The point was that you dismiss the importance of playmaking and defending in comparison to pure goal scoring all the time. That's why I wanted your opinion on both players because they are the perfect example of how misleading goalscoring stats can be if we talk about the greatest players of all time.
Cristiano Ronaldo
- Thread starter ciderman9000000
- Start date
- Status
Show me where I have dismissed importance of playmaking and defending. I have pointed in my posts that it is wrong to 1)dismiss 'just goal scoring' as nothing but a robotic thing 2)Ronaldo has many other aspects to his game which are conveniently ignored.
Sure, there are defenders and playmakers worthy of being in GOAT list, I have never denied that.
Jungle Book was based in India and yes Balu is a common name in India.
Great choice for a username!
I'm not sure what a rich assumption is but if you had seen those players surely you would've happily addressed the point instead of changing the subject.
Shaving off about 10 goals and adding that dribbling threat and constant threat he had back then would clearly make him a better player and a more rare breed of footballer, in my opinion. I'd say it would alter Madrid's chances, but agree to disagree.
I remember about 7 years ago when teams used to shit themselves silly whenever Ronaldo got the ball. He caused far more disorder and chaos for an opposition every time he got the ball, and that's something that affects every aspect of an opposing team. You could say this is too intangible a thing to measure, but I think it's an easy enough thing to see; opponents become more hesitant and wary around some like that, and it leaks into more than just how the defence plays. That sort of player changes the whole dynamic of a team, the way it operates and sets up to cope, how unsettled and uncomfortable they are, etc... It's more than a matter of how the defence react; it entirely changes how both teams play,. Only analogy I can think of is to say that introducing a player like that Ronaldo to a game is like watching a load of particles being heated. Something like that...
It is? I lived in India for a long time and I don't think I ever came across a person called Balu. Kipling's work was, of course, inspired a lot by Indian culture but the only time I ever came across the name Balu was while reading the Jungle Book.
Have you even read the posts before that? Why would I answer who is greater between those two when it was irrelevant to point which I was making and mentioning those two was in fact 'changing the subject.'
So is it Balu in Kipling's book? Or is that just the German translation? Never had the original book in my hands, only the German translation and afaik the character in the Disney movie is called Baloo in English?
Cheers, I never would have imagined a bear inspired your username. Specifically, why did you choose Balu? Lulz
If you had seen them play you would understand the relevance of the point being made. Beckenbauer was special, to the extent that even the greatest goalscorer of the last 50 years wasn't even close to being on his level. You don't need stats to recognise that because it's right there in front of you, clear as day, completely undeniable. And when you see what Beckenbauer has that sets him miles apart from Muller - that indescribable aura - you'll see what Ronaldo's missing.
It's Baloo in Kipling's book. It's a bit odd that they would change names as part of German translation to Balu.
I'm sorry, but:
sounds a lot like dismissing everything else but goals to me. That's why the "How do you rate Müller and Beckenbauer in comparison" question seemed like a good idea?
I'm sure you have seen them play week in week out.
feck this Ronaldo lark. Let's concentrate on Balu. It is a common name in Southern India (especially Tamil Nadu)
You are going to get a picture of his portable hard disk with downloads of all World Cups played from 1950 to 2024
For whats it worth Paul Breitner who played with Muller and Beckenbauer Says Muller was the best and most important player in Germany's history, its just an opinion though but hes certainly not the only one who thinks muller was better.
A guy who I knew made up the name "Balu", and tried to prank me (prank is a wrong word - he tried to cause me serious problems) from a PCO . I stalked him, found his PCO, waited for him to try it again and beat the crap out of him. Not related, but throwing it out there.
It's a very likeable bear though.My niece visited me and I watched the movie with her and the DVD was still lying on the table. I couldn't think of a username that made sense, so I picked Balu.
It's happening quite a lot actually and it makes sense, especially in a children's book. The German "Balu" sounds exactly like the English 'Baloo', while Baloo in German would sound really weird.
Isn't it sad that the only thing Ronaldo has in his favour is the fact people have seen him score goals against Getafe, Betis, Zaragoza etc. while Pelé's goals against Botafogo, Corinthians or Sao Paulo were never caught on camera? It doesn't make him better than Pelé, it just means we're more qualified to judge how good he is. Brilliant.
Well, I am that kind of football fan who reads in detail about a derby even it is about two small teams from a country which is not much recognized or the two clubs haven't achieved anything. So, not having seen these two is out of question. I have indeed seen whatever clips I could find and even studied about their career, as I have done with around 30 or so other historically 'great' players. Obviously I haven't seen these two live, both retired before I was born
I stand by my point that those two were not relevant to my discussion, especially when Balu had asked me, "who is greater between two?" Had he asked me, "what is your opinion on these two in greatest players list," I surely would have not avoided answering.
I can't speak for exactly where Ronaldo should go down among the greatest players of all time. But if I'm to hazard a guess, I'd say he should be in the tier below the absolute greatest footballers. While he isn't simply a goal poacher like some claim, he doesn't influence games other than goals as much as I'd expect someone who is staking a claim to be the best football ever. Like I said, he's not just a poacher, he's a quality footballer overall. But if you do cut out the playmakers of the team, he can be stopped because he can't play the role of one. I've always assumes the likes of maradona and pele made the team function really, and to stop the team you had to stop them rather than stop them from getting into the game.
Do you have a link to those quotes? Not that it matters, because Breitner changes his opinions on a daily basis and is a massive idiot anyway. But I never read anything like that, so I'm curious. I know Beckenbauer stated that Müller's goals shaped the club and the club would not be where it is today without him, but well Beckenbauer is not like Pele, he rarely talks about himself, so thoses quotes don't really count.
If you didnt saw them play then stop acting like you're some kind of expert that has seen them week in week out when obviously thats not the case. Acting like a smartass wont help your argument either so get out of your high horse and cut the bullshit cause you're not fooling anyone.
Yes, and if you see other posts, my arguments weren't about "goal scoring is the only worthy attribute of a football player" but my objection was to dismissing goal scoring prowess, especially like Ronaldo's. Even other factors can be proved with stats and that's what I was looking for. Of course, this kind of comparison will be between players in similar roles. If it is across positions, it becomes different discussion point which was what your post was about.
Its from a documentary about Bayern that was showed on ESPN Classic a while ago where they talk about the great Bayern team from the 70's.
Yes, I've watched them play. I didn't see them week in, week out because a) I didn't exist at that point and b) no-one who lived in the UK could have seen them week in, week out. If watching a player week in, week out is the criteria to judging a player then people who lived through Di Stéfano's era aren't even allowed to have an opinion on him. How ridiculous is that?
Sorry Partizan, you might've lived through his era, you may even have seen him play against your team, but your opinion on him is now disqualified.
I don't think you can totally discount goals in favor of general play or visa versa. In the end it comes down to overall contribution, however you contribute. Iniesta's playmaking and creativity is much greater than Ronaldo's but the latter is clearly the superior footballer IMO. Overall as an attacker he contributes more for me than iniesta does as a midfielder.
However, I still wouldn't think of Ronaldo as one of the greatest ever. Like I said in the earlier post, I haven't seen any of the so called greatest players, but I'd expect them to influence games in more ways than Ronaldo does, as brilliant as he is. Just a level below I reckon.
However, I still wouldn't think of Ronaldo as one of the greatest ever. Like I said in the earlier post, I haven't seen any of the so called greatest players, but I'd expect them to influence games in more ways than Ronaldo does, as brilliant as he is. Just a level below I reckon.
It's not a different discussion because if an attacking player also contributes a lot in other areas, it simply can't be dismissed. The way how you dismissed Ronaldo's lack of tracking back or defensive contribution in general was just ridiculous. All you did in your first post today was to ridicule what makes players great besides goals and making excuses for Ronaldo, a player who's part of the most expensive team of all time with some of the best managers of his generation in charge. It's weird anyway, all the truely great players took the blame when their teams weren't playing well, yet with Ronaldo, it's always everyone else's fault. That's just wrong.
Yes, because it is equally ridiculous to point out any random match and blame Ronaldo's 'not tracking back.' It isn't about Ronaldo being above blame, but when the team is Real Madrid with a new soap opera everyday, yes it is more fault of others that there are lesser trophies to show for.
I don't think one should totally discount anything, really. Truly great goal scorers will always be remembered. While Ronaldo's insane stats are no doubt influenced by where he plays and when he happened to play there (the context is favourable) he must undoubtedly be ranked among the great goal scorers, like Müller, Fat Ronaldo, Romario, going all the way back to Dixie Dean: Such players are special and will rightly be remembered as such. Ronaldo's problem in this context is mainly - you know, the other guy: Who is even more prolific, whilst also being regarded as a more complete player.
It's not mystical if you understand what 'creative play' means. Midfielders can be more important than strikers to a team. Arguing 'but the strikers score the goals' just means you don't really understand football.
I can't believe TMH asked for stats to show that Ronaldinho is a better passer than Ronaldo. Does he not have eyes?
I think he'd prefer to watch games FM style - Dots on a pitch, as key stats are continally updated.
I think he'd prefer to watch games FM style - Dots on a pitch, as key stats are continally updated.
To me GOAT is the answer to the question: if you could have any player in history play out their whole career at United, who would you choose? By this I mean who would do most for the team over their career, not who do you like best. I would choose someone who was fantastic for a long time rather than a genius with a meteoric career. Messi and Ronaldo are climbing the charts quite rapidly and you would think there is plenty more to come.
Read again all the posts of mine if you are interested. My problem was with dismissing a player who is NOT a striker as merely a goal scorer. Someone(I) whose all time favourite player is Scholes certainly won't disregard creative play. Reading your posts, a certificate from you whether I understand the game or not will be least of my concern.
About your second post, it will be better that instead of picking and choosing a single point out of context, you offer valid arguments if you think Ronaldinho is better
What are the points still being argued atm? Because I have a sneaky feeling everyone is on the "same page" (excuse the pun)? 
Does anyone not agree with this, I think amol summed it up for me:
Otherwise, if anyone still thinks Ronaldo belongs in that "top tier", my apologies, carry on...
Does anyone not agree with this, I think amol summed it up for me:
Otherwise, if anyone still thinks Ronaldo belongs in that "top tier", my apologies, carry on...
He will be in the top tier by the time he's done. Given his conditioning, he still has at least 3-4 years at the world class level, followed by another 3-4 productive years after that. By the time he's finished, although he won't have any World or Euro cups, his career goals scored will be sufficiently higher than the likes of Cruyff and Maradona, and nearly all of them will have come in big European leagues (unlike Pele's which mostly came at Santos). At that point the only argument keeping him out of the top tier will be lack of World Cups, but then again that may plague Messi was well.
True, but I think most people wrongly downplay Pele's role. The pitches weren't exactly mint and the tackling was much harder. Pele also rejected a move to Europe.
Muller's career goals are higher than Cruyff and Maradona too and his 18 goals in 15 Euro/World cup matches prove his pedigree at the highest level - why should he not be in the top tier on that basis?
In fact he was deemed a national treasure and was refused permission to leave by the government. Not playing in Europe wasn't a bad thing at that point anyway, South America still reigned supreme. Half of the great Brazil '70 team played in the Paulistão, over half of the players in the 1962 WC winning team played in the Paulistão and just under half of the 1958 WC winning team played in the the Paulistão. All of the rest played in the Campeonato Carioca, who Santos played against in the Taça Brasil every single season, usually on their way to winning the Taça (they won over half of those contested while Pele was there).
- Status