Gullit was a fantastic athlete as well.
Cristiano Ronaldo
- Thread starter ciderman9000000
- Start date
- Status
It's difficult to compare - because you can't say how good players of the past would have been with the advantages the modern players have. For example, The likes of Pele and George Best showed great skill and poise, even though they had much less protection than modern players.
Some people may need to accept the game moves on and stop romanticising the players of years gone by - but you could just as easily marvel at players who used a heavy ball on crap pitches and got kicked from pillar to post, yet still performed.
You can't make any "factual analysis" of it, and that's perhaps what makes it such a great debate.
Too true - him, Van Basten and Rijkaard would be the basis of a great side even now. That Milan side was special.
Well said. A slower Ronaldo would still be able to do everything that Shearer did or Van Persie does, and more. He'll be banging in the goals for many more years.
This isn't meant as a comparison really, it's not about who is the better player( I agree Messi is the better player). I think O'Sullivan is the better snooker player, but Hendry is the guy who decided the direction of the sport.
As for Van Basten, great player, but come on, he's physically not in the same league. We know how much more sprinting footballers do now, even compared to 2002. Football is at its most physically demanding right now and Ronaldo in this regard is currently without peer.
How is it more physically demanding than playing with heavy equipment on muddy pitches... And a little issue of no protection whatsoever from referees? you simple can't compare eras.
I take the point on different demands but of course we can compare eras. We can say football is much faster than it was 50 years ago, we can say players are fitter and stronger, they run further at higher speeds. Or can we not?
And whats to say that Van Basten wouldn't be bigger stronger and faster if he were playing these days? He was a top athlete with a great goal scoring record in top competitions.
That's my point, impossible to say.
Ronaldo is a great player, no doubt, and physicality and pace are his major assets. United had a big hand in developing him physically and I think you'll see more of the with players in years to come.
That 70's Brazil's team have builds like a tank. All muscular and fast.
They do - but surely a lot of that is down to better nutrition, better kit, better pitches, better training?
Impossible to compare for me.
This has become a debate about different eras. I'm talking about Ronaldo and how he'll develop in his thirties. My original point being that he'll regress at a slower rate because he's physically advanced on those before. I can see why we've started to compare but it isn't pertinent to the point, at least not to the one I was making.
I think I've mentioned it before... Denis Law was asked about his era, he said that the pitches we a kin to mud baths which meant players couldn't pass the ball, instead they coped by chipping the ball to each other. These days players play in perfect conditions but I suspect in fact I'm sure we wouldn't see Barca and all their football thrive in the same way in that era. But this discussion is about physically demanding, I'm not sure it's currently more physically demanding, it maybe faster but take away these playing conditions and I doubt we'd see such a fast game. Which brings me down to my point all players have had to condition themselves to play in their era. Whether it's on muddy pitches or bowling lawns. Comparing eras comes down to opinions but they shouldn't be stated as fact. Anyway, I think Ronaldo would be great in any era, like any great player.
There's one thing Ronaldo being the most impressive physical specimen at the top level of his own era, it's another to suggest he brings a new level of physicality unseen in the game before. As an athlete the original Ronaldo trumps him for both acceleration and pace. As you'd expect from any former midfielder and current Mourinho player, Cristiano probably possesses better stamina but that's a less relevant attribute in assessing a forward player.
What Messi and Cristiano bring to the table is the retention of their physical abilities beyond what the most explosive stars of the 1980s and 1990s managed. That's largely down to the additional protection afforded to creative players the lack of which saw Gullit, Van Basten and Maradona playing on one leg by their late 20s.
Someone sent me this link. This is a section of the Barcelona crowd after Ronaldo scored and it's not the (500 strong 
) Real Madrid section. Now, remember the Barca crowd's traditional greeting to him is, "Ese portugues hijo puta es."
But when the celebration starts
) Real Madrid section. Now, remember the Barca crowd's traditional greeting to him is, "Ese portugues hijo puta es."But when the celebration starts
Ronaldo I Vs Ronaldo II - well the physical arguments are almost impossible to run, I haven't seen an analysis of their relative accelerations and turning speeds. I will say that defenders have become quicker and more mobile as well so leaving a player behind isn't necessarily a guide. As for raw pace, that's an easier one - Ronaldo II is clocking up sprinter speeds during some box to box breaks.
Ronaldo I almost certainly became more susceptible to injury due to poor training methods in his younger days, and maybe due to clubs using steroids to allow muscles to outdevelop the supporting structures. In the context of that, Ronaldo II shows the lessons learned.
Obviously there's nothing new or unique in football. Everything's just evolution. The Ronaldo II evolution is partly at least about his resistance to injuries (except for his one chronic weakness, an ankle condition). Some of which comes down to an obsessive training regime that prizes symmetrical muscle development and which may have spared him from some routine injuries. Some of it is also probably down to careful handling during his teens at Sporting and United.
Ronaldo I almost certainly became more susceptible to injury due to poor training methods in his younger days, and maybe due to clubs using steroids to allow muscles to outdevelop the supporting structures. In the context of that, Ronaldo II shows the lessons learned.
Obviously there's nothing new or unique in football. Everything's just evolution. The Ronaldo II evolution is partly at least about his resistance to injuries (except for his one chronic weakness, an ankle condition). Some of which comes down to an obsessive training regime that prizes symmetrical muscle development and which may have spared him from some routine injuries. Some of it is also probably down to careful handling during his teens at Sporting and United.
Someone sent me this link. This is a section of the Barcelona crowd after Ronaldo scored and it's not the (500 strong
But when the celebration starts
That has to be a photoshop if not, deary me.
Why are they all smiling?
It looks legit to me 
Someone sent me this link. This is a section of the Barcelona crowd after Ronaldo scored and it's not the (500 strong
But when the celebration starts
They even missed a few more holding a camera in the crowd, I counted at least 4 or 5. Also were there only 500 places reserved for Madrid fans again?
And not one of them looks even slightly pissed off, it has to be photo-shopped.
I'm sorry but if you've seen Ronaldo Luiz in full flow and C.Ronaldo, there's a distinct gap in speed both off the mark and at full pace, as Gio said, where C.R trumps him is in having way more stamina and conditioning for repeated sprints. As an athlete, C.R would beat Ronaldo, easily, over a middle distance running or any leaping event, but over short sprints: 30m, 60m and 100m, it's got to be one-way traffic for the Brazilian with it being more in favour for C.Ronaldo at 200m and definitely 400m.
I also don't agree with what I've bolded. Ronaldo came up against Maldini, Nesta, Cannavaro, Thuram and a host of others as well as being from R.Carlos, Cafu etc era. There is no way defenders have got faster or more mobile at the top end. On the lower rungs it's hard to extrapolate as we don't tend to remember crap players from the past with encyclopedia-like consideration as we do the mid and especially top tiers.
What really sets C.R apart from almost anyone else I can think of from past eras is the combination of pace, power and most of all, stamina, but outside of that stamina (combined with the rest), we're not seeing anything new with him as has been suggested.
A big problem with a discussion like this comes by way of the suspicions regarding P.E.D's and so forth - not to single Ronaldo out in any way, as it's assumed many are at it, but if it is a factor, then that would mean absolutely nothing evolutionary or revolutionary is occurring within the player himself. In the laboratories, sure. But nothing that wouldn't have made supreme athletes of the past, super cyborgs who seemingly play all games all season without rest[!], or dips[!] in today's game.
I'm playing Devil's Advocate with the last paragraph, as I don't know if that is a factor, but it is certainly worth bringing to the table.
I've seen them both, many times - live and on TV.
Ten to twenty metres - the first 1/2 second that's in the mind? Ronaldo I at his best was extraordinary in that first turn and move, the best I've seen.
30m / 60m / 100m no - I think it's Ronaldo II. So yes, our opinions differ, and unless there's some actual evidence to the contrary, I don't expect to change my mind.
There's a bigger view you can zoom in on here
http://www.intereconomia.com/eplayer/punto-pelota/cristiano-ronaldo-fotografiado-camp-nou
I assume it's the daytrippers stand and of course it's cropped, it's just funny seeing people react by bringing out the camera phone.
I can't believe that's a real pic but I have found the one proper fan call him a cnut, anyone else spot him?
It's that combination I'm referring to, of course there have been players just as fast, or just as strong, but I don't believe anybody has put it all together like he has with world class technique on top.
If today's era is regarded as the most physically advanced and Ronaldo is physically the best at this time then it stands to reason that we haven't seen anybody as impressive as him.
Wow, that's completely mental. The sad thing is I'm not at all surprised to see the camera phones, even "proper" fans like making their own youtube videos of moments from the game these days. If you're delighted to see Ronaldo score at the Nou Camp rather than pissed off to see your rival's best player score against you at home then you're not even a rubbish Barca fan, you're just a football fan.
Reminds me of one of the episodes of Black Mirror I watched recently.
100m is the questionable one, but if you've seen both as you've said, I cannot fathom why you'd say what you have about 30m or 60m.
But, as you say, without evidence, this is all opinion, so I'll leave it at that.
Physically advanced? You don't think Spoony's point was valid? I'd bet everything I own that C.R wouldn't be floating along unaffected after 90 upon 90 on a sodden, muddy bog of a pitch that saps energy so much more than a bowling green does.
Athlete is a broad term and there are a number of outstanding ones in the current game. What makes Ronaldo physically the best? I don't think there's a definitive definition. On counts of stamina, speed or strength there are players out there who match or surpass him. With technique thrown in, he moves up the ranks in his own era, but not by a margin that redefines the game, I mean, why would it?
I agree it is difficult to compare players head-to-head across times, pitches, training methods, technology, etc. What CAN be done is assess players based on the state of the art at their times, that actually is the only fair way to do it.
Someone mentioned above van Basten was not in Ronaldo's class. van Basten consistently shat on rival defences, however brilliant they were (largely much much better and tighter than Barca's), in a way no one has in recent times bar Messi. And van Basten didn't have the luxury of having an entire side featuring the arguable #2 and #3 in the world built around turning him into a goalscoring machine.
Of course you can compare. Right now, for Madrid fans, the question is whether Ronaldo has been a better player for them than Gento was. Challenging Di Stéfano is galaxies away.
It's a common phenomenon in a lot of match goers these days. Noticed what I posted a couple of months ago:
https://www.redcafe.net/f11/manchester-city-vs-manchester-united-362853/index19.html#post12637486
There weren't viral pictures roaming around but the image I remember watching on TV is pretty similar to that Ronaldo picture.
It's not just a football thing, it's a gadget phenomenon. People love their toys.
Comparing players from different eras is a difficult chore, but it's pretty safe to say that players like Pele, Zidane, Messi and Ronaldo (both of them) would have been wildly successful in any era and who will stand up well to critical analysis a century from now.
As far Ronaldo playing at a high level through his mid 30s? I see no reason why there's even a doubt about that.
As far Ronaldo playing at a high level through his mid 30s? I see no reason why there's even a doubt about that.
I think it's more people wanting to record their experiences than loving gadgets. Bit of an odd moment to do it but, you can understand the sentiment behind it.
Even their steward was laughing. And that one girl (in white t-shirt) was happily clapping.
I just about understand it but not really when you consider they're losing out on experiencing the moment properly live so that they can record it and watch it later. That's hard to understand, it would be annoying to me having to work a camera-phone while I was at a match.
Wasn't there a photo of a United fan with a laptop at OT?
I hope Ronaldo pulls his hamstring or something at the weekend, I'm a bit scared of him after Tuesday's display.
I hope Ronaldo pulls his hamstring or something at the weekend, I'm a bit scared of him after Tuesday's display.
Why? United won't leave anywhere near the same amount of space Barcelona did. Can't see why Tuesday will be any different from the game in Spain.
He scored 2 goals at the nou camp and he'll be even more confident after that game.
I've been thinking about this a little today and was wondering what the Madrid hierarchy think of Ronaldo. Obviously individually you can't ask for more, but his purchase hasn't really spurned Madrid on like I'm sure they thought it would. I know this Barca team is one of the greatest ever but a Copa del Ray and one league win in his four years at the club isn't that great.
This obviously isn't Ronaldo's fault but I do wonder if the Madrid hierarchy were expecting more success.
This obviously isn't Ronaldo's fault but I do wonder if the Madrid hierarchy were expecting more success.
- Status