But then you'd probably have around 20-25 people in the top tier and that's kind a boring to discuss, especially if it's so obvious that you can seperate that group quite easily when you've watched the players regularly.
Cristiano Ronaldo
- Thread starter ciderman9000000
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, that's my point, but I didn't know he was refused permission - why was that? It was a much stronger league than today and I think people downplaying Pele's achievements is down to ignorance. In fact, I was the same, I belittled the past legends, but I soon realised the physical demands, pitches, etc. You're obviously more informed than me, how do you watch old matches? I'd really love to see more of what made Pele a legend.
I wasn't having a go at Pele, just putting his stats in context. I know pitches were poorer and tackling more violent in those days.
Sorry for poor wording mate, I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to a recent Twitter debate I witnessed. Hope I didn't offend you, apologies.
I don't imagine there are many players who have scored over 600 goals in a major European league and also won a World Cup. Who else would you throw into that category ?
But how do you compare Gerd Müller for example with Platini, a player who deserves credit for scoring 1 in 2 as a playmaker in the most defensive league of all time while controling games in midfield and carrying his nationalteam to an Euro win and who also had a few brilliant world cup performances. It's not fair to seperate players because of their individual stats and Gerd Müller doesn't deserve to be in the top tier just because of his goals.
Its all completely subjective. I suppose in your example, one might begin comparing things like major cups won, style/flair, ability to influence a match, etc. At the end of the day its still quite subjective.
The one thing that has always bugged me is the need to win a World Cup. Messi may never do it, but IMO will likely wind up as the best ever, with Ronaldo not very hard behind.
But back to Ronaldo - He's influential, scores a ton of goals, exhibits bags of flair and creativity, and is probably the most complete footballer in the world. Unfortunately, he plays for Portugal and is likely to never win a major national trophy (despite his near miss in 2004). His consistency at the top level is however, quite remarkable.
Portugal are hardly minnows though. They have some very good players besides Ronaldo. Are they any worse than Argentina were if you discount Maradona and Ronaldo respectively?
They're a lot worse than Argentina. Even without Messi, Argentina would be a quality team.
I was talking about the Argentina team that won the WC with Maradona, though maybe your point still stands.
Yes they are a lot worse than the 1986 Argentina.
Nice the discussion is still going
I largely agree with the points made by Raoul. Ronaldo is a complete footballer, not just a goal scoring machine. He definitely has other aspects to his play than just goal scoring. Otherwise those of us arguing him to be amongst GOAT would have argued for inclusion of RvN, Inzaghi as well.
The major difference in my opinion, going into technicalities is, Ronaldo being pre dominantly a wide player has made tactically good teams to cut him out of game relatively easily. All the other greats we are comparing him to, mostly played through centre in their prime. Through centre, you can dictate game more and have more options. That is the pivotal area of the pitch. Obviously not everyone can do that and we have a select few who did it superlatively. But that also doesn't mean only those who could do super human things in that area are topmost tier worthy. So often, GKs and Defenders get neglected in GOAT discussions (except 1-2 players) and even while handing awards. For this very reason, in fact, I am in support of having a discussion about who are the GOATs, even if we have to have 15 or so names in the list, provided they were one of their kind in their area on pitch and cover all areas/roles. You can't compare Ronaldo with Platini/Pele/Maradona if they have so different styles of play and have/had different kind of role in team. Going by same argument, Muller is also a top tier player for me. How many were/are better than him in his trade?
A game which has produced so many top quality players from so many countries and with so varied styles of play, we are bound to have more than just 4-5 players who are GOAT worthy. You can't say that no matter how far in future we move, GOATs will always be only 4-5 at max and only those who were playmakers. It can't happen. It shouldn't happen.
I largely agree with the points made by Raoul. Ronaldo is a complete footballer, not just a goal scoring machine. He definitely has other aspects to his play than just goal scoring. Otherwise those of us arguing him to be amongst GOAT would have argued for inclusion of RvN, Inzaghi as well.
The major difference in my opinion, going into technicalities is, Ronaldo being pre dominantly a wide player has made tactically good teams to cut him out of game relatively easily. All the other greats we are comparing him to, mostly played through centre in their prime. Through centre, you can dictate game more and have more options. That is the pivotal area of the pitch. Obviously not everyone can do that and we have a select few who did it superlatively. But that also doesn't mean only those who could do super human things in that area are topmost tier worthy. So often, GKs and Defenders get neglected in GOAT discussions (except 1-2 players) and even while handing awards. For this very reason, in fact, I am in support of having a discussion about who are the GOATs, even if we have to have 15 or so names in the list, provided they were one of their kind in their area on pitch and cover all areas/roles. You can't compare Ronaldo with Platini/Pele/Maradona if they have so different styles of play and have/had different kind of role in team. Going by same argument, Muller is also a top tier player for me. How many were/are better than him in his trade?
A game which has produced so many top quality players from so many countries and with so varied styles of play, we are bound to have more than just 4-5 players who are GOAT worthy. You can't say that no matter how far in future we move, GOATs will always be only 4-5 at max and only those who were playmakers. It can't happen. It shouldn't happen.
But isn't what seperates the Greats from the GOATs to go where it helps the team most and still perform brilliantly instead of staying in the comfort zone of their best individual position? Pele isn't one of the GOATs because he mastered one position, but because he mastered several and became the player the team needs more than just being the player he always was. It's even more impressive with Maradona, he simply went where his team needed him and then made it work for the team, he basically played every attacking and midfield position at one time in his career and he played them all on the highest possible level. That's what allowed him to turn mediocre teams into good ones and good teams into great ones. The GOATs all were easily the best in the world in one position early in their career but they had to be more than that to become the center of some of the most successful teams of all time. Why should a player who couldn't do that be in the same tier? I love Gerd Müller, his goals shaped the history of the club I support but it looks so wrong to me, if someone says he's in the same tier of all time greats as Pele.
He sums up what i'm getting it. He is an amazing player but he doesn't touch enough of the game. It is even more noticeable in bigger matches was my point.
For Real to struggle against Dortmund the way they did and for Ronaldo to be no more involved than Ozil or Di Maria says it all, that is not the first time I have seen it either. He relies on his teammates to create a lot for him. He is an amazing scorer of goals in a team suited to him (someone earlier suggested otherwise). But his ability to get involved in games outside goals lacks. He scores so much that you don't notice it as much. Unless you watch his games. Messi may be the less complete in terms of what is in his locker if we reading from a list, but he is able to do things Ronaldo can't. He can change a game without scoring AND he scores more than Ronaldo. Yes he plays in a great team, but amongst Xavi, Iniesta et al. he still manages to be the difference. Ronaldo is an amazing player with his consistency being his most commendable trait but up there with the very best? Not for me.
@Balu: You can't expect a striker to move around all over the pitch just to show that he can do other duties. The players who play through centre and are playmakers, well often they do cover around more area and the best ones at that, they can, through their skills be important in defensive duties or elsewhere on pitch(scoring). But just like you can't expect a central defender to be doing creative duties game in/game out, you can't expect out and out strikers to be heavily involved in build up play, up to the opposition goal. This doesn't mean that just because comparing Pele and Muller seems odd in greatness comparison we should conveniently disregard someone like Muller and put him a tier below. Can we confidently say that had these GOATs who were AMs, if were out and out strikers they would have had matching goal scoring record as Muller?
By this argument of influencing in more areas, a GK will never be candidate for GOAT whatever he does. Yes, within GOATs, Pele might be a 9.8-9.9/10, Muller might be 9.5/10 but how many strikers can be ranked above Muller?
That's why to me, a GOAT list should have representation of all areas and competition and selection should be stringent among the like players. To me, Lev Yashin is a GOAT, Gerd Muller is a GOAT, Ronaldo is a GOAT.
By this argument of influencing in more areas, a GK will never be candidate for GOAT whatever he does. Yes, within GOATs, Pele might be a 9.8-9.9/10, Muller might be 9.5/10 but how many strikers can be ranked above Muller?
That's why to me, a GOAT list should have representation of all areas and competition and selection should be stringent among the like players. To me, Lev Yashin is a GOAT, Gerd Muller is a GOAT, Ronaldo is a GOAT.
Best isnt on the list either, would you put Ronaldo is the same class as Georgie?
To broaden the discussion, basically no traditional no.9 is in the conversation for greatest ever??
@The Man Himself
I agree that Müller, Yashin and Ronaldo are part of the Greatest of all time tier in their respective position. I'd still rate someone who does more than that a tier above if we compare players in general. Put Müller in Pele's shoes, he maybe could have matched his goalscoring rate (which is still a big maybe, imo), but he never could have played Pele's role in 1970, but that's what the team needed him to do to become the best international side of all time. The striker Pele wouldn't have been enough. With Müller instead of Pele, that side wouldn't have existed and that would be really sad. Why would you ignore that? That's what makes international football still so incredibly important. For a club side, you just buy the players you need to get the best out of your players. For the nationalteam the best players often don't play in their best position but in a position where it's best for their team and if they master that challenge, then they become contenders for that GOAT tier, that tier that isn't about position anymore. Goalkeeper are a bit fecked, I agree, but well, if they were more talented with their feet, then they wouldn't have played in the one position where it's allowed to use your hands, so I don't mind, it's called football after all .
I agree that Müller, Yashin and Ronaldo are part of the Greatest of all time tier in their respective position. I'd still rate someone who does more than that a tier above if we compare players in general. Put Müller in Pele's shoes, he maybe could have matched his goalscoring rate (which is still a big maybe, imo), but he never could have played Pele's role in 1970, but that's what the team needed him to do to become the best international side of all time. The striker Pele wouldn't have been enough. With Müller instead of Pele, that side wouldn't have existed and that would be really sad. Why would you ignore that? That's what makes international football still so incredibly important. For a club side, you just buy the players you need to get the best out of your players. For the nationalteam the best players often don't play in their best position but in a position where it's best for their team and if they master that challenge, then they become contenders for that GOAT tier, that tier that isn't about position anymore. Goalkeeper are a bit fecked, I agree, but well, if they were more talented with their feet, then they wouldn't have played in the one position where it's allowed to use your hands, so I don't mind, it's called football after all
.https://www.redcafe.net/threads/can...test-of-all-time-accolades-and-regard.378182/
We actually have a thread for that. But with someone claiming from time to time that Ronaldo should be up there with the best of all time, the discussion will always be back in the Ronaldo thread (same for Messi).
I agree that AMs or specifically the playmakers are the most important to the game and hence the GOATs will have more of them in discussion on this topic. For my GOAT, I would probably list down an XI but not in particular formation. 3 playmakers, 1-2 strikers, 1-2 wingers/wide players, 1 GK, 2-3 defenders (including full backs), 1-2 sweeper/DM
His one-touch finish from a through pass or a deep cross is the best I've ever seen. The way the Real Madrid team is set up around getting him the goal is almost impossible to stop when is a player like Ronaldo.. Its been like what? 4 seasons? And teams still haven't figure out how to stop him from scoring. I read this shocking stat from somewhere that roughly about 80% of his goals come from a one-touch finish inside the box. Its always the typical run from a the blind spot of the left defender or a header from a cross.
Then again, his goals don't really speak much about his abilities purely as a footballer. In fact, one thing the stat suggest is that his technique beyond the goal is irrelevant. His primary weapons are his positioning, his "explosiveness" in the box and his extreme focus when the chance presents itself. All are great mental attributes for any athletic but to put it philosophically: Is that what football is about?
Then again, his goals don't really speak much about his abilities purely as a footballer. In fact, one thing the stat suggest is that his technique beyond the goal is irrelevant. His primary weapons are his positioning, his "explosiveness" in the box and his extreme focus when the chance presents itself. All are great mental attributes for any athletic but to put it philosophically: Is that what football is about?
He and Messi are the 2 greatest players of their generation.
I think if you compare "generations" only then can you decipher who is the best.
Problem being how the game and science has moved on effecting the results, football is no longer the same game it was 40/50 years ago.
I think if you compare "generations" only then can you decipher who is the best.
Problem being how the game and science has moved on effecting the results, football is no longer the same game it was 40/50 years ago.
Exactly. If you stuck Ronaldo in Pele's era, his physique would make the likes of Pele look like a fat chain-smoker, he is a hyper-athlete. But then again you have to factor in pitch conditions, the boots they wore and the footballs they played with. Really hard to balance these things out.
Cruyff never won the World Cup either, but that has never prevented him from being regarded in the top tier of all time greats.
For people who say that the likes of Maradona carried Argentina in the 80s and stuff - football is far more advanced now..
Even teams with less quality are still incredibly fit and in terms of international teams, very tactically aware. At international level, you just can't carry your team like possible in past decades.
Even teams with less quality are still incredibly fit and in terms of international teams, very tactically aware. At international level, you just can't carry your team like possible in past decades.
I disagree, football has advanced in certain aspects yes but defending these days is awful. If Cruyff was playing for the modern Barca side, he'd still be their best player bar Messi and at Real Madrid, he'd be running that side even if he wasn't top scorer, he'd be the fulcrum of that side. He was a better player than Iniesta, class is class regardless of era in my opinion - although this doesn't go for every player from the past but certain players would fit in any era and be great, Pele being one of them and Maradona too.
Are you serious? Maradona won the league with Napoli against Sacchi's Milan. There's no league in the world right now who comes even close to tactical awareness in comparison to Serie A back then.
There are plenty of 1960s footballers who Ronaldo would physically overshadow, but a searingly quick sprinter (sub-11 second 100m), possessing incredible agility (see those textbook overhead-kicks, that famous leap) with near bulletproof resilience (over 800 official career games, over 100 official and friendly matches in 1959 alone) like Pele isn't really one of them.
Professionalisation of various European leagues in the 1960s certainly moved football forwards, but I'm not sure what significant leaps have been made since then. There's been a gradual physical improvement and a shorter passing style over the last few years mainly attributed to superior pitches and equipment. If anything it was harder to carry a team in the mid-to-late 1980s, when football was at its most negative (fewer goals scored, defences well on top) and brutally ruthless (defenders allowed near free reign to hammer attackers, hence the curtailed careers of the stars of the era in Van Basten and Maradona).
I never said that these players wouldn't carry clubs - you guys brought that up.
Messi is carrying Barcelona, and Balu, Ronaldo carried Real Madrid to a title against a Barcelona considered by many to be one of the greatest teams of all time. But anyway, the point was that would they be able to carry an international team to such titles as they did?
Nobody has questioned the past greats talent or quality or class Raees. Who did that?
Spain have won the last 3 tournaments, with the other finalists being Italy, Germany and Holland. All 4 have great individual players, but you would say that the success of all was down to the tactics and brilliance of the team rather than a single individual's brilliance.
I think that there is every chance that Argentina team in the 80s could have achieved similar with Ronaldo instead of Maradona.
Messi is carrying Barcelona, and Balu, Ronaldo carried Real Madrid to a title against a Barcelona considered by many to be one of the greatest teams of all time. But anyway, the point was that would they be able to carry an international team to such titles as they did?
Nobody has questioned the past greats talent or quality or class Raees. Who did that?
Spain have won the last 3 tournaments, with the other finalists being Italy, Germany and Holland. All 4 have great individual players, but you would say that the success of all was down to the tactics and brilliance of the team rather than a single individual's brilliance.
I think that there is every chance that Argentina team in the 80s could have achieved similar with Ronaldo instead of Maradona.
It's hard to imagine a bigger gulf between how talismanic Maradona was in '86 and even in '90, and how comparatively toothless Ronaldo has been for Portugal in recent tournaments.
Simply saying but Ronaldo back in the 60's and he would be amazing is a one sided way of looking at it. He would not be the same player physically if he was born 50-60 years ago on the other hand bring Pele, Eusebio, Cruyff to this era with the top of he line fitness trainers and regimes etc. and they would be better athletes. I respect how hard Ronaldo worked as a player to reach this level. He has decided to focus on being a scorer rather than a facilitator. Hence why Portugal struggle with him still in the side and why he couldn't have doe what Mardaona did in 86' and 90'.
He may be second to Messi but there is a comfortable gap for me.
He may be second to Messi but there is a comfortable gap for me.
I'd love to know how a 23 year old can no so much about players who retired long before they were born.
Based on what? Scoring lots of goals? There are many players throughout history who have scored lots of goals and aren't even a consideration in greatest of all time discussions.
No doubt he will score lots more goals during that time, but will he lead his teams to anything or be a key component in them doing anything of note? In the teams he's had around him since going to Madrid, all set up to supply him constantly, he's doing fantastically well in one regard, but not much in others.
Is it fair to anoint him with such lofty titles and placing in tier lists if he hasn't been as influential as anyone he's supposed to be usurping? Lots and lots of goals scored really isn't a pre-requisite, you only have to look at the names to see that, what usually goes hand-in-hand, though, is those with ridiculous GPG's also are the key component in leading their teams to the biggest trophies on the biggest stages provided to them and not falling short when they are needed the most. Ronaldo doesn't have many big games at the very highest level of pressure where you can say he was exceptional or where it could be considered a performance for the ages - especially when measured against the level of player mentioned in the bunch of names I provide below. It goes against him, badly, and always will unless he can turn it around between now and the end of his career.
From 5 of the usually considered top 5 of all time (Pele, Maradona, Di Stefano, Beckenbauer and Cruyff), only 3 have won the world cup, and two, Di Stefano and Cruyff have not. If you expand it to a top 10 (take your pick from this selection) and include the likes of: Puskas, Platini, Eusebio, Zico, Ronaldo, Best, Charlton and Zidane, you only have two (or 3 at most) more World Cup winners, which leaves us with at least half of the established top 10 not having won the World Cup.
Delivering great, all-time regarded performances on all the stages available to a player is far more of a factor than simply winning the world cup as a bit-part player, so I don't think a player has to win the World Cup, unless, you're talking about being the equal or better of Pele and Maradona. Then it simply must be mandatory, in my opinion, and hugely disingenuous to disregard.
Being one of, if not THE most complete players in the world. Winning trophies and scoring a lot of goals in the two biggest football leagues in the world at a time when football is (imo) far more heterogeneous, international, and competitive than in previous generations. Consistently being world class in a way that only he and Messi in their own unique ways are.
The standard for being next to the likes of Pele and Maradona is rightly high. I doubt Ronaldo can reach those heights, and if he can't, it's no shame. I've never thought Ronaldo was that good. Antohan's post in this thread describes it perfectly for me. Tiers of Greatness
I just find it ridiculous we're castigating a wide forward/winger for not being a midfielder, or playmaker. His inability to perform with Portugal (to date) is a black stain on his record, however with club he's been extraordinary. I can't think of any player apart from Messi in recent years that has so consistent, as Ronaldo has been for Manchester United and Real Madrid.
I think it's fair to say if Ronaldo doesn't have many big games where he has performed under an intense level of pressure, then only Pele and Maradona eclipse this stringent criteria. I'd go listing all the games where he grabbed it by the scruff of the neck and put the result beyond doubt but it's just a waste of time.
I just find it ridiculous we're castigating a wide forward/winger for not being a midfielder, or playmaker. His inability to perform with Portugal (to date) is a black stain on his record, however with club he's been extraordinary. I can't think of any player apart from Messi in recent years that has so consistent, as Ronaldo has been for Manchester United and Real Madrid.
I think it's fair to say if Ronaldo doesn't have many big games where he has performed under an intense level of pressure, then only Pele and Maradona eclipse this stringent criteria. I'd go listing all the games where he grabbed it by the scruff of the neck and put the result beyond doubt but it's just a waste of time.
I don't know what bearing or value this is supposed to have in a discussion about him belonging in the most elite tiers football can provide?
Ronaldo's trophy haul is absolutely nothing to write home about in such esteemed company. To date, he's behind the curve despite being in sides that should have done better. It's not the biggest stick he gets beaten with in debates such as these, but it is still a consideration.
Ronaldo plays in a league where the hegemony and distribution of wealth from TV deals etc is a disgrace. If anything, he plays in the most uncompetitive era for a league of any player mentioned in these discussions. That's not his fault, nor Messi's, but it does mean he has to do far more in the CL and on the international stage to balance things out in a far more even playing field, and pretty much as soon as push comes to shove in the CL and Real Madrid face opposition who are their equal or superior, Ronaldo's performance and influence diminishes greatly and on the international stage, the less said, the better.
Selectively world class given he does next to nothing on the international scene whilst not playing for a minnow nation, which would have excused him to a degree.
I don't think Messi and Ronaldo can be bracketed in the same way. Even disregarding the international stage, Messi has done more in the K.O stages of the CL than Ronaldo by some distance by now. And over all platforms/tournaments provided, neither of them delivered on an even keel to Xavi, who has only fallen apart through ageing and injury but was the key component for club and country during both of their peaks. Arguably, he was the conduit for those peaks and with his decline, so fell the standard of performance for both.
- Status