Yes, right. It's funny to hear that from a Brazilian guy. Lol!
Zidane's moments in the world cup aren't merely his two goals in Brazil, it's more the way he played, the way he orchestrated the game in crucial moments. You have to remember that before the world cup 2007, no one gave a slight chance for France winning it. But when Zidane (and also Makelele) decided to come back to the national team, the team changed their way of playing and were again successful mainly because he had such a big influence on others.

Alright, he was brilliant in a match against a ridiculous Brazil squad that sooner or later would concede a goal and would lose to any single squad that reached the quarter finals, except England.

Let's remember his decisive moments at WCs...two goals from cks in the final, fk assist agaisnt brazil, penalty against Portugal, penalty against Italy.

Now think about Rivaldo decisive moments at WC...I will give you a little help...Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, England and Germany. Just compare.

This is getting a little unfair now. Brazil were clear favourites for the World Cup in 2006!!

Played awfully in 4 of 5 matches at the 2006 WC. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

He was great against Spain, Brazil, and played well in the final, though admittedly not great.

But he was 34 years old in that world cup. Rivaldo was 34 at the same time and where was he? Back in Brazil scratching his own ass while watching the world cup on TV.

sheva7 wrote:

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Torrente wrote:

sheva7 wrote:At least he didn't end his career after 3 straight trophyless seasons at the so called "biggest club in the world"...

No, but Rivaldo ended it with 2 straight trophiless seasons in Barcelona, then making a fool of himself in Seria A where Zidane was king, and going to a pathetic league because no big team could be bothered with him.

And of course, Zidane won the CL, unlike Rivaldo

So ZZ was the king of Serie A? Maybe that's why Juve couldn't win the league and even played in the Intertoto when he became their main player.

You can't blame Rivaldo for Barca's lack of sucess. Even being sorrounded by mediocre players he played very, very well. In fact he scored a hat trick at Bernabeu but the referee disalowed a legitimate goal and the game end tied.

Rivaldo also had excellent performances in the UCL. But there's a difference between playing with players like Roberto Carlos, Raul and Figo at their prime and average players.

ZZ was not the king of Serie A, he was definately one of the best players there at the time though. Juve had a bad season in 98-99, but why do you have to blame Zidane for the lack of success? Juve had no real replacement for Del Piero, while some of the older players (Di Livio, Deschamps etc.) were losing their form. The 2 seasons after that, Juve were right up there and they only marginally lost out on the Scudetto. I don't think you can blame Zidane for that. More that you need a bit of luck to win the title, and Juve didnt get it.

You've got to be joking if you think Barca had mediocre players. Luis Enrique, Figo, Kluivert, De Boer, Overmars etc. hardly mediocre is it?

Zidane also had excellent performances in the CL with Real AND Juve.

The point is that Zidane was sorounded by WC players at their prime. Makelele, Raul, Figo, Roberto Carlos, Ronaldo. Legends.

You've mentioned great players, but tell me if Overmars and Petit ever played at Barca like they played at Arsenal? Kluivert was in decline after 2000, he missed a lot of easy goals. Has Saviola ever fullfiled his potential at Barça or anywhere? Hesp, Bonano were the goalkeepers. Reiziger was the right back. A decadent Sergi was the left back. Christanval or Patrick Anderson, who clearly past his best, were the defenders. Geovanni and Rochemback weren't good enough to play for Barça. Xavi and Puyol were too young and missed experience. They were commanded by coaches like Rexach and Serra Ferrer.

At that time those players I mentioned were mediocre, except de Boer and Cocu.

Alright, I can't blame him for the 99 season, that's unfair.

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Torrente wrote:

sheva7 wrote:At least he didn't end his career after 3 straight trophyless seasons at the so called "biggest club in the world"...

No, but Rivaldo ended it with 2 straight trophiless seasons in Barcelona, then making a fool of himself in Seria A where Zidane was king, and going to a pathetic league because no big team could be bothered with him.

And of course, Zidane won the CL, unlike Rivaldo

So ZZ was the king of Serie A? Maybe that's why Juve couldn't win the league and even played in the Intertoto when he became their main player.

You can't blame Rivaldo for Barca's lack of sucess. Even being sorrounded by mediocre players he played very, very well. In fact he scored a hat trick at Bernabeu but the referee disalowed a legitimate goal and the game end tied.

Rivaldo also had excellent performances in the UCL. But there's a difference between playing with players like Roberto Carlos, Raul and Figo at their prime and average players.

ZZ was not the king of Serie A, he was definately one of the best players there at the time though. Juve had a bad season in 98-99, but why do you have to blame Zidane for the lack of success? Juve had no real replacement for Del Piero, while some of the older players (Di Livio, Deschamps etc.) were losing their form. The 2 seasons after that, Juve were right up there and they only marginally lost out on the Scudetto. I don't think you can blame Zidane for that. More that you need a bit of luck to win the title, and Juve didnt get it.

You've got to be joking if you think Barca had mediocre players. Luis Enrique, Figo, Kluivert, De Boer, Overmars etc. hardly mediocre is it?

Zidane also had excellent performances in the CL with Real AND Juve.

The point is that Zidane was sorounded by WC players at their prime. Makelele, Raul, Figo, Roberto Carlos, Ronaldo. Legends.

You've mentioned great players, but tell me if Overmars and Petit ever played at Barca like they played at Arsenal? Kluivert was in decline after 2000, he missed a lot of easy goals. Has Saviola ever fullfiled his potential at Barça or anywhere? Hesp, Bonano were the goalkeepers. Reiziger was the right back. A decadent Sergi was the left back. Christanval or Patrick Anderson, who clearly past his best, were the defenders. Geovanni and Rochemback weren't good enough to play for Barça. Xavi and Puyol were too young and missed experience. They were commanded by coaches like Rexach and Serra Ferrer.

At that time those players I mentioned were mediocre, except de Boer and Cocu.

Alright, I can't blame him for the 99 season, that's unfair.

Clutching at straws really. I never mentioned Petit. Overmars did fairly well at Barca. You must be joking about Kluivert. He was still scoring goals for fun up until the 2002-03 season.

98-99 FC Barcelone 15 Goals, 34 Games (-) 1 Goals, 7 Games
99-00 FC Barcelone 15 Goals, 26 Games 7 Goals, 14 Games (Champions League) 14 Goals, 14 Games
00-01 FC Barcelone 18 Goals, 31 Games 2 + 3 Goals, 4 + 8 Games (Champions League + UEFA Cup) 5 Goals, 7 Games
01-02 FC Barcelone 18 Goals, 33 Games 7 Goals, 16 Games (Champions League) 3 Games
02-03 FC Barcelone 17 Goals, 36 Games 5 Goals, 15 Games (Champions League)

If anything, it looks like he improved after 2000. I never mentioned Saviola, but he was good in his first season at Barca. After that its irrelevant since Rivaldo had already left.

So De Boer, Cocu, Luis Enrique, Guardiola, Kluivert, Sergi - you call them medicore players. Please tell me if i'm missing something, but that seems like a pretty awesome team to me.

Again i sense double standards. You fail to mention that Real had a 34 yo Hierro and Ivan Helguera as their centre backs. You failed to mention that they didnt properly replace Makelele and also brought in alot of mediocre players like Pablo Garcia, Graveson, Mejia etc. and had coaches like Luxemburgo and Quieroz plus other care taker managers.

sheva7 wrote:

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Torrente wrote:

sheva7 wrote:At least he didn't end his career after 3 straight trophyless seasons at the so called "biggest club in the world"...

No, but Rivaldo ended it with 2 straight trophiless seasons in Barcelona, then making a fool of himself in Seria A where Zidane was king, and going to a pathetic league because no big team could be bothered with him.

And of course, Zidane won the CL, unlike Rivaldo

So ZZ was the king of Serie A? Maybe that's why Juve couldn't win the league and even played in the Intertoto when he became their main player.

You can't blame Rivaldo for Barca's lack of sucess. Even being sorrounded by mediocre players he played very, very well. In fact he scored a hat trick at Bernabeu but the referee disalowed a legitimate goal and the game end tied.

Rivaldo also had excellent performances in the UCL. But there's a difference between playing with players like Roberto Carlos, Raul and Figo at their prime and average players.

ZZ was not the king of Serie A, he was definately one of the best players there at the time though. Juve had a bad season in 98-99, but why do you have to blame Zidane for the lack of success? Juve had no real replacement for Del Piero, while some of the older players (Di Livio, Deschamps etc.) were losing their form. The 2 seasons after that, Juve were right up there and they only marginally lost out on the Scudetto. I don't think you can blame Zidane for that. More that you need a bit of luck to win the title, and Juve didnt get it.

You've got to be joking if you think Barca had mediocre players. Luis Enrique, Figo, Kluivert, De Boer, Overmars etc. hardly mediocre is it?

Zidane also had excellent performances in the CL with Real AND Juve.

The point is that Zidane was sorounded by WC players at their prime. Makelele, Raul, Figo, Roberto Carlos, Ronaldo. Legends.

You've mentioned great players, but tell me if Overmars and Petit ever played at Barca like they played at Arsenal? Kluivert was in decline after 2000, he missed a lot of easy goals. Has Saviola ever fullfiled his potential at Barça or anywhere? Hesp, Bonano were the goalkeepers. Reiziger was the right back. A decadent Sergi was the left back. Christanval or Patrick Anderson, who clearly past his best, were the defenders. Geovanni and Rochemback weren't good enough to play for Barça. Xavi and Puyol were too young and missed experience. They were commanded by coaches like Rexach and Serra Ferrer.

At that time those players I mentioned were mediocre, except de Boer and Cocu.

Alright, I can't blame him for the 99 season, that's unfair.

Clutching at straws really. I never mentioned Petit. Overmars did fairly well at Barca. You must be joking about Kluivert. He was still scoring goals for fun up until the 2002-03 season.

98-99 FC Barcelone 15 Goals, 34 Games (-) 1 Goals, 7 Games
99-00 FC Barcelone 15 Goals, 26 Games 7 Goals, 14 Games (Champions League) 14 Goals, 14 Games
00-01 FC Barcelone 18 Goals, 31 Games 2 + 3 Goals, 4 + 8 Games (Champions League + UEFA Cup) 5 Goals, 7 Games
01-02 FC Barcelone 18 Goals, 33 Games 7 Goals, 16 Games (Champions League) 3 Games
02-03 FC Barcelone 17 Goals, 36 Games 5 Goals, 15 Games (Champions League)

If anything, it looks like he improved after 2000. I never mentioned Saviola, but he was good in his first season at Barca. After that its irrelevant since Rivaldo had already left.

So De Boer, Cocu, Luis Enrique, Guardiola, Kluivert, Sergi - you call them medicore players. Please tell me if i'm missing something, but that seems like a pretty awesome team to me.

Again i sense double standards. You fail to mention that Real had a 34 yo Hierro and Ivan Helguera as their centre backs. You failed to mention that they didnt properly replace Makelele and also brought in alot of mediocre players like Pablo Garcia, Graveson, Mejia etc. and had coaches like Luxemburgo and Quieroz plus other care taker managers.

If you read the previous posts carefully you will find out that we were talking about his trophyless years at Barca.

What's wrong with Helguera? He was excelent until del Bosque departure.

Now talking about the players you've mentioned. Compare Luis Enrique with Figo, Sergi with R. Carlos, Kluivert with Raul, Makelele with Guardiola. All at their prime. Who had better teammates?

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

BoBo Vieri wrote:

sheva7 wrote:

Torrente wrote:

sheva7 wrote:At least he didn't end his career after 3 straight trophyless seasons at the so called "biggest club in the world"...

No, but Rivaldo ended it with 2 straight trophiless seasons in Barcelona, then making a fool of himself in Seria A where Zidane was king, and going to a pathetic league because no big team could be bothered with him.

And of course, Zidane won the CL, unlike Rivaldo

So ZZ was the king of Serie A? Maybe that's why Juve couldn't win the league and even played in the Intertoto when he became their main player.

You can't blame Rivaldo for Barca's lack of sucess. Even being sorrounded by mediocre players he played very, very well. In fact he scored a hat trick at Bernabeu but the referee disalowed a legitimate goal and the game end tied.

Rivaldo also had excellent performances in the UCL. But there's a difference between playing with players like Roberto Carlos, Raul and Figo at their prime and average players.

ZZ was not the king of Serie A, he was definately one of the best players there at the time though. Juve had a bad season in 98-99, but why do you have to blame Zidane for the lack of success? Juve had no real replacement for Del Piero, while some of the older players (Di Livio, Deschamps etc.) were losing their form. The 2 seasons after that, Juve were right up there and they only marginally lost out on the Scudetto. I don't think you can blame Zidane for that. More that you need a bit of luck to win the title, and Juve didnt get it.

You've got to be joking if you think Barca had mediocre players. Luis Enrique, Figo, Kluivert, De Boer, Overmars etc. hardly mediocre is it?

Zidane also had excellent performances in the CL with Real AND Juve.

The point is that Zidane was sorounded by WC players at their prime. Makelele, Raul, Figo, Roberto Carlos, Ronaldo. Legends.

You've mentioned great players, but tell me if Overmars and Petit ever played at Barca like they played at Arsenal? Kluivert was in decline after 2000, he missed a lot of easy goals. Has Saviola ever fullfiled his potential at Barça or anywhere? Hesp, Bonano were the goalkeepers. Reiziger was the right back. A decadent Sergi was the left back. Christanval or Patrick Anderson, who clearly past his best, were the defenders. Geovanni and Rochemback weren't good enough to play for Barça. Xavi and Puyol were too young and missed experience. They were commanded by coaches like Rexach and Serra Ferrer.

At that time those players I mentioned were mediocre, except de Boer and Cocu.

Alright, I can't blame him for the 99 season, that's unfair.

Clutching at straws really. I never mentioned Petit. Overmars did fairly well at Barca. You must be joking about Kluivert. He was still scoring goals for fun up until the 2002-03 season.

98-99 FC Barcelone 15 Goals, 34 Games (-) 1 Goals, 7 Games
99-00 FC Barcelone 15 Goals, 26 Games 7 Goals, 14 Games (Champions League) 14 Goals, 14 Games
00-01 FC Barcelone 18 Goals, 31 Games 2 + 3 Goals, 4 + 8 Games (Champions League + UEFA Cup) 5 Goals, 7 Games
01-02 FC Barcelone 18 Goals, 33 Games 7 Goals, 16 Games (Champions League) 3 Games
02-03 FC Barcelone 17 Goals, 36 Games 5 Goals, 15 Games (Champions League)

If anything, it looks like he improved after 2000. I never mentioned Saviola, but he was good in his first season at Barca. After that its irrelevant since Rivaldo had already left.

So De Boer, Cocu, Luis Enrique, Guardiola, Kluivert, Sergi - you call them medicore players. Please tell me if i'm missing something, but that seems like a pretty awesome team to me.

Again i sense double standards. You fail to mention that Real had a 34 yo Hierro and Ivan Helguera as their centre backs. You failed to mention that they didnt properly replace Makelele and also brought in alot of mediocre players like Pablo Garcia, Graveson, Mejia etc. and had coaches like Luxemburgo and Quieroz plus other care taker managers.

If you read the previous posts carefully you will find out that we were talking about his trophyless years at Barca.

What's wrong with Helguera? He was excelent until del Bosque departure.

Now talking about the players you've mentioned. Compare Luis Enrique with Figo, Sergi with R. Carlos, Kluivert with Raul, Makelele with Guardiola. All at their prime. Who had better teammates?

Yeh i know you were. Whats your point?

Helguera worked very hard, but you can't deny that he made alot of mistakes and his positioning was very suspect.

Rivaldo played with Figo in 99-00 incase you didnt realise. Kluivert and Raul were as good as each other. Guardiola and Makelele are completely different players. So Real had a better left back (even tho Carlos cost Real the CL in 2003). I'm sure this made all the difference.

Torrente wrote:

gone wrote:

And one more thing: Rivalo didn't end his career with a head but.

No. He ended it with a pathetic injury faking against Turkey, a horrible season with Milan where he was voted "worst player in Seria A" and then 2 seasons in Olympiakos

gone wrote:

Torrente wrote:

gone wrote:

And one more thing: Rivalo didn't end his career with a head but.

No. He ended it with a pathetic injury faking against Turkey, a horrible season with Milan where he was voted "worst player in Seria A" and then 2 seasons in Olympiakos

At Barca he ended with a overhead kick form 16 m in the last min of the season, securing a CL place.

BTW, Olympiakos are far from being a weak team and his 2 years there where brilliant. But you wouldn't know that.

gone wrote:

Torrente wrote:

gone wrote:

And one more thing: Rivalo didn't end his career with a head but.

No. He ended it with a pathetic injury faking against Turkey, a horrible season with Milan where he was voted "worst player in Seria A" and then 2 seasons in Olympiakos

At Barca he ended with a overhead kick form 16 m in the last min of the season, securing a CL place.

BTW, Olympiakos are far from being a weak team and his 2 years there where brilliant. But you wouldn't know that.

kas wrote:Rivaldo was a failure in Milan because Ancelotti never played him. They expected instant magic and never gave him chances to settle in.

Torrente wrote:

gone wrote:

Torrente wrote:

gone wrote:

And one more thing: Rivalo didn't end his career with a head but.

No. He ended it with a pathetic injury faking against Turkey, a horrible season with Milan where he was voted "worst player in Seria A" and then 2 seasons in Olympiakos

At Barca he ended with a overhead kick form 16 m in the last min of the season, securing a CL place.

BTW, Olympiakos are far from being a weak team and his 2 years there where brilliant. But you wouldn't know that.

No he didn't. That happened over a year before he left. But of course, you wouldn't know that.

And Olympiakos is weak by European standards and so is the Greek league. There's no going around that.

kas wrote:Yeah, it was also a matter of timing I guess. Personally I was disappointed he went to Greece so quickly. He could have easily done well in another Spanish or Italian club.

Also, none of us here know much about the Greek league, but from what I've heard Rivaldo has been fantastic for Olympiakos. Understandable considering the league's level, but also shows his quality. In fact, he has done a Figo this summer and signed for their arch rivals AEK Athens.

gone wrote:

kas wrote:Yeah, it was also a matter of timing I guess. Personally I was disappointed he went to Greece so quickly. He could have easily done well in another Spanish or Italian club.

Also, none of us here know much about the Greek league, but from what I've heard Rivaldo has been fantastic for Olympiakos. Understandable considering the league's level, but also shows his quality. In fact, he has done a Figo this summer and signed for their arch rivals AEK Athens.

43 goals in 81 games.

Just for Torrente, this is how weak they are:

Dec 6: Olympiakos (Piraeus) 2 - Real Madrid 1
[Erol Bulut 50, Vitor Borba Ferreira “Rivaldo” 87; Sergio Ramos 7]

Torrente wrote:

gone wrote:

kas wrote:Yeah, it was also a matter of timing I guess. Personally I was disappointed he went to Greece so quickly. He could have easily done well in another Spanish or Italian club.

Also, none of us here know much about the Greek league, but from what I've heard Rivaldo has been fantastic for Olympiakos. Understandable considering the league's level, but also shows his quality. In fact, he has done a Figo this summer and signed for their arch rivals AEK Athens.

43 goals in 81 games.

Just for Torrente, this is how weak they are:

Dec 6: Olympiakos (Piraeus) 2 - Real Madrid 1
[Erol Bulut 50, Vitor Borba Ferreira “Rivaldo” 87; Sergio Ramos 7]

So FC Copenhagen beat Manchester United this year. I guess they're a really strong team and the Danish league is amazing. Did Olympiakos make the knockout rounds? Have Olympiakos ever won an away game in the champions league?

And even if Olympiakos is stronger than most Greek teams, it doesn't change the fact that the Greek league is very weak. Celtic may challenge some of Europe's top teams from time to time, but it doesn't change the fact that the league sucks, because all the teams besides them and Rangers and miles behind.