I personally think that Sheva is "better" than Marco, even though it's considered otherwise, and there is some reasons for that misconception:
- Marco played in big national team (Holland) and Sheva plays in small Ukraine
- Marco was european, and Sheva is considered as foreigner
- Marco played in more greater Milan, and Sheva spent his first 4 years in weak Milan
- Marco achieved more trophies than Sheva
- Marco led Holland to their only title EVER, they are not a big national team.
- Eh? Both where considered as much foreigners by the club. How can this be considered a argument?
- Marco on the other hand played in Italy when the league was the most defensive it had possibly ever been, up until 1991 and his career was over in 1992. Milan was only dominant just by the end of his career too, as several - other teams won the scudetto the years before 1992.
- True and that may say a lot, especially since he was crucial in winning several of them.
So because this 4 reasons Marco is considered a greater player than Sheva, but this is a mistake. I saw van Basten in action, and I have to say he is a great target-forward and nothing more. He has great finishing skills and a good ability to make himself available for his teammates in the box. I think u can compare him with van Nisteroj, same style. Marco just played in big teams with great players and there were always someone to assist.
What a load of bull****! Van Basten was a complete player, he had lots of assists, much more than Sheva ever had. He scored quite a few goals outside of the area and his technical skills have only been surpassed by Maradona of the players I seen playing. Van Nistelrooy is mostly good the last few meters, while Van Basten could scored from all situations and angles. The only skill Sheva may be better at is his ability to dribble and chest the ball to his feet.
But just look at Sheva, the things he does on the pitch are much more than just goal scoring. He sometimes go wide to flanks and act as a winger, or go down to midfield and plays behind the forward.
Just because his role have been more diverse doesn't make him better. As said Van Basten was a better assist man
Sheva knows how to score or assist, he also takes free kicks and helping out his defence at set-peices. The only striker that has some of this qualities is Henry, but Sheva ofcause much more better.
Eh? Have you seen Van Basten? I think you are lying when you say that. 1. van Basten also scored on freekicks even if he seldom took them, Sheva take many of ours but is not even our best taker. 2. Van Basten had a greater vision and assisted more than Sheva ever done, never would we have seen threads about how selfish he was. We had several of those about Shevchenko. 3. Van Basten also helped in defensive set-pieces and he was better than Sheva at it, since he was better on heading. 4. Sheva is NOT much better than Henry, I would say they are about the same level. Only fanoys claim one great player is "much more better" than another.
And what about his great personality, he always works for the team and not for himself.
I see nothing better nor worse in his peronality then Van Basten, Marco who didn't even blame the players that injuried him for the injuries.
And what about some great goals that he scored, some of that goals are at Pele-Maradona level.
Van Basten had one of his goals voted goal of the century (Bicycletas in the top corner in Holland), he also scored one of the most famous goals in international football ever and that in a final as the deciding goal.
I mean Sheva is a perfect goal-scoring machine, he can score all kind of goals from all kinds situations (head, right foot, left foot, inside the box, outside the box, in one touch or after overcoming couple defenders, both spectacular and simple goals, u name it). So I think he is much more better than Marco, and surely the best striker today.
Marco easily could do all these things and he also scored several bicycletas, something I never seen Sheva score with.