Who do you think was the best left back in their prime? I chose Maldini, i think he is a great defender and can attack when needed, i can't fault him in any departement. I have question marks over Roberto Carlos' defending abilities.

Roberto Carlos is an exciting player, but Maldini is the better player.

I think that Calos, should be a winger, as he gets forward to much and leave gaps at the back, so I would pick Maldini

Camon.. someone had to give Roberto a vote....

Maldini at his best was so much better than roberto Carlos its unreal. Carlos is pacier and better going forward but Maldini was (at his peak) and probably still is better in every defensive aspect, tackling, marking, reading the game.

Maldini is the better defender by a mile, Carlos is better going forward but that side of the game aint obviously aint as important for a defender. Maldini wins hands down

Well i think its Robbie Carlos. From what i've seen i think only Carlos Alberto can match him in terms of the way he can influence a match. In the past Roberto Carlos has carried Real Madrid and at times has even looked like their biggest attacking threat. In the pre-Zidane era people forget that he virtually had to operate as both a full back and a winger for Real simply because they were weak on the left. Even with Zidane in the side he's still been expected to do that job because Zidane rarely sticks to the left as he's not a winger and is more influential in the middle.

Maldini is undoutedly the better defender of the two, but R.Carlos is much better than most people give him credit for. In his prime he had the ability to catch up with the play even when he was on the wing, and more than once he came back to make crucial tackles. I think its partly a myth that he cant defend because 1) so many ex-defenders cant stand the thought of a defender going forward, and 2) hes played for a Real Madrid and Brazil team that are often leaky at the back anyway. For all thoe people who say he can't defend name one game in his prime where he was outplayed by a right sided midfielder because i cant think of any!

I dont think there's any coincidence that Brazil has been the most successful country while almost always opting to play attacking full backs. Even look at the total football Dutch sides and Cruyff's Barcelona 'Dream Team' and you'll see that all of them use attacking full backs. Because i agree that full backs are so much more than defenders, id always pick Roberto Carlos ahead of Maldini.

Maldini is a football legend. Best defender in these last 8-6yrs. So obviously Maldini.

Some valid points you have there.

A defenders main job is to defend and prevent goals. Thats the reason I went for Maldini.

Well i totally respect your opinion I think this really comes down to how you prefer a fullback to play, rather than who is better. Being a fan of attacking full backs myself i'd always go for R. Carlos.

Hey I hear ya. One of my favourite players is Miguel. An attacking RB.

Maldini is very good at going forward. His strength is defending but he also makes those runs down the left flanks that cause havoc. He does have a decent cross on him as well. Maldini is also very consistent, something Carlos hasnt achieved over his career.

Maldini when he retires will be regarded as one of the greats. For so long he has been at the top.

A modern defender should be able to do both well.

As everyone has said, Roberto Carlos is much better offensively, and Maldini defensively. I feel Roberto Carlos fits much better as a wingback when there are 3 CBs behind him.

But looking back at all those important games....how Roberto Carlos was able to influence them so greatly is beyond me. Finding old clips of Real Madrid matches is a fun thing to do when you're bored, and I ALWAYS get surprised to look back and say "wow Carlos had a large hand in this win". I wonder what we'll do without him

They're both great. I think I like Carlos better, and he'd be much better than Maldini at Real Madrid, but Maldini also played a large role in AC Milan's success.

I'm so decisive

Madini's attacking skill shouldnt be underestimated. I think that Maldini's attack is better than Carlos's defending!

Yeah I fully agree with you there. Maldini over Roberto Carlos by a fair way for me. Maldini provides attack while not neglecting his defensive duties. Roberto Carlos is a fantastic attacker but can get shown up on the defensive end from time to time. Having said that I agree with zzraul5, it is best that Roberto Carlos has 3 CBs behind him so that he can push up the field and do his damage. They are two great players who are best employed in differing roles.

Maldini is probably one of the best defenders ever, Roberto Carlos isn't even close...

Maldini will go down in history as being one of the best defenders ever, Roberto Carlos will be remembered for his free-kicks but that is all

Yeah the 1 in 100 that he actually connects with and goes in!

Roberto Carlos is unique in his work-rate and his ability, and will probably be remembered as one of the best attacking leftbacks ever, but Maldini is just the full package

Wonderful Post there.

People criticize Carlos coz his attacking ability often overshadows his defending. Thats a fact. But it doesnt mean that Carlos is a useless defender, not by any means. Hes one of the best left backs to have ever played the game. I cant remember one game where a right winger troubled him. Hes probably the only left back in the world, who was marked by the opposition's winger (Beckham at MU )...

Attacking : Carlos > Maldini

Defending : Maldini > Carlos

if i had to choose one of them for my team i would have to first decide how my team is gonna shape up, if i had a well balanced midfield who could both attack and defend i would go for Carlos coz he so good at raiding down the flanks but if i had an attack minded midfield consisting of Zidane, Becks, Figo & Guti i'd go for Maldini coz if he is asked to defend his flank i know he will do it and do it better then anyone.

I agree Carlos is far better going forward than maldini, but I think that Maldini is far better than carlos defending. Theyre both pretty equally influential to the team but in different roles, both great players but if I had to chose one out of the two, just for his out and out loyalty to his club and leadersip skills more than anything else i would have to go for maldini.

V. good post. The only way you can judge these two players is in the context of the way the team around them plays. To use another example its like sayin who's better, Guardiola or Vieira? They both play in the same position but the way they play and what they can offer is entirely different. Most Brazilians or Argentinians will prefer Roberto Carlos because both national teams don't play with a lot of width instead preferring a number of creative players in the centre. So these teams rely on attacking full backs to provide the width.

European football though is generally more cautious and most coaches will only employ one playmaker (if any) in a team. The primary job of full backs is to defend and use wide midfielders to provide width for the team. So whenever full backs are caught out of position in attacking situations they are blamed because they are not fulfilling their role in the team.

Maldini

mate, you dig up the holdest threads lol.

Id go with Maldini to i guess.

Yhey both are legends in defender category.

I won;t be surprised if Maldini got more votes as he has longer brilliant career, and superior in defensive skills.

However, Roberto Carlos is a special LB, who in his best time was BETERR than any great left winger in attacking skills : tremendous pace, and speeding. great crosses, some visionary passes and thundershot

Maldini! Roberto Carlos was great going forward but poor defensively while Maldini was great defensively and average at going forward.Roberto Carlos is one of the most overrated players ever in the history of football imo.

Maldini for me. For me, he is the best left back ever.

R.Carlos is massively overrated, even A.Cole is better than him. Maldini wins hands down.

R.Carlos is mainly overrated due to his free kicks especially the france one, and some nice thunderbolt strikes, but thats it.

A$$ Cole? Who?

We are talking about "legends" here ...

Maldini by far....RC can't hold a candle to Maldini....RC has to be one of the most overrated players.

Maldini is better that's clear. But I wouldn't say that R.Carlos is overrated. He was one of the matters why RM won the CL two times.

loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool mate be quiet.

Maldini was the greatets left back of all time so it's a pretty easy choice.

They tried playing him as a winger before he moved to Real Madrid, he wasn't as successful because he wanted 80 yards to run into, instead of 20. Which is a valid point for someone as explosive as Carlos in his prime. Maldini was the better player though, he just exuded class. To have played at the very top level for almost 20 years is an outstanding achievement. Also, the dedication of Maldini was so great that when he was in Milan's youth team, he knew there was a vacancy at left back for the first team, so he spent hours and hours honing his left foot so he could fill that position, a great talent and a great role model.

Roberto Calros Vs Phillip lahm?

hmmm, Krol and Fachetti were great too and may be better.

Who said it? NO, he was "among the best LB, but NOT the best of all time.

Some better LB: Dajmina Santos, Fachetti.

In this generation, I rate Maldini as a "best LB" (over Carlos) just because he is more consistent. Carlos in his "best form" was a "better player !

Roberto is a LWB, which is a more attack-minded version of an LB by my reckoning. Maldini is ofcourse the best LB of his generation, but this comparison seems a bit off since LB is not Carlos's original position IMO.

Btw James, I think you mean Nilton Santos cause Djalma Santos was a RB as far as I know.

yep .. Nilton Santos ... thanks

I think this would really depend on what kind of team you had or wanted. The overall balance of the team.

I actually think Roberto Carlos was a very underrated defender at his peak. One on one certainly he was very hard to beat.

Obviously he could never man mark or zonal mark like a Maldini say in a 3 man defence. But since that's rarely played anymore that is not all that relevant. In a typical 4 man defence at left back specifically I think you can make a case for both.

If it's a united back four where the fullbacks rarely go forward and concentrate on defending obviously Maldini is the pick.
If Carlos was asked to just mark you'd take so much of his game away and he probably wouldn't be very succcessfull.
His great limitations in the air alone make sure of that but overall with freedom to go forward and how that directly occupies the other team and indirectly, at times at least, their whole attacking capability, he could be a very effective and valuable player.
And he was of course, for most of his career.

Basically his unique speed made up for so much and setting up succesfull counter attacking schemes trying to take advantage of his endless
rushes forward, proved way easier in theory than in practice.
If the opposite had been the case Real Madrid simply would not have enjoyed the success they did when Carlos was still in his prime.

Maldini just was and in many ways still is a great athlete. Physically there were no weaknesses whatsoever, just strenght upon strenght, and as far as defensive fundamentals were concerned he got the best education possible playing alongside Baresi from a very young age.

It's also easy to forget, following a number of years now in mostly central defence, that Maldini was also effective going forward and at the time actually was one of the better technical left backs in world football.

I really can't say anything bad about Maldini. He is just an incredible legend and since I favor more tightly balanced sides, generally not compromising their defence, Maldini would be my natural pick.

A random fact about Maldini is that he has actually outlasted the guy who was once labeled the "new Maldini", Francesco Coco, which I think is pretty awesome.

England International Paul Merson:

“The best player I ever played against was Paolo Maldini. We [Arsenal] played against Milan in the European Supercup [in 1995 which Milan won 2-0 on aggregate].

“Maldini marked me, and I didn’t even get a kick of the ball all game. He was just unbelievable."

BTW, Odd thing, I was watching Paolo Maldini's DVD the other day and Roberto Carlos is on the DVD himself saying Maldini is the number 1.

I haven't seen much of Maldini in his early years, so i cant really comment on him, but i must say that he would have to be pretty freaking good to be able to better than roberto carlos.

Roberto Carlos is not just an extra ordinary defender, but he is also a great attacker. His runs down the wings are amazing and his crosses have been known to be inch perfect. His free kicks and in play kicks can also come in such a force that it is sometimes amazing that he doesn't burst the ball. And nobody can question the amount of speed that carlos has. He also has the ability to keep going at the player with the ball until he eventually wins it. And like most brazilians, he has great ball controll.

From what i know of Maldini, he is an Italian and AC Milan Legend. If im correct his father played for AC Milan as well and from a quick Wikipedia check, i have noticed that he has scored 33 goals in his career at milan. But as i've said, i have never really watched Maldini play before.

Maldini by a country mile. That is art of defending. Carlos wasn't that great at defending and was only really known for useless freekicks that hit the back of the net once in every 30 tries