Ronaldo in 98 had 4 goals and 3 assist meaning he had a hand in 7 out 14 goals for Brazil.
Best post-Maradona player (peak level)
- Thread starter Hound Dog
- Start date
When it's all said and done, in 20 years when all 3 are done playing if you wanted to tell the story of how or why any was the 'greatest player ever' - you would simply say 'watch them play' with regards to Messi and R9, and probably 'check his stats' with regards to CR7.
I agree, and in that sense I'd say only Messi is equal to him. And Ronaldo had a powerful presence and frantic style for an additional effect. But in the end, does it amount to more goals than C. Ronaldo's superior awareness and ability to escape defenders? One could argue that being so efficient at using the service provided by your team requires no less skill than going at defense by yourself. Only a different kind of skill, and perhaps not as flashy.
On a side note - since Maradona peak is mentioned and best players in respective position:
-------------Ronaldo------------
Cristiano----Dinho-------Messi-
--------Redondo----Xavi--------
Would be a joy to watch on the ball
-------------Ronaldo------------
Cristiano----Dinho-------Messi-
--------Redondo----Xavi--------
Would be a joy to watch on the ball
Nailed it, about as exciting as tap water.
On a side note - since Maradona peak is mentioned and best players in respective position:
-------------Ronaldo------------
Ronaldinho---Zidane-------Messi-
--------Redondo----Xavi--------
Would be a joy to watch on the ball
Fixed.
Don't think so. Messi isn't universally loved as Ronaldinho and Brazilian Ronaldo were.
Ronaldo played for Inter, Milan, Madrid and Barcelona and each and every one of those fans love him like their own. No other player will get that universal love and affection. Old Trafford rose in his honour even when he was past his peak yet still destroyed us in a CL qf.
There's only one O Fenomeno. He's incomparable when it comes to the joy he gave to anyone who watched him.
Messi has been applauded at the Calderon, the Bilbao stadium, Sevilla, in Brazil by the brazilians... and I'm sure that if announces his retirement early in the season (like for example Kobe Bryant did with the Lakers) he will be applauded in almost every stadium bar Espanyol. Even the Bernabeu may do it. And I'm sure every european Club would do it.
With Madrid and Espanyol the story is different. You can't really say Ronaldo and Ronaldinho belong to X team. But Messi has been rised since a kid at Barcelona, he's and will be a part of the institution. He represents it way more than the two, even if they played for the Club. Messi has a deep feeling for the Club, and you must add to that, that he had some incidents with the Bernabeu people before, and also with Mourinho and several Madrid players.
Messi has been the fundamental part of Barcelona's best times in the history, humilliating Madrid many, many times. And he's been the "enemy" of their main star, Cristiano Ronaldo. All of that goes in a mix involving the hispanic people's passion and puts these people against Messi, for sure.
Someone who does not like or appreciate Messi's football is either a Madrid or Espanyol fan, or a CR7 fanboy. If somebody appreciates the game, there's no way you can hate Messi, Ronaldo and Ronaldinho. Not only because all of them produced/produces magic but also for being humble guys who work for the team and not themselves.
That's what I'm saying, there's a fair percentage of fans who don't LIKE even if they think he's amazing.
With Ronaldo there was never such a thing as not liking him. No matter which team you supported or who you your favourite player was EVERYONE loved Ronaldo. Period. Messi, or anyone else will not come close to that level of universal love that Ronaldo received. Like I said fierce rival fans loved him as much as his own and still do. He's the face of beautiful football, joga bonito, playing to entertain and provide an unparalleled amount of joy to spectators. Ronaldinho is the only one who came close to that.
Look at me. I'm not Brazilian. I don't support any club he ever played for and here I am singing his praise. I'll never ever give that love to someone who was not associated with United.
Same can be said about Dinho as well. Probably to Zidane to a lesser extent. Cristiano and some of his antics cause controversy and it's easier for rival fans to hate him. Messi is somewhere in between.
Yep. Anyone who doesn't love Ronaldinho and the way he entertained us deserves a smack on the head.
@Moby think you are wrong, i know few people that dont like both Ronaldo and Ronaldinho, in fact i know a fair share of people that dont like Dinho. Every player in every sport will have people who like him and people who dont, its just the way it is. Some will have less haters then others but they will have it you can be sure of it.
Who would those be
Not liking Ronaldo or Ronaldinho is like not appreciating the game for me.Who would those be
people are strange what can i say. Im not the biggest fan of Dinho but i rate his peak highly and i loved to watch him play.
But Ronaldo is appreciated because he's not related to any Club, he played in a lot of Clubs. And he's a humble and nice guy, which helps.
Messi is totally related to a Club, he was formed in that Club and not any club, the best club in the last 10 years.
You can't compare that.
Zidane over Cristiano with Dinho on the left. Far better fit, they would absolutely hide the ball from anybodyOn a side note - since Maradona peak is mentioned and best players in respective position:
-------------Ronaldo------------
Cristiano----Dinho-------Messi-
--------Redondo----Xavi--------
Would be a joy to watch on the ball
EDIT: @IFC 1905 great minds and all that
Where is Iniesta in that lineup? He is better then both Cristiano and Ronaldinho IMO
BTW, yeah, if messi announces X to be his last season at barcelona, he'd get a standing ovation at the bernabeu. That's for sure
This.
The main argument in Ronaldo vs Messi is for me that Messi would be able to come close or surpass Ronaldo as a striker, he might not have that explosiveness, strength and heading but similarly the taking on of defenders at speed, chance creation for himself, brilliant finishes and constant threat are thing they have in common, and when Messi did actually play as a striker/false 9 he broke basically all the records that where there. But Ronaldo would just never ever be able to function as an orchestor/playmaker as well, Messi's football IQ, vision, passing, creativity is in an entire different dimension to his. Messi has played as RW, 10, ST and he is one of if not the best ever in all of those positions, probably could even do it as LW s well, there never has been such a complete forward imo.
Have you watched much of R9 in his Inter or Madrid days except the occasional CL game?
Of course it's about the managers, if they believe that having CR7 and the rest of the team playing that way is detrimental to the side, any manager worth their salt will change the playing style. The fact is 2 of the most successful managers in recent decades have decided that style of play serves their team best.
Cristiano Ronaldo's record in big games more than comparison to Messi's, it's another stupid internet myth he he scores multiple goals in 8-0 wins or whatever, whereas somehow Messi only scores winning goals and not "scoreline inflating ones".
The amount of goals is very relevant and is exactly why R9 at his peak being better than CR7 argument completely falls apart.
CR7 basically has only finished top of the scoring chart or behind Messi for the better part of a decade.
R9 on the other hand, except that season at Barcelona, even before his injury, finished behind Bierhoff at Inter in 97/98.
Then behind Makaay in 02/03, Forlan, Etoo and Ricardo Oliveira in 04/05 (and before you mention injuries, those are all seasons where he played 30 or more league games).
In fact, he only managed to be topscorer ONCE in his Real Madrid career.
Who would those be
There are quite a few inter fans that are still sour towards Ronaldo to be fair.
With Ronaldinho I think Gremio fans might harbor some resentment towards him.
Messi, it's not even close.
R9 is the only other debatable person but Messi was better in his peak and his peak lasted longer.
R9 is the only other debatable person but Messi was better in his peak and his peak lasted longer.
Have you watched much of R9 in his Inter or Madrid days except the occasional CL game?
Of course it's about the managers, if they believe that having CR7 and the rest of the team playing that way is detrimental to the side, any manager worth their salt will change the playing style. The fact is 2 of the most successful managers in recent decades have decided that style of play serves their team best.
Cristiano Ronaldo's record in big games more than comparison to Messi's, it's another stupid internet myth he he scores multiple goals in 8-0 wins or whatever, whereas somehow Messi only scores winning goals and not "scoreline inflating ones".
The amount of goals is very relevant and is exactly why R9 at his peak being better than CR7 argument completely falls apart.
CR7 basically has only finished top of the scoring chart or behind Messi for the better part of a decade.
R9 on the other hand, except that season at Barcelona, even before his injury, finished behind Bierhoff at Inter in 97/98.
Then behind Makaay in 02/03, Forlan, Etoo and Ricardo Oliveira in 04/05 (and before you mention injuries, those are all seasons where he played 30 or more league games).
In fact, he only managed to be topscorer ONCE in his Real Madrid career.
The amount of goals is not relevant on the basis that R9 scored more than 300 club goals in less than 400 games. Once you reach that kind of level, you are a great goalscorer, it doesn't matter if another great scorer scored more or less. I know R9 was better than Batistuta without having to check heir stats. Both are great goal scorers, I know that much. Batistuta may have scored more, possibly did. That only becomes relevant in a comparison between a striker who doesn't score and a player who does.
We are on a Manchester United forum, and I can guarantee that less than 5% of fans would consider our record goalscorer as either our best ever player or striker. What you can be certain of was whichever striker they think is our best will also have been a goal scorer. After that, it's not the point. It obviously won't be Welbeck on the basis that he didn't score goals at all. That's not the case with R9.
Or is your post supposed to show that R9 was not only inferior to CR7, but also Makaay and Forlan?
TBH, we've said enough. If you think CR7 is better than R9, then that's your right. The only way I can 'prove' R9 is better to somebody like you is to present data to support. Nothing visual would matter at all.
Of course it's relevant! A record of 0.75 goal a game is impressive, but a record of 1.0 goal a game is legendary, surely you can see there's a clear difference.
Our record goalscorer's tally was built up over a very high number of games. You just helped prove my point that the goals per game ratio is vital.
My post was supposed to prove that whilst R9 was undoubtably a very good player, he's not at the level that Cristiano or Messi has been at for most of the past decade.
Scoring the occasional great goal does not a GOAT make, otherwise people will be discussing Le Tissier as the best PL player ever rather than Henry or Cristiano.
Messi and then Ronaldinho.
Ronaldinho, most fun to watch by a mile.
If Le Tissier scored 0.75 goals per game, with many stunners etc, a player is not 'better' than him by virtue of mathematics for scoring 0.96 per game. That is my point, otherwise nobody would ever need to watch a game again. All we'll need is a textbook.
If Le Tissier scored 0.37 a game, then I'd get your point. But when we are talking 0.75 a game, we are moving into a realm of semantics. We are speaking about great goal scorers regardless. There are only so many points I can keep giving a player for being a 'great goalscorer'.
If listing attributes, I'd go 'R9 - Great goalscorer'|'CR7 - extraordinary goalscorer' and then continue from there. I'd give R9 an 8 for goals, if you like, and CR7 a 10. Okay, now what? Even if we weighted the importance of goals as the most important factor, the fact that both are great scorers means, for me, that we must still consider other factors to determine who is best.
That is not even considering the numerous factors that have gone into their respective stats. Different opposition, different refereeing, different level of competitiveness. Also, a person can watch R9 and see enough ability to confidently say that if CR7 was swapped out for him in the same Madrid team, I suspect he could score the same amount of goals.
It's extreme I know, but you can say that, even if Dwight Gayle gets 60 league goals for Newcastle this year, which is more than any of these players have done - they could probably better it in the same Newcastle team, on he basis that you have seen them and know they are better. They may have scored 45 at a different level, it could get the 60 over here. That's my view on R9. I am very confident that Cristiano Ronaldo could not replicate his Real stats in the same Inter team R9 played in. He'd get goals, of course, but not 50 a year in my view. That's just an assessment from watching him.
I don't get this, isn't this thread about the player's peak?
It's not really fair to compair Brazilian Ronaldo's best seasons with a Cristiano Ronaldo who has clearly evolved his style of play with age (something we praise the likes of Giggs for). If we were to look at the body of work R9 produced at Real Madrid and discount everything else, he wouldn't even be mentioned in this thread.
It seems to be a common theme with fans who seem eager to discredit Ronaldo for some reason.
And by the way, I would put CR7 behind Messi, R9 and Ronadinho when comparing their respective peaks, I just don't agree with how he's been portrayed in this thread.
Since R9 was a striker all his career, I'm not sure what other factors you want to discuss? Does he help his team defend more than Cristiano? No. Does he contribute more assists? No. So what exactly are these other factors?
As for the different oppositions argument, I've already pointed out that Luiz Ronaldo has been top scorer 2 times in his entire career in Spain and Italy, finishing behind the likes of Bierhoff, Makaay, Forlan, etc in seasons where he was mostly fit. Cristiano Ronaldo on the other hand, has only finished behind Messi and often ahead of him for the better part of a decade. [Edit: Suarez once too]
Regarding your final point, I'm not suggesting CR7 would score 50+ with that Inter team during that time, but I'm almost certain he'd have scored more than R9 managed to do, and I seriously doubt he'd have finished behind the likes of Bierhoff, Makaay, Forlan & co if he had been playing for those Inter/RM teams during that era instead of R9.
Since R9 was a striker all his career, I'm not sure what other factors you want to discuss? Does he help his team defend more than Cristiano? No. Does he contribute more assists? No. So what exactly are these other factors?
As for the different oppositions argument, I've already pointed out that Luiz Ronaldo has been top scorer 2 times in his entire career in Spain and Italy, finishing behind the likes of Bierhoff, Makaay, Forlan, etc in seasons where he was mostly fit. Cristiano Ronaldo on the other hand, has only finished behind Messi and often ahead of him for the better part of a decade. [Edit: Suarez once too]
Regarding your final point, I'm not suggesting CR7 would score 50+ with that Inter team during that time, but I'm almost certain he'd have scored more than R9 managed to do, and I seriously doubt he'd have finished behind the likes of Bierhoff, Makaay, Forlan & co if he had been playing for those Inter/RM teams during that era instead of R9.
By other factors, I mean not statistically quantifiable. I don't see football in this modern way. Everything isn't goals and assists. I meant like technique, aesthetics of goals, individual ability etc.
In any case, it's clear you rate CR7 higher, as is your right.
And on your last point, CR7 may have struggled to finish ahead of the likes of Makaay and Forlan after 3 cruciates. But it's clear we fundamentally disagree on how we assess football. I know Ronaldo gets more goals. For me, it's bout asking 'why' he scored more. In my opinion, he answer is not as simple as 'because he has more ability'. Perhaps that's how you see it.
I agree, statistics are not a way of seeing football in a modern way, it's a modern way not to see football and still judge players. But in the end it's about winning and technique, ability and aesthetics is serving that. That's why I rate CR7 very high, I haven't seen one player beeing that important to the success of one team as Ronaldo for United in 2008 since Maradona played.
It was in a different way though. In the days of Maradona there wasn't all this great talent concentrated in a few clubs, so a player like Marodona with his unmatched skill, vision and character could really lead a team in every way and lift not that special players to higher level. Like Cantona did on a lower level. Ronaldo9 wasn't a player like that, it was more like give him the ball and wait and see what he comes up with, all by himself, his effect on the team he plays in wasn't all positive. Messi isn't the kind of player that leads and pulls all the strings either. So for me the only true successor to Marodona is Ronaldinho in those 2 years he was incredible.
I was kind of with you until this bit. Either I've misunderstood you, or you couldn't be more wrong in my view. Messi lifts the entire Barcelona team in a way no player has affected a whole team before I think.
While Cal? is laughably wrong gauging player's creativity through number of assists, he has a point in judging goalscorers by their goal output. CR7 has unparalleled combination of quickness, positional awareness, athleticism and power of will. He is always that fraction of second quicker than defenders. R9 was a clever player in his own right, with great goalscoring instinct, but comes short in this aspect compared to the Portuguese. Perhaps to an extent that his ability to wreak havoc with ball at his feet, and looking absolutely spectacular at that, doesn't quite make up for it. Goalscoring records attest to that.
Now, you could make an argument that his creativity was superior. After all, it seems logical. He was so brilliant on the ball, able to break defenses by himself. But skill doesn't automatically translate to creativity. He wasn't really a playmaker, making plays for others through combination of skill and ingenuity. His game was direct and individualistic. Certainly, player with that kind of ability can break defensive structures. But elite quickness and off the ball movement put no less pressure on defense, only of a less conspicuous kind.
Last edited:
I think you're underestimating Ronaldo's impact in 1998. If you want to consider the creative side through statistics, Ronaldo got 3 assists in 1998 to Messi's single one in 2014. Not that the direct comparison is that useful, because Messi played in the hole and his job was to create, whereas Ronaldo's job was to score. It's Messi's 2010 World Cup that can get under-rated IMO - his dribbling was excellent at times.
Its easier to get assists with the likes of Rivaldo next to you than the useless Higuain and Aguero etc, Messi was class and the only functioning player in attack. Some think Argentina have a world class team because of Higuain, Aguero, Di Maria, Lavezzi etc, nothing is less true, absolute bottlers they are.
Last edited:
This is true. The only player who's played well for Argentina with Messi has been Mascherano.
Di Maria, Aguero, Higuain, etc have been woeful. Higuain with his misses in the WC final and Copa final. The awful myth that Di Maria was good in the World Cup. Pretty sure he set the WC record for loss of possession in 1 game. And let's not forget Aguero. Has he ever had a good game for Argentina lately? The narrative changes so much if Higuain puts those chances away. Messi's won a WC and a Copa, and then his 'GOAT' status becomes almost undeniable in the present.
Only one of his assists was to Rivaldo though. 2 was to an aging, past his prime Bebeto.
He was and most importantly argentina's play went through him when it didn't go through Messi. Losing him meant if you stopped Messi, you stopped Argentina(*until Sabella used his subs and went with his team rather than messi's)
EDIT nevermind, it was a stupid point
Have to say, Ronaldo at his best ('96-98) was essentially a better version of Cristiano at his best(2008-2012)
That said, people here talking as if cristiano was always just a super-poacher who gave his teams nothing outside goals(mostly tap-ins), totally forgot how peak cristiano picking up the ball 80 yards from goal with a couple yards of space to pick up speed totally put the fear of god into every opponent's players, coaches and fans
That said, people here talking as if cristiano was always just a super-poacher who gave his teams nothing outside goals(mostly tap-ins), totally forgot how peak cristiano picking up the ball 80 yards from goal with a couple yards of space to pick up speed totally put the fear of god into every opponent's players, coaches and fans