Cristiano Ronaldo - Much Ado About Al Nassr

Hilarious post, thanks for the chuckle this morning. I'm not quite sure that Instagram post means what you would like to think it means :lol:

Nor did I anywhere say that Guiness is the 'absolute official source of facts'; I mentioned them in order to highlight the discrepancy between their contention that Pele scored 1279 goals as a world record, and the more modern, 'goalpost-moving' notion that he didn't.

You're entitled to your opinion. To me, CR's definitely not top 3 and probably not top 5. No one who has never scored or assisted a goal in the knockout rounds of the World Cup (football's most important competition by far) can possibly be the greatest player of all time. That fact alone completely disqualifies him from being the greatest.
Apparently, he'll likely participate in the next world cup, which would give him a chance to register a goal or assist. It is crazy to think that in 5 world cup tournaments, he doesn't have a single KO stage goal contribution though.
 
Hilarious post, thanks for the chuckle this morning. I'm not quite sure that Instagram post means what you would like to think it means :lol:

Nor did I anywhere say that Guiness is the 'absolute official source of facts'; I mentioned them in order to highlight the discrepancy between their contention that Pele scored 1279 goals as a world record, and the more modern, 'goalpost-moving' notion that he didn't.

You're entitled to your opinion. To me, CR's definitely not top 3 and probably not top 5. No one who has never scored or assisted a goal in the knockout rounds of the World Cup (football's most important competition by far) can possibly be the greatest player of all time. That fact alone completely disqualifies him from being the greatest.

Does that include Cruyff then?

Because getting fouled for a penalty isn't really an assist.
 
It's amazing to think that if he scores against Ghana or Switzerland in the last 16 of the next world cup he'll be in contention for being one of the greatest players of all time again. Truly the margins are so narrow in football
 
It's amazing to think that if he scores against Ghana or Switzerland in the last 16 of the next world cup he'll be in contention for being one of the greatest players of all time again. Truly the margins are so narrow in football
But those are the rules. A dodgy VAR penalty could decide whether 25 years of goalscoring and trophies won means something or not. It's harsh, but the same for everyone of course.
 
Errr… what?

That poster is saying you can't be considered the greatest player if you've never scored or assisted in the knockout stages of the world cup. Because Ronaldo hasn't done it (yet), he can never be considered as the greatest of all time.

Now, as far as I know and I may be wrong here, so feel free to correct me. Cruyff played in only one world cup (1974) and didn't score or assist in the knockout stages of that world cup. Maybe because it was a 2 group stage tournament and he only played in one knockout game and that was the final.

He is credited with getting an assist in the final on different websites today, but lets be honest being fouled for a penalty isn't an assist. It's a fantasy football or gambling invention.

A supposed Barcelona fan is essentially saying Cruyff can never considered as the greatest.
 
That poster is saying you can't be considered the greatest player if you've never scored or assisted in the knockout stages of the world cup. Because Ronaldo hasn't done it (yet), he can never be considered as the greatest of all time.

Now, as far as I know and I may be wrong here, so feel free to correct me. Cruyff played in only one world cup (1974) and didn't score or assist in the knockout stages of that world cup. Maybe because it was a 2 group stage tournament and he only played in one knockout game and that was the final.

He is credited with getting an assist in the final on different websites today, but lets be honest being fouled for a penalty isn't an assist. It's a fantasy football or gambling invention.

A supposed Barcelona fan is essentially saying Cruyff can never considered as the greatest.
There were only 2 direct knock out games in that World Cup - the final itself and the 3rd/4th place game. Cruyff was essentially running through k.o. Rounds (as was everyone else) during the group, where he was outstanding. He was also very good in the final. He was rightfully crowned player of the tournament, over even anyone from the winning team.

Even if you rejig modern World Cups to the ‘74 format, there’d be no equivalency with C.Ronaldo’s abysmal WC showings.
 
There were only 2 direct knock out games in that World Cup - the final itself and the 3rd/4th place game. Cruyff was essentially running through k.o. Rounds (as was everyone else) during the group, where he was outstanding. He was also very good in the final. He was rightfully crowned player of the tournament, over even anyone from the winning team.

Even if you rejig modern World Cups to the ‘74 format, there’d be no equivalency with C.Ronaldo’s abysmal WC showings.

Aye, but if you use that posters qualifying criteria, Cruyff doesn't make the cut.
 
Aye, but if you use that posters qualifying criteria, Cruyff doesn't make the cut.

I think this is splitting hairs. Cruyff wad a player who contributed in various ways which couldn't be captured in goal and assist stats. Cristiano Ronaldo on the other hand did his very best to optimize those statistics. You could even argue that he became a worse player because he sacrificed different apsects of his game to get more goals. It is a different story if such a player can't get on the scoring sheet conpared to a playmaker like Cruyff.

But I agree that the idea that a football great has to have scored in the WC knockout stage generally is a bit stupid.
 
That poster is saying you can't be considered the greatest player if you've never scored or assisted in the knockout stages of the world cup. Because Ronaldo hasn't done it (yet), he can never be considered as the greatest of all time.

Now, as far as I know and I may be wrong here, so feel free to correct me. Cruyff played in only one world cup (1974) and didn't score or assist in the knockout stages of that world cup. Maybe because it was a 2 group stage tournament and he only played in one knockout game and that was the final.

He is credited with getting an assist in the final on different websites today, but lets be honest being fouled for a penalty isn't an assist. It's a fantasy football or gambling invention.

A supposed Barcelona fan is essentially saying Cruyff can never considered as the greatest.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here, but it's obvious that Cruyff is an actual worthy candidate for "best ever World Cup performance", whereas Cristiano Ronaldo is not anywhere near it.

(It has nothing to do with goals and assists, as shocking as that may seem.)
 
Apparently, he'll likely participate in the next world cup, which would give him a chance to register a goal or assist. It is crazy to think that in 5 world cup tournaments, he doesn't have a single KO stage goal contribution though.
He'll be 41, so I think it's unlikely. The tournament is still a long way away. Nevertheless, as you say, he's had 5 attempts already and failed, which is terrible. The reason is that he's not as good as his PR would have you believe.
 
Does that include Cruyff then?

Because getting fouled for a penalty isn't really an assist.
Others have pointed out why you are confused about the format of that tournament, which had 2 group stages. But nevertheless, Cruyff played in one tournament. Do you seriously think that if he had played in 5 World Cups and never scored or assisted a single goal, that wouldn't be somewhat notable?
 
It's amazing to think that if he scores against Ghana or Switzerland in the last 16 of the next world cup he'll be in contention for being one of the greatest players of all time again. Truly the margins are so narrow in football
What's so amazing about it? You can't score all your goals against the best Italian defence/ goalkeeper. That's football.
 
I think this is splitting hairs. Cruyff wad a player who contributed in various ways which couldn't be captured in goal and assist stats. Cristiano Ronaldo on the other hand did his very best to optimize those statistics. You could even argue that he became a worse player because he sacrificed different apsects of his game to get more goals. It is a different story if such a player can't get on the scoring sheet conpared to a playmaker like Cruyff.

But I agree that the idea that a football great has to have scored in the WC knockout stage generally is a bit stupid.
I mean, it really isn't if you actually use logic. You're trying to claim that a player is greater than any other player who has ever played since the dawn of time. That is a lot of players.

Yet this player, cannot score or create a single goal in the (by far) biggest games he has ever played in. And it's not a situation where he didn't get a chance compete, or only got one shot. He's played in FIVE tournaments.

I'm not saying you can't be a great player with this repeated failure. He's a great player. All time great. I'm saying you can't be THE GREATEST. NUMBER ONE.

Because there are players that have basically done what Ronaldo has done AND ALSO performed in the World Cup Nothing stupid about it.
 
I mean, it really isn't if you actually use logic. You're trying to claim that a player is greater than any other player who has ever played since the dawn of time. That is a lot of players.

Yet this player, cannot score or create a single goal in the (by far) biggest games he has ever played in. And it's not a situation where he didn't get a chance compete, or only got one shot. He's played in FIVE tournaments.

I'm not saying you can't be a great player with this repeated failure. He's a great player. All time great. I'm saying you can't be THE GREATEST. NUMBER ONE.

Because there are players that have basically done what Ronaldo has done AND ALSO performed in the World Cup Nothing stupid about it.

Still disagree. If you played those ko matches without acoring but put in 10/10 performances in overall contributions, why not?
 
I’m pretty sure that is factored toward the new format.
Others have pointed out why you are confused about the format of that tournament, which had 2 group stages. But nevertheless, Cruyff played in one tournament. Do you seriously think that if he had played in 5 World Cups and never scored or assisted a single goal, that wouldn't be somewhat notable?
Others have pointed out why you are confused about the format of that tournament, which had 2 group stages. But nevertheless, Cruyff played in one tournament. Do you seriously think that if he had played in 5 World Cups and never scored or assisted a single goal, that wouldn't be somewhat notable?
Not sure what point you're trying to make here, but it's obvious that Cruyff is an actual worthy candidate for "best ever World Cup performance", whereas Cristiano Ronaldo is not anywhere near it.

(It has nothing to do with goals and assists, as shocking as that may seem.)

The criteria that poster put forward was that you can't be considered the greatest ever if you've never scored or assisted in the knockout stages of the world cup.

That would remove Cruyff from the conversation, it's not about including Ronaldo. Any conversation that has such an idea that would remove Cruyff from consideration is stupid.
 
The GOAT title can only be awarded to those with at least fifteen assists in the Rumbelows cup so let's not even get into this here
 
I mean, it really isn't if you actually use logic. You're trying to claim that a player is greater than any other player who has ever played since the dawn of time. That is a lot of players.

Yet this player, cannot score or create a single goal in the (by far) biggest games he has ever played in. And it's not a situation where he didn't get a chance compete, or only got one shot. He's played in FIVE tournaments.

I'm not saying you can't be a great player with this repeated failure. He's a great player. All time great. I'm saying you can't be THE GREATEST. NUMBER ONE.

Because there are players that have basically done what Ronaldo has done AND ALSO performed in the World Cup Nothing stupid about it.

Still is silly, and more than stupid, it's excessivly romantic. Yes the WC has a lot of weight, yet that weight ain't strictly just football related and sometimes shyte just happens.
Also the idea that only matters KO stages it's also quite silly, more in WCs, CLs or Libertadores, but it's a matter of another subject.
 
Each time I see this thread bumped, I'm thinking he's said something even more ridiculous in the press, and I keep being disappointed
 
You could even argue that he became a worse player because he sacrificed different apsects of his game to get more goals.
You could, if you were insane
Any conversation that has such an idea that would remove Cruyff from consideration is stupid.
Why? Cruyff was not THE greatest player of all time. He never was as good as Pelé or Maradona. Quite clearly so. He absolutely does not belong in that conversation.
 
Cruyff was not THE greatest player of all time. He never was as good as Pelé or Maradona. Quite clearly so. He absolutely does not belong in that conversation.
Cruijff was one of the greatest of all time, Cristiano will never be in my book.
 
Still disagree. If you played those ko matches without acoring but put in 10/10 performances in overall contributions, why not?
Well if you are a forward, you're not going to play 8-10 matches of stellar performances without scoring or assisting a goal. That's just ridiculous.
 
Well if you are a forward, you're not going to play 8-10 matches of stellar performances without scoring or assisting a goal. That's just ridiculous.

Well there arent 8-10 ko matches in the wc or euros. Still agree though if it was way. He was still player of the tournament at the WC despite not having those goals in the knockout rounds.
 
Wonder how Cristiano will try to stay relevant after he retires. Coach, Youtuber, something else? Don’t think he’ll be just enjoying retirement peacefully.
He's got more money than he could ever burn through so doesn't need to do anything, but I'm not sure what he could/would actually do after he calls it a day. It's probably why he's intent on keeping playing. He has no idea what do after either.
 
The criteria that poster put forward was that you can't be considered the greatest ever if you've never scored or assisted in the knockout stages of the world cup.

That would remove Cruyff from the conversation, it's not about including Ronaldo. Any conversation that has such an idea that would remove Cruyff from consideration is stupid.
No, what is stupid is the idea that a forward who played in one match and didn't score or create a goal (though he won a penalty with a great dribble into the box) is the exact same as a forward who played in 8 matches and didn't score or create a goal. That's what's stupid.
 
Maybe he'll convince the Saudis to buy United and put him as Chairman. No bigger boost for his ego than coming back as the headman.
 
Well there arent 8-10 ko matches in the wc or euros. Still agree though if it was way. He was still player of the tournament at the WC despite not having those goals in the knockout rounds.
8-10 matches was a reference to how many WC KO games Ronaldo has played. The actual number is 8. In fact, I believe he has played 21 KO games if you include the Euros, and he has 3 goals and 2 assists in total. This is from one of the most prolific goalscorers (and assisters) in history.

This is why he has never won the 'best player' award at any of the international tournaments he has played in (maybe 11 of them?), despite winning a title in 2016.
 
:lol:

Had what? 1 great year in Barca, 1 in Inter? At a stretch 1-2 good years in Madrid.

No doubt he was one of the most talented players to ever walk the planet but Cristiano’s career absolutely obliterates his.
There’s no appreciation for consistency and longevity
 
No, what is stupid is the idea that a forward who played in one match and didn't score or create a goal (though he won a penalty with a great dribble into the box) is the exact same as a forward who played in 8 matches and didn't score or create a goal. That's what's stupid.

It's your criteria that you posted.

Your arguments and posts in this thread are stupid.
 
:lol:

Had what? 1 great year in Barca, 1 in Inter? At a stretch 1-2 good years in Madrid.

No doubt he was one of the most talented players to ever walk the planet but Cristiano’s career absolutely obliterates his.

For sure Cristiano had a way better career. But I would still take peak R9 over peak Cristiano. The club sides R9 played for in his peak weren't super teams and he had more flair and ability to create a goal out of nothing. I've got no beef with anyone disagreeing with that though.
 
You could, if you were insane

Why? Cruyff was not THE greatest player of all time. He never was as good as Pelé or Maradona. Quite clearly so. He absolutely does not belong in that conversation.

Why? It's pretty obvious that Ronaldo's goal obsession at times worked against his team. And I'd definitely take the 2008-2014 CR7 over the version after that.