Wow those tinted glasses are sure getting in the way of your better judgment... By good defensive skills you mean lunging around like a maniac for a million times in one match and probably only one of those is not concidered a foul Both Rino and Flamini are good at winning the ball in the air, just because Ambro scores a couple of goals doesn't put him above Rino and Flamini as last time I checked it isn't in their job description to score goals. And I'm not even going to bother with the good passer comment as Ambro is probably the worst passer in the team, he can't make a good pass to save his life if its longer then half a meter... And this you say while excluding Flamini who by far is our best passer from all the DMs.

The fact that all coaches choose Rino over Ambro, whether that's the NT coach or the club coach is indication enough of who is the better player.


dst is 100% right on this. Ambro is a terrible passer and if you look at him closesly during a match and count all the times he loses the ball you wouldn't be saying this. Ambro is the most frustrating player on our team, he's so limited as a player its ridiculous.


I don't know how that happened since there were at least 3 players on our team that had a far better game that night then him, those being Seedorf, Kaka and Rino.

Whoa?? Amrbo was immense in that match man! Just coz he didn't get the crowd worked up. He's a silent worker. I like him a lot.

But did you just say Seedorf and good game in the same sentence? Are you trying to seduce me or something? Why're you being so nice?

I didn't say that it was because they got the crowd riled up then they had the better game. I'm just saying this based on what I saw and the 3 that I mentioned above had the batter game. Kaka was immense that night and not just because he scored the goal, same goes for Seedorf who just dominated the pitch. And Rino kept both Rooney and Ronaldo quite, they both barely got a look in because of Rino.

That was a perfect example of a non-existent defense more than anything else. As Zed said I was of course exaggerating but I do think Ambrosini's passing does not help our attacking game apart from some exceptions that only prove the rule.


To continue on passing, I think Rino's is just as bad but I think he's a better defender that does not make as many stupid fouls as Ambro at least not very close to our area. That's why I think of him higher than Ambro. As for Flamini, he's more or less as good as Ambro in defense but he's much better going forward than the other two and that's why he also comes ahead of Ambro. I don't think the blonde angel is as bad as you make him sound though.

In the past I didn't think he was so bad, but now he just makes me want to throw things at the TV, its not just the bad passing and the bad lunges, its the fact that for some reason he thinks he's a winger, you see him running on the left wing then crossing the ball to the people in the stands. Also the fact that he shoots the ball when there are better options, and its not like he has a good shot as he mostly just sends it flying to the crowds.

I think he was asked to do those things by Ancelotti, the same way Brocchi was asked to play as an attacking midfielder...

Or Seedorf as a winger/striker Carlo was really one of a kind! I'll never forget the game in which he fielded 6 defenders/FBs....

It is just unfair to call this player average. He is very useful, certainly not as explosive and virile as Gattuso, but he is as effective in his own way. You can not just claim he is useless.

I didn't call him useless, I said he was frustrating and limited as a player. There is a big difference. I think he's a good player to have on the bench but certainly not starting material as there are better players ahead of him...

@ dst, whether it was Carlo's fault or not that he was playing as left winger, there are still far too many cons in his game that out weigh the pros. Imo the only thing he brings to the table that is better then Rino and Flamini is the fact that he's good at scoring from set-pieces, but I'd rather have the better players on the pitch then just putting on Ambro in the hopes that he scores off a set-piece

Tinted glasses? Come on, that's ridiculous. You are the same way (but opposite) about Rino and Ambro as I am, so don't play that card.

Rino and Flamini are terrible in the air. Yes, I'm not talking about in the opponnents box, but in the middle of the field and in their own box, they are terrible. I think Rino is terrible at passing a ball, Flamini is the type that will have a very good pass rate since he generally plays the ball short and quickly to the guys that can do something with it. Ambro is definitly more creative with his passing, yes he will make a bad pass every now and then, but he'll try more longer searching balls than the other 2.


International level doesn't really mean anything. Pato hasn't been called up for Brazil, yet I think Fabiano has, does this mean we are stupid not to have signed Fabiano and sold Pato to Chelsea. We'd end up with more money and a better player.

I don't really recall Rino being picked over Ambro alot, he usually only ever misses games when he's injured or suspended. How we could have done with him in Istanbul, there's no way that would have happened if he played. While Rino had an abysmal 2nd half.

There were not 3 players that had a better game, Ambro was incredible that night, he won the ball back pretty much every time he attempted to, not just winning 1 every 10 with 'lunging' tackles. I think you'll find it was a smuch Ambro as it was Rino that kept Rooney and Ronaldo quiet, you're kidding yourself if you think 1 man can mark those 2 out of a game.

I don't agree with much of what the club does, but Ambro for captain is spot on.

EDIT: This is my last comment on the matter anyways, I won't be continuing it as there really is no point and we've been over it a million times +1.

I always said that Rino is definately no Pirlo when it comes to his passing bu he's better at it because he passes it quickly toPirlo, so rarely loses it, while Ambro tries the long diagonals and long balls all the time and rarely do they ever turn into something as they usually end up with the opposition...

Both Rino and Flamini are good at challenging in the air from the middle of the pitch, they might not have Ambro's towering jump but they're still good at it. Rino is not a good passer of the ball in the Pirlo sense, but he's good at releasing it quickly and rarely does he pass it to the opposition, unlike Ambro who tends to spend too much time with the ball then attempts stupid passes that will never hit the mark. Flamini is our best passer, he makes both long and short range passes which are actually good.


Pato has been called up for Brazil on more then one occasion so that's a moot point and the reason Fabiano gets the start over him is because of his physicality which is what works for Brazil with the way they play. It doesn't mean that one is better then the other, just that one has the characteristics needed for the way Brazil play.


Hmm lte's see when Rino was picked over Ambro, all through 2002 to 2006 Rino was always the one that started in the DM position while Ambro was either benched or injured. He said himself that he was thinking of leaving during those times becuase he was on the bench a lot. In 07 both played because Seedorf was moved into the attaching mid position so there was a spot for both and the last 2 seasons Rino was injured a lot, but when he was fit and we were going to play with just 1 DM Rino always got the start ahead of him.

And you're really going to blame Intanbul on the fact that Ambro wasn't there?? The entire team switched off, I'm 100% sure that had Ambro been on we would still have lost that game. And Ambro was there when we nearly lost it in the semis against PSV as well, we let 3 goal in that night and he was on the pitch to.


It was the combo of Rino and Oddo that handled Man U's left side, which was where Rooney and C.R were operating. While Ambro had Flethcer and Giggs to take care of

Its not like the club went through a lot of details when choosing the captain, he got it on default because he was here the longest. But what's really going to be ridiculous next season is the fact that our vice captain will wear the armband more then the actual captain will, becuase there is no way that Ambro will get the start ahead of the other mids we have that can play in that position

What a poor game to pick on..


So? Gattuso played in that game to, so he was just as bad. If it weren't for Ambro in that game, we wouldn't have even got to Istanbul in the first place.

Should Fishdoll get out his popcorn for this one?

I agree with Kurt on his second to last post except for the point he makes that Ambro is more creative than the others. Surely he has a better long ball than Rino but he never creates something out of it, it's mostly horizontal balls.

The reason I'd pick Gattuso ahead of Ambro is because the former avoids making mistakes when trying to take the ball out our area. Ambro thinks he can create a counter-attack with a straight ball but almost always we end up having trouble because these passes get stopped. This is not a minor negative part of his game, it happens in every match at least once.

I think Flamini is way ahead of these two when it comes to going forward and just as good in defense and if it was not for Gattuso's heart (which I think brings a lot to our game and lifts the team up) and Ambrosini's undying passion I'd pick him ahead of these in purely footballing terms.

As for the captaincy I don't understand what the fuss is all about. There's no one that can be compared to our last two captains so for me it was not all that important who would get it. Besides, whoever IS a captain does not need an armband to show it... Gattuso captains the team with an armband or not and so does Ambro.

HAHAHAHAHAHA i was thinking the same thing, ambro is washed up and it's an insult to Rino/Pirlo that THEY don't see their efforts rewarded with the armband!

Completely agree, it's hard to say it, but flamini is definitely our overall best midfielder, while no ronaldhino, i think we will see this year, while rino and ambro square the ball, or send it back to the backline, Pirlo and Flamini will push the ball forward.

Saying ambro is better than gattuso is pretty bold considering one is considered one of the best DMF of all time and the other is just known as a bench player, but to consider him better than flamini now i've heard it all!


As it stands right now flamini=gattuso+ambrosini because he does both their jobs just as good if not better than them and contributes to the attack a lot more than those two. As many people have said already, look at the number of passes completed/balls lost when you compare the three and you will see Flamini stands on his own level in comparison to those two. Rino and ambro are equally bad at passing as they are reckless. Rino seems to get away with more than ambro does but that is because his reputation plays a huge role in that.

If flamini is benched for either one in an important game i'll consider Leo clueless about his job.

You may consider it a 'bold statement' but I think it's pretty straightforward to be honest. There is not a single part of Rino's game that is better than Ambro's, in my opinion.

Best DM of all-time? Now I've heard it all. Over-rating of players taken to the extreme.

I've got to go with the saskachawanian (sorry for butchering it) Look at the trofeo berlusconi performance of Rino and honestly tell me ambro could have played like that!

He's a world cup winner, 2x champions league winner and has been playing at the top of europe wanted by all clubs for about 3 seasons at least. Gattuso is a legend and known worldwide while ambro is....captain of milan


But I just don't see it kurt. I know its your opinion but to me it sounds like your saying Stankovic is better than Kaka as an example. I just don't see it.

exactly +1. Rino is called animal for a reason. Ambro could never played like that.

I never said that things wouldn't have happened had this or that player been on the pitch. You were the one that said that had there been Ambro playing in Istanbul things wouldn't have gone that way, which imo is totally ridiculous seeing as the entire team switched off and I'm pretty sure Ambro would have made no difference...

And yes Ambro did in the end score the goal in that match, but when it came to doing his actual job he wasn't all that great along with the entire team who played badly that night and still let 3 goals in. So what I'm essentially saying is we were still poor even though Ambro was on the pitch that night.

@ dst, even though no one can compare to our previous 2 captains I still think that its an important decision to make and a player shouldn't be captain just because he's been with a club the longest. Also the fact that the captain should be a regular starter in the team, not someone that in most likelihood will be on the bench for the majority of the matches

@ blue, saying that Rino is one of the best DMs of all time is stretching it a lot. But he is concidered as one of the best oh his generation. And when it came down to it Rino was the one that was wanted by the top clubs and not Ambro.

He's in the top 10 or 20 list forsure. Ambro is not.

I think I'm pretty much the man in the middle here, as I rate both players(Gattuso slightly higher than Ambro though).
What makes Gattuso so famous is his numerous clashes with opposition players and fierce way of playing. He makes himself noticed, and in no way am I criticising him for that, but the fact that Ambrosini is a less noticeable player doesn't automatically make him better. In fact, Ambrosini has a better goal rate than Gattuso, he's stronger in the air, is more tactically aware and he has better technique. Gattuso beats him on stamina, strength and tackling, and he's marvelous at winding up the opposition.

As for Gattuso being one of the best DMF's of all time...please Bluey, I can think of at least 10 superiors to him and even then I'm probably forgetting a bunch. I rate Gattuso very highly, and he's been, without a doubt, one of the best DMF's in recent years. But in history...blah.

I don't doubt it, but he's up there with the best.

Redondo? Makelele? Albertini? Vieira? Keane? Mattheus? Deschamps? Dunga? Riijkard? Davids? Simeone?

No he isn't.

Certainly no.

I really don't think that saying one has a better goal to game ratio counts for much seeing as neither of them is a striker...

I agree with pretty much all the points you made except for the goal argument as imo its not really relevant and that Ambro has better technique, I mean this guy pretty much trips over his own feet while running, has a terrible touch, bad passing, holds the ball too long then loses it, the list goes on. I'm not saying that Gattuso has good technique, but what makes it less noticable then Ambro is the fact that he himself knows it, that's why when he gets the ball he plays it quickly to Pirlo because he himself knows not to try the impossible stuff, unlike Ambro who probably thinks he's a cross between Pirlo, Iniesta and Fabregas with the things he tries to do

Agreed he's not concidered as one of the best of all times, but he's certainly up there as one of the best of his generation.

And even in that list there are come that are on a level of their own like Mattheus, Rijkaard, Redondo, all imo are a class above the rest

So? If two defenders are roughly equally good then I'd say most coaches would pick the one with the best goal ratio.
Some of the most important goals in the history of football has been scored by defensive players.

Yes, but they're not equally good are they?

Imo having a player that is superior on the pitch but doesn't have the arial ability on one side or you have Ambro on the other side who imo just holds the midfield back because of his limitations but he's good in the air and there is a chance that he might score off a set-piece. I'd still always choose Rino. Because I'd rather have the better player for the entire match then have a player on in the hopes that he gets a goal from a corner or free-kick

I don't think the quality gap between Gattuso and Ambrosini is that big, to be honest. But it seems you think that if Ambrosini plays then Gattuso don't and vice versa. That's not the case.

your kidding right.

What do you mean? Don't tell me you don't rate those guys!

I don't think you can really base things like winning a World Cup of Champions League in deciding a better player. Does this mean Gary Neville is one of the best right backs ever? I think I would need about 10 hands to count how many trophies he's won. I just don't see what trophies have to do with anything, it's like saying Fletcher is better than Fabregas.

Locke made a good point that made me think. If Rino wasn't such a confrontational player, if he wasn't so vocal or loud in his actions, he would have nowhere near the praise he does. His image seems to make people think he's better than he is.


So you're saying you agree, but Locke listed one thing which is essentially needed by a DM, tackling. All players that play DM have enough stamina/strength to play (otherwise they wouldn't be playing) so anymore is really unnecessary. Winding up the opposition, strange how it's good when it's Rino but it's a disgraceful thing when it's Matrix. I think somebody has blinkers on, and it isn't me.

Rino is a more liked player and I believe that is why people stick up for him. People on here have been trying to convince me Rino is better based on a friendly we played the other day and saying "Ambro couldn't do this", yet when we talk of a CL SF where Ambro was immense, they just dismiss it. Poor opposition, all the pundits are blind, it was all Rino, etc.

Give me a break.

Maybe that helps him in the way people see him but I think his spirit helps the team a lot too. I can see it. It's obvious when he does not play and it's even more clear in the few times he had to be substituted like against Utd at Old Trafford in 2007, the team missed a lot that night when he was taken off.

All in all, I think Gattuso is more solid at the back and Ambrosini is a bit better going forward. I don't think, no matter who's better, that there is a significant gap in quality. However, I think for their position defense and comes first and for that reason I'd pick Gattuso ahead of Ambrosini. That's footballing-wise. There's also the way Rino helps the team spiritually which is one more reason why I'd pick him first.

... and of course in no way I think giving Ambro the armband is wrong.

So now we're agreeing on football related things as well...I'll expand a bit on the parts I've put in bold.

The main reason Gattuso is as popular/controversial/misliked as he is is because he's so visible. Whenever there's a scrap taking place, Gattuso is there. Whenever two players other than him are confronting each other, Gattuso is the first to rush in and divert attention to himself. I'm NOT saying that's a bad thing, in fact it's good to have a player soaking up frustration and confrontation who can deal with it, than having several angry players going into reckless tackles all over the place.
That, and the fact that he looks like a crossbreed of wolverine and rottweiller on an acid trip gets him huge amounts of attention. This doesn't mean he's not a very good player, but it doesn't make him superior to other players who works just as hard but not as eye-catching.

Makelele got a playing position named after him. That's not something you see alot of.
Vieira in the space 1998-2005 was simply immense. He defined box-to-box play, had good technique, an impressive goal ratio and excellent leadership qualities.
Dunga was the backbone of two Brazil sides and captained them to two successive world cup finals.

And Rijkaard essentially reinvented the position. What a grand player he was!

Well you have to concider the fact that there are Flamini and Seedorf to play in that position as well, so in reality both of them won't be playing at the same time unless there's an injury.

But what I really was trying to say there was that if I was given a choice between the 2 and had to pick one it would be Rino.


I don't think he only gets noticed because he's so controversial, its because he does everything with such passion and drive, he's running all over the place non stop, constantly winning balls, etc. Then there is also the fact that he gets in people's faces, riles the crowd up, always in the thick of things that also pulls people towards him. I'm just saying that its not just him being so controversial that gets people to notice him but also in the way he plays with such fire. Its why every Milan fan loves him, not just for being a great player but also for always playing with passion.

I'm saying I agree with the things Locke said except for the goals argument, which I always said that its not in either players' job description therefore to me its irrelevant whether they score goals or not. And come on, Matrix?? He doesn't wind up the opposition, he's brutal not passionate, 2 very different things

Makelele and Viera better than gattuso, that just makes me laugh. Dunga, maybe a little more successful career wise but gatts still got 3 years or more left. But! I don't understand how you can see Viera better than gattuso, that just makes me laugh or makelele

i'd go with Viera in his prime was better than gatts but rino has everlasting passion and drive to succeed for Milan, Viera has a bench accross town with a cell he can watch rino on live screening

You rate players only based on what they have won? So you're saying van Bommel is a greater player than Bergkamp since he has won a CL and Bergkamp has not.

You probably have not seen Makelele play too much... as much as I like Gattuso I don't think he can even be compared to Makelele. Real let him go and they fell apart... Gattuso could not have that big an impact on a team in his wildest dreams!

EDIT: Are you truly being serious? You're the only person I know that would nor rate Makelele higher than (or at the very least at the same level as) Gattuso... more so laugh at such a comparison.

I can't actually believe what I'm reading.

If these 3 were clubs, Makelele and Vieira would be Madrid and Barca, Gattuso would beWycombe Wanderers, there's that much difference in ability.

Obviously I can't comment on years gone by since I haven't been alive to see other DMs, but these 2 are the best since I've been alive, easily. Vieira I'd rate slightly higher since he was better on the ball/better going forward.

I think your 'titles' arguement is stupid. Again, it's like saying Fletcher is better than Fabregas.

I was about to answer but Kurt and the Greek has said all I wanted to say.

BRAVO! Someone noticed!!

Its ridicioulous to say gattuso is better than makelele or viera because its simply not true. Can you argue it with facts? Not really because how can you rate these players? You can't...but everyone knows that gattuso is not better than those two,

which Is why I made those previous comments earlier saying gattuso is better and those two are a joke and the reaction I got is exactly what I wanted it from you guys. Its the same thing when you add ambro into the equation.


Now lets take the makelele and viera arguement out and focus on ambro. Now without special goggles and bias towards the player could you honestly say that Ambro is better than gattuso? I couldn't, just like I couldn't say that gattuso is better than makelele and viera or R. Keane. It simply isn't true but he is one of my favorites so yes in a sense I might argue that he is better eventhough deep down I know he is not.



So @ kurt, when you say ambro is better or locke when you say that, you guys don't have a basis to say that on. Gattuso has been a main leader and protagonist for milan's success this decade while ambro has been.....? My point is right there.

Can we say gattuso is better than ambro as a football player? No we can't because its simply impossible to compare. We can't say oh gattuso can only juggle 400x while ambro can do it 900x. OR gattuso can only pass 5/10 times on average to the target while ambro can do 7/10. Its simply not possible because we don't know these things.

What we can compare though is their contributions on the pitch when give the chance to play, which brings me to the reason why I say gattuso is better than ambro. Gattuso over the years has contributed alot more when give the opportunity than ambro has. There is a reason why he has started and played all those minutes while ambro has not.

I disagree with what you're saying. Nobody can know which player is better since it is 100% opinion, but you can base it on what you see. I feel Ambro is a better footballer than Gattuso in the sense that people will say Italians are better footballers than English players. The technique is better, he seems more aware on the ball and he isn't afraid to try and play a pass. Gattuso is just a work horse to me, I don't feel he has much use in an Italian team.

I think the arguement of success is also very harsh. Ambro's lack of time is more due to him being injury prone, he doesn't start as a sub that often, he usually plays when he's fit, r he did under Carlo. I think it's even worse when comparing players of diferent teams.

I'd really appreciate it if you read my posts before trying to argue with me, I've said at least 3 times that I think Gattuso is indeed better, but not by much and Ambrosini is by far a more suitable choice for captain.

you know what kurtypoo lets just say we dont' see eye to eye on this. You are convinced that ambro is better than gattuso. Unfortunately you are a minor in carrying this opinion but I respect you for holding your feet firm. But enjoy the ambro-less and gattuso-full season, I know I will

Can't we just all agree that we could not have played as well as we did with ambro in the linup....