Cristiano Ronaldo

[Ronaldo's Mum Eh?]

Well there you go. When we're comparing him against the best players in history "ok" looks pretty bad. Yes, if he played in the Brazil team they most likely would have won in '62 and '70 (although I don't think they would have won in '58), but if you put Pelé in that Portugal team I reckon they could well have won back-to-back international tournaments in 2004 and 2006. That's the difference.

I don't know why you use the international stage as a barometer, especially in this day and age when the best quality of football is played in the Champions League.

A stage where Ronaldo has excelled in. If I need to remind you again - he scored the most goals in a single CL campaign just last year and was influential in his team winning the 10th european title.

 

[Sly]

I'm not taking part of this kind of debate but just to clarify we lost the Euro2004 because of Scolari. You can't expect a kid to have any responsability in leading the country in that competition. He wasn't supposed to be a starter. He got in the the team after that atrocious Greece opening match along with Deco and Ricardo Carvalho due to media pressure and popular demand. He did pretty well in the competition and was one of the best players along with Ricardo Carvalho, Maniche and Deco. Good ol' days we had a great team there and in the 2006 WC where we reach the semi's.

 

[Sly]

Well there you go. When we're comparing him against the best players in history "ok" looks pretty bad. Yes, if he played in the Brazil team they most likely would have won in '62 and '70 (although I don't think they would have won in '58), but if you put Pelé in that Portugal team I reckon they could well have won back-to-back international tournaments in 2004 and 2006. That's the difference.

Just Pelé? Put any world class striker and we could have done it. Why not mention Ronaldo? Or Romário? That's our main flaw and it will keep going on for a while unless we naturalize someone.

 

[Sly]

I don't need to re-write anything. The fact is, Portugal's squads have been downright pathetic, whilst Brazil during their world cup winning years have had a far stronger side.

That's harsh and you don't really know what you're talking about. What we have achieved with our limitations isn't downright pathetic. Go easy on the fanboyism

 

[Brwned]

I don't think you understand the fact that bar Ronaldo, there is not a single world class player in that Portugal squad. This is contrary to Pele's Brazil.

They were a collection of talented individuals which is way more than you can say of anything Portugal has ever put together. I don't know why you're counting Ronaldo as a top talent in 2004. He was just a kid ffs. That's like saying United had top talent last year because of Januzaj.

I don't need to re-write anything. The fact is, Portugal's squads have been downright pathetic, whilst Brazil during their world cup winning years have had a far stronger side.

In 2004 Deco was named the second best player in the world and Carvalho was the only defender in the top 10. Ronaldo was 14th. Figo was named in the UEFA team of the year in 2003. I don't know why you're trying to make out that he played with a bunch of mugs...they were a great team, and if you swapped Pelé in for Ronaldo they would've won the thing. In 2006 they still had that same core group - which as far as I'm concerned is easily comparable to some of the previous World Cup finalists and winners I've listed above in terms of individuals - and in 2008 the only player that dropped off was Figo. They were surrounded by a lot of hard-working, solid players...but then that's the case with lots of teams that were successful in international tournaments. Argentina in '78 for example: Galvan, Olguín, Tarantini, Gallego, Ortiz, Luque. They're easily comparable to Ferreira, Pepe, Moutinho, Simao, Petit, Nuno Gomes. They just have this added glamour and prestige because they're "World Cup winners" and because people here haven't watched them. What made them World Cup winners was Kempes single-handedly dragging them on in the latter stages...and that's something Ronaldo couldn't do, and it's a justified criticism. The fact you're already reverting back to the "well international football doesn't even matter anyway, so there" says it all really.

 

[Raoul]

I don't know why you use the international stage as a barometer, especially in this day and age when the best quality of football is played in the Champions League.

A stage where Ronaldo has excelled in. If I need to remind you again - he scored the most goals in a single CL campaign just last year and was influential in his team winning the 10th european title.

Fan Boy alert.

 

[Sly]

In 2004 Deco was named the second best player in the world and Carvalho was the only defender in the top 10. Ronaldo was 14th. Figo was named in the UEFA team of the year in 2003. I don't know why you're trying to make out that he played with a bunch of mugs...they were a great team, and if you swapped Pelé in for Ronaldo they would've won the thing. In 2006 they still had that same core group - which as far as I'm concerned is easily comparable to some of the previous World Cup finalists and winners I've listed above in terms of individuals - and in 2008 the only player that dropped off was Figo. They were surrounded by a lot of hard-working, solid players...but then that's the case with lots of teams that were successful in international tournaments. Argentina in '78 for example: Galvan, Olguín, Tarantini, Gallego, Ortiz, Luque. They're easily comparable to Ferreira, Pepe, Moutinho, Simao, Petit, Nuno Gomes. They just have this added glamour and prestige because they're "World Cup winners" and because people here haven't watched them.

Agreed with most of it. The only problem with what you wrote is that Figo unfortunately wasn't as influencial in the Euro2004 for Portugal as he was in the Euro2000 and in the WC2006 he was clearly declining. It was a shame that we didn't have the 2000 (or tournaments qualifying rounds where he carried us) Figo along with the full steam Ronaldo.

 

[Snake Plissken]

I don't know why you use the international stage as a barometer, especially in this day and age when the best quality of football is played in the Champions League.

A stage where Ronaldo has excelled in. If I need to remind you again - he scored the most goals in a single CL campaign just last year and was influential in his team winning the 10th european title.

Except in the semi's and the final of course.

I think he's merely highlighting the sheer stupidity of your comments on Pele.

 

[Raul Madrid]

Well there you go. When we're comparing him against the best players in history "ok" looks pretty bad. Yes, if he played in the Brazil team they most likely would have won in '62 and '70 (although I don't think they would have won in '58), but if you put Pelé in that Portugal team I reckon they could well have won back-to-back international tournaments in 2004 and 2006. That's the difference.

I never compared Ronaldo to the very best ever. For me the very best ever are Pele, Messi, Maradona and Di Stefano in no order and maybe a few others are at that level. I didn't agree with how you were making out that Portugal were massively underachieving and that Ronaldo had the perfect platform to succeed on the international stage and win trophies with Portugal. Also just using his international career for comparison is not ideal as Messi's does not compare favourably with Pele or Maradona's either and neither does Di Stefano's (who never even played at a world cup) and they are both up there in that class, category and tier with Pele and Maradona and perhaps a few others as the absolute best ever.

 

[Pink Moon]

Yeah the Champions league is definitely crap.

He bullied the PL and La liga but yeah let's just gloss over that.

It was only half serious in reply to your ignorance regarding Pele and his achievements in the game. How much of the Brazilian league in the 50's, 60's and 70's did you actually watch? I think given how good that Brazilian NT was at that time and given that the majority of the players (if not all, I haven't checked) played in Brazil, it stands to reason that the league wouldn't quite have been as devoid of quality as you imply.

Bullied the PL? Hardly. His best goal return was equalled by Suarez last season. Bullying La Liga? Absolutely. Bullying the very league many of you on here and other PL fans regularly mocked when Messi was clearly the top dog in the league.

Do you think Ronaldo has matched the Messi of 08-12? I'm interested to hear your thoughts on that.

 

[Pink Moon]

I don't think you understand the fact that bar Ronaldo, there is not a single world class player in that Portugal squad. This is contrary to Pele's Brazil.

They were a collection of talented individuals which is way more than you can say of anything Portugal has ever put together. I don't know why you're counting Ronaldo as a top talent in 2004. He was just a kid ffs. That's like saying United had top talent last year because of Januzaj.

I don't need to re-write anything. The fact is, Portugal's squads have been downright pathetic, whilst Brazil during their world cup winning years have had a far stronger side.

Shouldn't a top 3 all time player be able to take his team out of a group containing Ghana and America? Maradona's teammates were hardly world beaters (not as poor as others make out either, though) in 86.

 

[Brwned]

I don't know why you use the international stage as a barometer, especially in this day and age when the best quality of football is played in the Champions League.

A stage where Ronaldo has excelled in. If I need to remind you again - he scored the most goals in a single CL campaign just last year and was influential in his team winning the 10th european title.

The players he's being compared against excelled on the national level, continental level and international level. That's why it's being used as a barometer. What he's doing in the CL is brilliant but it puts him up in that bracket with someone like Eusébio, it doesn't catapult him into a different stratosphere. There's very little between them at club level. So if you want to compare them in any reasonable way you have to look at their performances on every level. You can argue that the CL is more important now but it doesn't change the fact that international tournaments are still major tournaments and play a considerable - and justified - role in shaping opinions of players even now. If you don't want it to be brought up you shouldn't be comparing him to players who did things that Ronaldo didn't. Beckenbauer, for example. Why is Ronaldo a better player than Beckenbauer?

 

[Pink Moon]

The players he's being compared against excelled on the national level, continental level and international level. That's why it's being used as a barometer. You can argue that the CL is more important now but it doesn't change the fact that international tournaments are still major tournaments and play a considerable - and justified - role in shaping the opinions of players even now. If you don't want it to be brought up you shouldn't be comparing him to players who did things that Ronaldo didn't. Beckenbauer, for example. Why is Ronaldo a better player than Beckenbauer?

Because he scores more goals and has better stepovers. Duh.

 

[Sly]

Shouldn't a top 3 all time player be able to take his team out of a group containing Ghana and America? Maradona's teammates were hardly world beaters (not as poor as others make out either, though) in 86.

Things aren't as linear. While i don't agree with Ronaldo's Mum you can't explain our failure just because of Ronaldo. Eusébio failed to qualify us to any internacional tournament bar the 1966 WC and is still in the top 10 best players of all time for most of the experienced football journalists. Our 2014 WC campaign was a bloody mess. Problems with our FA in terms of planning and logistics, having an imbecile as a manager, losing an important player as Coentrão, Ronaldo's bad form and physical limitations and our perennial lack of strikers are big handicaps. I would love to win a WC or an Euro (we had a chance in 2004 that probably won't come again in my lifetime) but there are too many structural problems with our football, a declining (in quality) pool of players to pick from and a lack of World Class players in our current choices. Ronaldo for his achievements is regarded as the best player ever for our national team.

 

[Skorenzy]

He's better than Pele, yes.

Pele is so overhyped it's not even funny. Scoring 1000 goals in a garbage Brazilian league is his best feat. He has been better than Messi for a good two years now. For a while Messi was better but he doesn't look like the same player he was a few years ago, whilst Ronaldo has gotten even better than the player he was a few years ago. The fact is he's smashed two leagues now. The two leagues that are hailed as the best in the world.

Face it, the people who don't give Ronaldo enough credit are the ones who don't like his attitude. But they should realize that his attitude only consists of striving to be the best ever. Such attitude should be hailed, especially if you are a former Manchester United player and in my eyes, legend.

No. Being absolutely vital to his country's 1st WC win, scoring a hat-trick in the semi-final and a brace in the final, at the age of 17 (!!) could be considered his best feat. Scoring 5 goals in 2 games (including a hat-trick in Lisbon) in the Intercontinental Cup against then dominant European powerhouse, Eusébio-led Benfica, could be considered his best feat. Being absolutely vital to his country's 3rd WC win at the age of 29, this time mainly as a playmaker instead of a finisher yet still scoring in the final, could be considered his best feat.

643 official goals in 656 official games for Santos and Brazil's all-time top scorer with 77 goals in 92 caps, making him one of the most prolific goalscorers of all-time.

The "garbage" Brazilian domestic leagues filled with teams and players who belonged to a generation that dominated and won 3 World Cups in a 12-year period. Yeah, okay.


I'm fairly skeptical about a lot of the "myth" of Pelé myself, but sometimes the achievements just speak for themselves.

 

[RooneyLegend]

I'm still trying to figure out why he didn't pitch in the euro 2012 match vs Spain when the rest of his team pitched despite them being so called trash. Surely a player better than Maradona, Pele etc at his best would be enough to push them over the line, no?

 

[Pexbo]

I'm still trying to figure out why he didn't pitch in the euro 2012 match vs Spain when the rest of his team pitched despite them being so called trash. Surely a player better than Maradona, Pele etc at his best would be enough to push them over the line, no?

What are you wittering on about?

 

[TheShedEnd]

Real Madrid fans - Di Stefano or Cristiano Ronaldo?

 

[RedPnutz]

If posters here are so sure that the likes of Pele and Maradona are the best players ever, the question is: What do Messi and Ronaldo need to do to rise above them?

It seems impossible because nostalgia and bias have raised past players to seemingly unrealistic heights.

 

[cesc's_mullet]

If posters here are so sure that the likes of Pele and Maradona are the best players ever, the question is: What do Messi and Ronaldo need to do to rise above them?

It seems impossible because nostalgia and bias have raised past players to seemingly unrealistic heights.

People will be looking back at Messi and Ronaldo in 50 years asking who will ever match them - in my humble opinion.

 

[Hamadovich86]

If posters here are so sure that the likes of Pele and Maradona are the best players ever, the question is: What do Messi and Ronaldo need to do to rise above them?

It seems impossible because nostalgia and bias have raised past players to seemingly unrealistic heights.

Totally agree with you there but I guess one of the things held against Messi and Ronaldo is not winning the world cup. Cristiano will never win it imo, Messi still has one more chance and its more than possible I believe.

Its so hard for me to rate Pele hes never played in Europe, didnt do shit in his 2nd world cup win and in the other world cup wins he had REALLY good players with him in the team. Im not saying hes shit on the contrary he might have been the best player of that era 50s to 60s but the game now is so much faster, more tactical and there are more players with great technical ability.

Maradona on the other has far more compelling evidence to be called the best player of all time. He was absolutely unstoppable in his prime and carried his teams to glory but despite this, Messi and Ronaldo both have superior goal scoring records and club trophies than Maradona.

 

[bosnian_red]

He's better than Pele, yes.

Pele is so overhyped it's not even funny. Scoring 1000 goals in a garbage Brazilian league is his best feat. He has been better than Messi for a good two years now. For a while Messi was better but he doesn't look like the same player he was a few years ago, whilst Ronaldo has gotten even better than the player he was a few years ago. The fact is he's smashed two leagues now. The two leagues that are hailed as the best in the world.

Face it, the people who don't give Ronaldo enough credit are the ones who don't like his attitude. But they should realize that his attitude only consists of striving to be the best ever. Such attitude should be hailed, especially if you are a former Manchester United player and in my eyes, legend.

How can you say he's definitely better then pele and he's overrated when you probably have never seen him play like the vast majority of this forum? The Brazilian league at the time wasn't garbage at all, it had some of the best players in the world playing in it. Don't let the fact he's a bit daft and comes across as clueless whenever he speaks influence your opinion on how he was as a player, and pretty much anyone who has seen him play says he's the best ever, or one of the top 2 with maradona.

 

[ZDwyr]

If posters here are so sure that the likes of Pele and Maradona are the best players ever, the question is: What do Messi and Ronaldo need to do to rise above them?

It seems impossible because nostalgia and bias have raised past players to seemingly unrealistic heights.

I assume the international stuff counts against them (Ronaldo in particular).

 

[amolbhatia50k]

The players he's being compared against excelled on the national level, continental level and international level. That's why it's being used as a barometer. What he's doing in the CL is brilliant but it puts him up in that bracket with someone like Eusébio, it doesn't catapult him into a different stratosphere. There's very little between them at club level. So if you want to compare them in any reasonable way you have to look at their performances on every level. You can argue that the CL is more important now but it doesn't change the fact that international tournaments are still major tournaments and play a considerable - and justified - role in shaping opinions of players even now. If you don't want it to be brought up you shouldn't be comparing him to players who did things that Ronaldo didn't. Beckenbauer, for example. Why is Ronaldo a better player than Beckenbauer?

I can never see ronaldo as a contender for these greatest tags. I dont see how a player who is so focused on goalscoring can be the greatest or even close. I can't place him on any list because I haven't seen most of the greats but simply on face value alone, I'd eliminate ronaldo based on his singular and limited contribution on the pitch, even though he's an outstanding footballer who scores goals for fun.

 

[2mufc0]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29925331

What a surprise all those rumours about him wanting to come back but as usual just a tactic to get more £££.

 

[::sonny::]

Every times

 

[SirAF]

Every times

Bless him

At least I can brag about being taller than Cristiano

 

[adexkola]

It will be interesting how people 20 years from now view Ronaldo and Messi.

 

[Samid]

Didn't realize what thread I was in. Thought this had something to do with Modric's shoes/legs.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

The players he's being compared against excelled on the national level, continental level and international level. That's why it's being used as a barometer. What he's doing in the CL is brilliant but it puts him up in that bracket with someone like Eusébio, it doesn't catapult him into a different stratosphere. There's very little between them at club level. So if you want to compare them in any reasonable way you have to look at their performances on every level. You can argue that the CL is more important now but it doesn't change the fact that international tournaments are still major tournaments and play a considerable - and justified - role in shaping opinions of players even now. If you don't want it to be brought up you shouldn't be comparing him to players who did things that Ronaldo didn't. Beckenbauer, for example. Why is Ronaldo a better player than Beckenbauer?

The increased money and professionalism in football over the years makes comparing achievement for international teams then and now kind of redundant. Almost every national team nowadays will have a squad in which every player is a highly trained elite athlete. Which makes it all much more competitive and harder for any one individual to drag his team to the next level.

That would be very different to teams from decades ago, who will have had an awful lot of mediocre footballers in every team and much more scope for one really talented individual to influence results.

 

[JaffyJoe]

Polarising player, there is no doubt he has gotten the most of his ability that has to be commended. He's 29 and doesn't look like he is slowing down.

Where he places in the pantheon is debatable, he is't the best player of his own generation and there are greats from previous generations i would have before him. He is definitely in the top ten for me, in terms of talent he is at a high level but it is his productivity that really vaunts him into the discussion of top players in my opinion.

 

[Brwned]

The increased money and professionalism in football over the years makes comparing achievement for international teams then and now kind of redundant. Almost every national team nowadays will have a squad in which every player is a highly trained elite athlete. Which makes it all much more competitive and harder for any one individual to drag his team to the next level.

That would be very different to teams from decades ago, who will have had an awful lot of mediocre footballers in every team and much more scope for one really talented individual to influence results.

Well yes, if you want to use that as a default argument then there's no point in comparing Pelé and Ronaldo at all. I don't agree at all that international teams in the 70s had an awful lot of mediocre players personally but that's just me. In any case if you want to compare it him to modern footballers it's really very easy too - you look at Zidane in 2006. They were full of functional players in much the same way the 2006 Portuguese side were, but one individual carried them to a final in a way Ronaldo's never come close to doing. Baggio in '94 is similar.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

To be fair, dragging a side up a notch does require a lot of elements coming together. But Ronaldo isn't the sort to do that anyway. He's a very individualistic footballer. Someone like Zidane who contributes hugely to the buildup and the way the team plays will always influence more greatly. I wouldn't expect that from Ronaldo.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Well yes, if you want to use that as a default argument then there's no point in comparing Pelé and Ronaldo at all. I don't agree at all that international teams in the 70s had an awful lot of mediocre players personally but that's just me. In any case if you want to compare it him to modern footballers it's really very easy too - you look at Zidane in 2006. They were full of functional players in much the same way the 2006 Portuguese side were, but one individual carried them to a final in a way Ronaldo's never come close to doing. Baggio in '94 is similar.

Inclined to agree with that. The two eras are far too different for any kind of meaningful comparison.

I would say the French team in '06 is better than any Portugese team Ronaldo has played in fwiw.

Having said all that, I also disagree with the whole premise of judging indvidual players by their contributiions in knock-out tournaments, for club or country. You're judging them on a very small number of games where tiny details which are completely out of their control can mean the difference between winning feck all or going down in history. Particularly in the major international tournaments where they'll only get a crack at two or three in their entire career.

 

[Walrus]

Ah the old GOAT debate...

Blah blah blah, impossible to compare players from different generations/eras as the game has changed so much blah blah blah.

For my 2c, I reckon if you took some of the "GOATs" and put them into modern football, they would be less effective than the likes of Messi or Ronaldo. This is because teams now are far more organised defensively, and the skill level of the "average" top tier footballers has increased dramatically.
By the above, I mean that if you take a Burnley (or equivalent Spanish/Brazilian team) and compared it with an equivalent team from 40 years ago, the current one would be miles better. This is because clubs now can afford to invest far more in training facilities, coaches and pretty much every other aspect of their club.

40 years ago before the game was so hyperinflated by money, your typical footballer in the top division wouldnt have had anything like this level of support. The general level of fitness and tactical awareness is nothing compared to today. I remember seeing a clip of Keegan (obviously this is more recent than 40 years) just chipping the ball over the opposition team (who were so compact that he could do it) and running on to his own ball, like you might see a rugby player do, and he was then clean through behind the defense. You couldnt do that nowadays, and you certainly couldnt do half of what you could in the days of Pele, or Maradona.

 

[Brophs]

Let's be honest, in terms of technique and physicality the likes of Pele don't come anywhere near Ronaldo or Messi. They were playing a different game.

 

[adexkola]

Polarising player, there is no doubt he has gotten the most of his ability that has to be commended. He's 29 and doesn't look like he is slowing down.

Where he places in the pantheon is debatable, he is't the best player of his own generation and there are greats from previous generations i would have before him. He is definitely in the top ten for me, in terms of talent he is at a high level but it is his productivity that really vaunts him into the discussion of top players in my opinion.

Why would you judge a player based on talent, not on what they accomplished with the talent and results and hard work?

 

[Raees]

To be fair, dragging a side up a notch does require a lot of elements coming together. But Ronaldo isn't the sort to do that anyway. He's a very individualistic footballer. Someone like Zidane who contributes hugely to the buildup and the way the team plays will always influence more greatly. I wouldn't expect that from Ronaldo.

Neymar for Brazil is a good example, like he is a wide player but still manages to exert an influence on the style and direction of the game when on form, as he can drift into the number 10 spot or come deep and playmake. Messi is physically superior to the pasts of the game? really.. Pele as a physical specimen is far superior.

 

[SirAF]

Let's be honest, in terms of technique and physicality the likes of Pele don't come anywhere near Ronaldo or Messi. They were playing a different game.

Absolutely agree, but then again who knows how the likes of Pelè would turn out like if they were transferred into today's game. With the advanced training, nutrition, sports science etc.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Let's be honest, in terms of technique and physicality the likes of Pele don't come anywhere near Ronaldo or Messi. They were playing a different game.

Why wouldn't Pele come close to Ronaldo in terms of technique? Seems an odd thing to say. Ronaldo is good technically but is hardly a genius in that area. Physicality is something at he'd have been great at in today's day and age if he wasn't then.