Tevez was poor in terms of goals at United. Everyone knows that. The Tevez at City is different.
Cristiano Ronaldo
- Thread starter ciderman9000000
- Start date
- Status
Tevez was poor in terms of goals at United. Everyone knows that. The Tevez at City is different.
How exactly does that work? The last time Cristiano played as an actual winger was in the 2006/07 season; since then he's been little more than a free-roaming goal scorer. I think it's fair to say that he won't change back to that after the past 4-5 years with little or no defensive duties. If anything in the current system he'd weaken the set-up defensively. You might score more goals with him in the side, but it's likely you'll also concede more... unless you shunt Rooney to the wing again. And even then it's unlikely to change much. More goals scored, more goals conceded, same goal difference would be my best guess for a potential outcome to this scenario.
if ronnie comes back (hopefully when, not if) i don't think rooney will be around.
I think we would have a vastly better chance with him than without him, what arent you getting about that? Look at Barca, one of the greatest teams to play the game yet they dont win the treble every season do they? No. Quality players doesnt guarantee success but it certainly increases the chances.
That proves nothing. The mentality of teams in the Premier league and quality of defending has shifted. That should be blatantly obvious.
With Ronaldo we won 3 titles in a row. In the three seasons since we've won one. With Rooney, Ronaldo and Tevez we won two successive league titles and appeared in two Champions League finals. In the three years since we've done it once. Those are the main factors you should be using. Not goals scored.
Barca are a great side with great players, but if you took Messi from the side I highly doubt they would have won the CL at all. I think players like Messi and Ronaldo offer a far greater chance of success to those teams that are already strong contenders. It's that extra bit of magic and having that player that can win a match single handedly when the team is struggling as a whole.
Your first paragraph seems to be in agreement with what I'm saying. Which is that having multiple world class forwards do not guarantee an Improvement in attack as a unit if the system isn't right. It's why Pedro-Ibrahimovic-Messi was less effective than Pedro-Messi-Bojan, despite Bojan being a far far inferior player to Ibra.
Real Madrid had a lot of goalscorers, yes, because the attack is usually Ronaldo and ONE of Higuain or Benzema, Not Higuain AND Benzema. When have you ever seen Madrid start a game with Ronaldo, Higuain AND Benzema in the lineup?
Real Madrid had a lot of goalscorers, yes, because the attack is usually Ronaldo and ONE of Higuain or Benzema, Not Higuain AND Benzema. When have you ever seen Madrid start a game with Ronaldo, Higuain AND Benzema in the lineup?
Having Ronaldo in he team would make the opposition think twice about being so attacking against us given that they'd be slaughtered on the counter attack. Sometimes there's more to stopping the other team from scoring than just defending.
I like how you attribute winning 3 League titles to the Ronaldo factor only and completely ignore the fact that the back five was arguably the best defence put together by any team in Europe over the past 20 years.
What bollocks, United didn't lose the league by one point to Chelsea, and another to City by goal difference because of Ronaldo FFS. A refereeing decision, Injuries, Conceding a goal that turned a win into a draw are all examples of factors that can give a team 6-10 points, nevermind the one point that was needed in both of those seasons.
Any single one of those factors go in favor of United would mean United would have won 3 out of the last 3 league titles without Ronaldo, which will shatter your hypothesis into pieces.
What bollocks, United didn't lose the league by one point to Chelsea, and another to City by goal difference because of Ronaldo FFS. A refereeing decision, Injuries, Conceding a goal that turned a win into a draw are all examples of factors that can give a team 6-10 points, nevermind the one point that was needed in both of those seasons.
Any single one of those factors go in favor of United would mean United would have won 3 out of the last 3 league titles without Ronaldo, which will shatter your hypothesis into pieces.
You're an arrogant chap aren't you? I didn't attribute it just to Ronaldo. It's pretty clear having him made us a better team. It's also obvious that having him would make needing a decision going in our favour less necessary. I think having Ronaldo in your team is worth more than one point a season. Goodnight.
What?
Indeed, if City hadn't scored that late winner against QPR, then we would have been champions for the 20th time, without Ronaldo so, hypothesising that we would have won others with him is beyond ridiculous, since there were other factors that you alluded to that were beyond our control. I have said it once, but he decided that the grass was greener on the otherside, let him rest. We need to establish a team with Welbeck, Young, Rooney, Hernandez and RVP. We are slowly getting our act together and on the last few performances, we do not need Ronaldo. We can win this without him.
Where the hell did that come from? less of the personal insults please, completely unnecessary seeing as all we're doing is having a civilized discussion. If you think the reason United lost the title by one point, and then by GD to Chelsea and City respectively was because of not having Ronaldo, then oh boy, have a good night indeed.
I think he was alluding to the fact that if Ronaldo had been on the pitch instead of Macheda, then we might have won against the Chelsea side where Drogba scored an obvious offside goal.
Perhaps, my argument was against his earlier post though, "With Ronaldo, 3 titles, Without Ronaldo, 1 title". Far from the truth when you actually consider the circumstances behind the title losses against City and Chelsea. Too much emphasis on individual praising as opposed to team work is my major gripe with assertions like that.
I don't think you dismissing my opinion as bollocks was particularly civillised. If you think having a great player doesn't make you more likely to win trophies then 'oh boy' indeed.
It was in counter to you using goals scored as proof we wouldn't be better with him. Trophies in the cabinet suggested otherwise.
It is like a criticism of all the players and if there had been one player to have done well, it would have been Ronaldo. It also shows a distinct lack of respect to the rest of the players that we support too, to the manager who selects the players and the fans of other players. Putting the Chelsea game into context, Ronaldo has scored a massive one goal in at least 15 matches, which is a great return. Does the poster still think we could have won the match against Chelsea considering his record against them?
George Best was an incredible player, yet how many world cups did he win? Ian Rush, Ryan Giggs or even Mark Hughes were great players for Wales, the list can go on, but they have never won a world cup. To win a major trophy of any kind, you need a team mentality and at the moment, we have that mentality with RVP coming into the team as if he has played here for years. The idea of Ronaldo coming in and messing all of that up doesn't sit well to be honest since the others will be working for him, yet again.
I agree with some of your points, thought this was a rubbish example to try and prove the point that I agreed with. You fail on your own logic. The personnel matters a lot. Barca didn't win the league last season now did they. Now they're walking away with it. What's the difference? Besides the drama in the Real camp on one hand you've got an injured Higuain and on the other a fit Villa. One hand you've got Alves and Alba fit and the other Essien covering the right back position. Last season it was the other way around a lot.
Because Real and Barca have these superstars they can cope in the general sense but it matters a lot when competing against each other.
Of course there are more factors behind this difference in season but you can't tell me that with the shift in injuries on important players doesn't hurt. Matters a lot when Higuain or Benzema are having an off day that you're able to put the other one on instead. If you don't your option is to keep them on and try subbing a different position or shifting Ronaldo up top and put another player on the left. It's not the same.
The better players you have, the more likely you're able to keep the same consistency of play (assuming the morale stays the same). It's clear as day that having the 2nd best player in your team would make it better than to have the same team without him. You might not see a significant change but it will be marginal and that's what wins titles.
It's no use though if it damages the morale. United usually doesn't have a problem with that. Who knows how that will change when SAF retires. Look at every other team that deals with morale problems and how it affects them. Real now, Chelsea last season and often before that. City always. Inter last season. If you play a bit shit you can't let the morale suffer because if you do then it gets very hard to stop playing shit. The mental game is huge for a professional athlete no matter what the sport.
This discussion has become annoyingly pedantic. Typical Caf discussion.
If I was the manager, and I had the option of swapping Valencia or Young with Ronaldo, I'd do so gladly. Damn the defensive contribution, I don't see Ronaldo collecting the ball, staring down the opposition full back, before making a safe pass to Scholes. Our defense has been shit this season anyways.
It shouldn't be up for debate. Like, really?
The debate here is whether having great players can make you a better team. It should be obvious that it does. We didn't seem to suffer when he was here before. Why would we suffer if he came back?
Firstly, he is badly paraphrasing what I said. All I've said is having Ronaldo made us a better team. Much like having Vidic made us a better team than if we hadn't have had him. Secondly I never mentioned individual matches. Just that Ronaldo being in the team over the course of the season is likely to have resulted in us gathering more points.
Don't you think that was down to the rest of the players being shit, rather than team mentality?
Some of you are nuts, ac makes a great point in that having Ronaldo in your side guarantees you that extra point we needed last season. If you don't think we'd have won the league last year in which we ended levels points with our rivals with Ronaldo in our side then all hope is lost for you.
It's that simple.
We wouldn't suffer at all if we had the world's second greatest player on the squad. End of story.
Can't believe people are debating whether or not we would have still not won the league if the situation was the exact same last season except with Ronaldo. He is the 2nd best player in the world.
Except that wasn't what the debate was about in the slightest. It was that United do not need Ronaldo to secure 1 point when there are loads and loads of other factors that would have secured United a point before it came down to needing Ronaldo in the team. How is this even an argument, a team that is good enough to win one title, and lose two titles in three years by a point is perfectly capable of gaining that single point without needing to buy the second best player in the world.
And adding Ronaldo to that team would make it easier. Adding Wilshere would too but Ronaldo would be better.
Are you sure about that?
ac wasn't debating that was he? I think he just said, Ronaldo would've made up that point and well, ac is right, we're talking about Cristiano Ronaldo here.
I think any sane poster realises that we could've won those league titles without Ronaldo, no doubt, but any sane poster should also realise that we most probably would have won those leagues WITH Ronaldo. It's not even a "probably" for me, we just would have!
You only need to listen to Sir Alex speak about Ronaldo once since he left to know he'd jump at the chance to bring him back. Of course he'd improve the team. Fitting him in wouldn't be that difficult either, it'd just be the exact same situation as it was in 07/08 where we'd play some kind of lopsided 433/442 with the player on the opposing wing playing further infield and almost acting as a third centre mid to provide a bit of balance. I reckon Kagawa could play that Giggs-type role.
Our left winger doesn't play as a left winger half the time anyway - when Young's there he spends half his time out wide and half his time playing as an extra striker. Before that we had Park playing as an auxiliary midfielder from out wide and before that it was Giggs playing as some sort of wide playmaker in the way a Silva or Mata does. It wouldn't take a whole lot of adjusting IMO. Rooney would have to do his bit defensively and van Persie would rotate and pull out wide but they do this regularly anyway. Players as good as this will always find a way to play together.
Getting rid of De Gea to do that is just ridiculous though. That's not how this club works at all - if the player wants to be here and we want to keep him then we won't just suddenly get rid of him because there's a chance for a good deal. Where's the loyalty there? What kind of message does that send out? It's the kind of thing Madrid would do.
Our left winger doesn't play as a left winger half the time anyway - when Young's there he spends half his time out wide and half his time playing as an extra striker. Before that we had Park playing as an auxiliary midfielder from out wide and before that it was Giggs playing as some sort of wide playmaker in the way a Silva or Mata does. It wouldn't take a whole lot of adjusting IMO. Rooney would have to do his bit defensively and van Persie would rotate and pull out wide but they do this regularly anyway. Players as good as this will always find a way to play together.
Getting rid of De Gea to do that is just ridiculous though. That's not how this club works at all - if the player wants to be here and we want to keep him then we won't just suddenly get rid of him because there's a chance for a good deal. Where's the loyalty there? What kind of message does that send out? It's the kind of thing Madrid would do.
And who's arguing otherwise? The issue some have is the extent to which one can say, yeah, Ronaldo is still worth that deal. In my opinion things like De Gea/Rooney/Nani + 60 million will be senseless. Ronaldo would be a much bigger improvement for a team like Juve than United. A team with RVP, Rooney and the likes is already arguably the best attack in the world, and you can only improve an attack so much without changing certain things that can have a negative effect of the team as a whole.
Stick Ronaldo in our team instead of Valencia and we're as good as anyone in the World. Simples really.
I just personally think that there would be two factors that could see rooney leaving to some other club if we get ronnie back.
1. it would help a lot in financing a ronaldo deal (both fee and wages)
2. Rooney talked about sacrificing some of his game for ronaldo, i'm not sure he'd go back to 'sacrificing' for ronaldo after being our 'main man' (prior to rvp, but post-ronaldo).
i think we'd still be level below barca.
in 09 we had ronnie, rooney, tevez, berbatov, a vastly stronger defense, a much more experienced and better keeper.
and barca did us easy.
The only sides that have knocked them out in europe (08 us, 10 inter, 12 chelsea) in 5 years have played it ultra-disciplined, tactically spot on, extremely defensive, healthy dose of luck.
We currently (and in the near future) can't put in a performance like those three. We don't have the personnel or discipline to do it.
This bit is exactly the message I was trying to get over, but much better expressed. Obviously Ronaldo would massively improve us, swapped for almost anyone on our team. Anyone denying it is a moron. But I like to think we're not a club who does things that way. If we're willing to spend the money, go for it. But don't rip bits out of the current team, built over time, just to swap them for a shinier superstar.
Ronaldo, Rooney, Van Persie and an inform Nani in their current guise are, much stronger than those four then. You slap Carrick and maybe a slightly better midfielder than clev's and you'd have a team willing to give one hell of a show against Barca. Just imagine the counter attacks
Indeed, what a terrible couple of seasons those were with Ronaldo; everyone wasting their time and getting nothing at the end. Since his departure, we've been way more successful.
Indeed, what a terrible couple of seasons those were with Ronaldo; everyone wasting their time and getting nothing at the end. Since his departure, we've been way more successful.
I cannot fathom people saying we dont need him/shouldnt trade DDG, are they mentally insane?
We shouldn't pay £60m plus a £15m goalkeeper and a £15m winger for him. We'd effectively be paying more than we had got for him in the first place, and we got a world record smashed by £20m for him when he was 24 and just as good as he is now. At 28 he won't keep that forever, I know he might change his game etc., but with £90m plus £10m a year we could count on him in this shape and form for 4-5 years at best, after which he'll need to change his game a little because I can't imagine a 33-year old forward relying on physique in the same way. It's around £30m a year when you consider the fee (as there'll hardly be any re-sale value to talk about then), while Real would basically get a good profit plus 150 goals in 4 years service. We'd look like proper fecking mugs.
£50m all things considered, with no players thrown into the deal, would be the maximum price to pay. Otherwise feck it and we'll do just fine. If he were 25 I'd consider a bigger price, but at 28 he won't be at that level forever and you need to be careful with the money.
£50m all things considered, with no players thrown into the deal, would be the maximum price to pay. Otherwise feck it and we'll do just fine. If he were 25 I'd consider a bigger price, but at 28 he won't be at that level forever and you need to be careful with the money.
- Status