Cristiano Ronaldo - Much Ado About Al Nassr

Kwabs said:
There are so many inaccuracies and contextual misunderstandings in what you have written that it is hard to know where to start. But the bolded is particularly egregious.

Pele's thousandth goal occurred in the Maracana and was witnessed by 80,000 people. The entire press and public were feverish in anticipation before that game in the hope that it might finally happen, because he'd missed a few opportunities to get it in previous games. I'd like to see you clamber into a magical DeLorean and go back to that time and go to the stadium and get on a megaphone (I hope your Portuguese is passable) and say 'I'm from the future and you are not about to witness Pele's thousandth goal, cos you see, in 2024, we've decided that certain goals don't count, so that a guy called Cristiano Ronaldo can be the highest goalscorer of all time, despite scoring hundreds of goals less than Pele, Bican, Puskas and several other guys....'

On the topic of eras, as I explained to the other gent, the greatness of a player is measured by their level of dominance in their own era, not what they would hypothetically be able to do in another era. And each era has its advantages and disadvantages.
Pele was a great athlete and a great footballer, but that gives him the same advantage over others in his era that someone with those same gifts has over others in today's game. Pele didn't have any special modern training, diet or coaching to differentiate him. He used the same heavy boots and balls as everyone else.

What you are doing is imagining someone like Ronaldo being transposed to the 60s, which is silly. What we know is that Ronaldo in his era can't score goals in the Euros or World Cup (3 in 21 knockout games, IIRC), whereas there is no arena or level that Pele could not score goals in/at. Is that because it was easier to score goals back then? Well I don't think so, seeing as the difference in goals per match in the WC then and now was about 0.3.
Click to expand...
First of all, my last post was not advocated to claim that one is better than the other and I'm definitely not a Ronaldo fanboy. Whatever numbers C. Ronaldo pulsl up in Saudi Arabia should be irrelevant in an all time great discussion because the quality of the opposition is too weak, and I don't think C. Ronaldo is among the top 5 in my all time list. I say "my", because a list like that is highly subjective and because it is impossible to directly compare player operating in different eras. Hence the last post. The differences in the sport now and then makes comparing football legends of the past to footballers today a very hard if not impossible exercise. It's comparing apples to oranges. Pele played in an highscoring era, the opposition was often very weak and he played 100s of friendlies against good and very bad opponents. You can only beat whats in front of you, but some of the friendlies Santos played were arranged only for Pele to score some goals for the crowds. He also played in one of the best teams in the world. Messi and Ronaldo were lucky enough to play for the two best teams of their era, stacked in every position and they were favourites to win every game they played for a decade except when they met eachother.
My whole point was that career number records means little when goals scored in friendlies counts for one and not for another, or they played in different leagues or they played in different eras....Very few people alive, and even fewer people in this forum has watched more than 500 minutes of Pele playing football for Santos, so I find it funny that so many have so strong feelings around it.

Pele was the man in his era, Messi was the man in his era and C. Ronaldo is probably among the best goalscorers in the history. To determine who was better between Messi and Pele is a silly exercise in my book because they played in different eras where the sport was totally different.
But I guess if you put 1960 Pele up against any decent 2020's professional footballer in a 1v1 football duel, the 2020s guy would win it with ease every time. Unfair? Yes, but that's how the sport has evolved.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
It's what I thought but @troylocker hasn't responded on that particular bit yet! I know I'm a slow runner but still that seems extreme :lol:
Click to expand...
I agree that sub 11 minutes would be pretty good, but between 11-13 minutes would be nothing more than decent.....for an amateur 50 year old jogging a few times a week.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
But do you have the data for the players? Genuinely curious :)
Click to expand...
I read it in "the beautiful game" part of the Bigsoccer forum a few years back. It's not possible to search that forum without membership anymore, so unfortunatley I don't have it. I think it was one player (not Pele) running sub 11 minutes and the rest spread out between 11-13 minutes. Really shocking results for world champs in football.
 
troylocker said:
I read it in "the beautiful game" part of the Bigsoccer forum a few years back. It's not possible to search that forum without membership anymore, so unfortunatley I don't have it. I think it was one player (not Pele) running sub 11 minutes and the rest spread out between 11-13 minutes. Really shocking results for world champs in football.
Click to expand...
I meant data from players now.
 
Mickeza said:
Sub 19 minute 5k pace is far better than decent for a 50 year old.

https://runninglevel.com/running-times/5k-times
Click to expand...
Yeah in a local town I grew up the person who wins the 5k park run is usually around 19 minutes, and they’re people who run for athletics teams too at amateur level and in their 20s and 30s. It’s not going to be anywhere near the best in athletics worldwide but it’s a good pace and enough to compete in football you’d imagine, outside of maybe full-back or centre midfield at a very elite level. Never mind for an average 50 year old. Maybe 50 year old Cafu or someone.
 
KeanoMagicHat said:
Yeah in a local town I grew up the person who wins the 5k park run is usually around 19 minutes, and they’re people who run for athletics teams too at amateur level and in their 20s and 30s. It’s not going to be anywhere near the best in athletics worldwide but it’s a good pace and enough to compete in football you’d imagine, outside of maybe full-back or centre midfield at a very elite level. Never mind for an average 50 year old. Maybe 50 year old Cafu or someone.
Click to expand...
I'm 49 and run a 5k in around 21 minutes, a 3k in less than 12 minutes and I run/jog or do other exercise around 3 times a week. Running is not my sport, but I would not stand out negatively against that WC1970 squad when it comes to stamina. I've played football on an amateur level almost my entire life (shoes back on the shelf last year). Running a 3k in sub 13 minutes really isn't that hard if you are a recreational runner. For a 20-30 year old professional athlete/footballer sub 11 minutes should be mandatory and sub 10 should be quite common.

Mind I said; an average 50 year old who jogs a couple of times a week (not an average 50 year old)

https://runninglevel.com/running-times/3k-times

You should expect professional footballers to be in the elite-group in that table. Track and field athletes competing on amateur level runs 3k well below 9 minutes, pro level sub 8 minutes.
 
Gehrman said:
Not counting goals scored club friendlies has been the norm for decades. Its not something we decided in 2024. In fact it might always have been the norm i dunno. Just because Guinness did it with Pelé doesn't mean they are authoritive compared to Fifa.

Its not just Fifa its Ballon D'or, Iffhs etc.
Click to expand...
You're exactly right, you don't know. The reason why they were counted with Pele is because he played around 500 of them, due to Santos's business model. Also, many of them were very important games, as I've said before. But this is not information about CR7, so I'll have to stop there.
 
troylocker said:
First of all, my last post was not advocated to claim that one is better than the other and I'm definitely not a Ronaldo fanboy. Whatever numbers C. Ronaldo pulsl up in Saudi Arabia should be irrelevant in an all time great discussion because the quality of the opposition is too weak, and I don't think C. Ronaldo is among the top 5 in my all time list. I say "my", because a list like that is highly subjective and because it is impossible to directly compare player operating in different eras. Hence the last post. The differences in the sport now and then makes comparing football legends of the past to footballers today a very hard if not impossible exercise. It's comparing apples to oranges. Pele played in an highscoring era, the opposition was often very weak and he played 100s of friendlies against good and very bad opponents. You can only beat whats in front of you, but some of the friendlies Santos played were arranged only for Pele to score some goals for the crowds. He also played in one of the best teams in the world. Messi and Ronaldo were lucky enough to play for the two best teams of their era, stacked in every position and they were favourites to win every game they played for a decade except when they met eachother.
My whole point was that career number records means little when goals scored in friendlies counts for one and not for another, or they played in different leagues or they played in different eras....Very few people alive, and even fewer people in this forum has watched more than 500 minutes of Pele playing football for Santos, so I find it funny that so many have so strong feelings around it.

Pele was the man in his era, Messi was the man in his era and C. Ronaldo is probably among the best goalscorers in the history. To determine who was better between Messi and Pele is a silly exercise in my book because they played in different eras where the sport was totally different.
But I guess if you put 1960 Pele up against any decent 2020's professional footballer in a 1v1 football duel, the 2020s guy would win it with ease every time. Unfair? Yes, but that's how the sport has evolved.
Click to expand...
I mean it's obviously the case that the eras are different and it is hard to compare across them. That goes without saying. My point is that just because the sport is more professional now, it doesn't mean that a modern great like Ronaldo is automatically better than a past great, or that what CR7 is doing is somehow more admirable because the players are better athletes. Ronaldo has to play against much fitter players etc, but he has all the best equipment, medicine, training, doctors and teammates (costing collective billions) at his disposal and his opponents are basically not allowed to touch him or they'll get sent off.

Pele played in a a much less athletic era where there wasn't all the tactical innovation and video analysis that there is now. But on the flip side, he had to use very poor equipment, play in bad conditions, and if he picked up an injury he couldn't come off (unless he practically couldn't walk) because there were no subs. The only medical guy you had was a physio with a sponge. Also, opponents were allowed to target you and kick you out of the game (like Portugal did in the '66 WC). So it's swings and roundabouts. I just don't want it to be a situation where modern feats are automatically considered superior, because the challenges were just as tough back then, but in a different way.

By the way, I don't know where you get the idea that no one has watched 5 games of Pele playing for Santos. Just because you haven't, doesn't mean that no-one has.
 
That laugh 2 seconds in killed me. There's no way he's not self-aware of these comparisons to the Homelander and other meme's about him. And now just phoning it in.
 
It's his very own Youtube channel? Actually I think it's a great fecking idea. From every social media APP out there Youtube it's by far the best for football players to upload matches. For him to have control over it its' even better.
 
Kwabs said:
There are so many inaccuracies and contextual misunderstandings in what you have written that it is hard to know where to start. But the bolded is particularly egregious.

Pele's thousandth goal occurred in the Maracana and was witnessed by 80,000 people. The entire press and public were feverish in anticipation before that game in the hope that it might finally happen, because he'd missed a few opportunities to get it in previous games. I'd like to see you clamber into a magical DeLorean and go back to that time and go to the stadium and get on a megaphone (I hope your Portuguese is passable) and say 'I'm from the future and you are not about to witness Pele's thousandth goal, cos you see, in 2024, we've decided that certain goals don't count, so that a guy called Cristiano Ronaldo can be the highest goalscorer of all time, despite scoring hundreds of goals less than Pele, Bican, Puskas and several other guys....'

On the topic of eras, as I explained to the other gent, the greatness of a player is measured by their level of dominance in their own era, not what they would hypothetically be able to do in another era. And each era has its advantages and disadvantages.
Pele was a great athlete and a great footballer, but that gives him the same advantage over others in his era that someone with those same gifts has over others in today's game. Pele didn't have any special modern training, diet or coaching to differentiate him. He used the same heavy boots and balls as everyone else.

What you are doing is imagining someone like Ronaldo being transposed to the 60s, which is silly. What we know is that Ronaldo in his era can't score goals in the Euros or World Cup (3 in 21 knockout games, IIRC), whereas there is no arena or level that Pele could not score goals in/at. Is that because it was easier to score goals back then? Well I don't think so, seeing as the difference in goals per match in the WC then and now was about 0.3.
Click to expand...

Actually agree with the third paragraph, it’s the same in any sport imo when everyone is banging on about the “GOAT”, nice post.
 
I predict that channel is going to make for completely insufferable viewing once he finally retires.
 
Disappointed not to see the thread updated with every new subscriber. His fans are losing interest.
 
Maybe his next chapter in life is comedy. There has been a hint of it previously:



Now that's a laugh track.
 
Oh dear God. Against my better judgment I started watching one of the videos.

This is a total cringe fest. A new low, even for him. Highly embarrassing. Siuuubscribe :lol: :lol: :lol:

I get that some former players have their own channels e.g. Rio, but they're nowhere near as cringey as this.

He just can't not be the center of attention. I hope he gets some help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.