It doesn't matter if you've seen him or not. Your logic applies to all players across all generations. It's not something you can simply apply to players you've seen. Under your logic, if Schmeichel isn't a legend, neither is Law.
Is Cristiano Ronaldo a United legend? | Poll added
- Thread starter Speak
- Start date
- Status
Isn't "legend" used as a pisstake nowadays for players like Bendtner? 
This wouldn't divide opinions as much if someone could define what a "legend" is in the context of football players. The dictionary doesn't clarify:
legend
[lej-uh nd]
noun
1.
a nonhistorical or unverifiable story handed down by tradition from earlier times and popularly accepted as historical.
2.
the body of stories of this kind, especially as they relate to a particular people, group, or clan:
the winning of the West in American legend.
3.
an inscription, especially on a coat of arms, on a monument, under a picture, or the like.
4.
a table on a map, chart, or the like, listing and explaining the symbols used.
Compare key1 (def 8).
5.
Numismatics, inscription (def 8).
6.
a collection of stories about an admirable person.
7.
a person who is the center of such stories:
She became a legend in her own lifetime.
8.
Archaic. a story of the life of a saint, especially one stressing the miraculous or unrecorded deeds of the saint.
9.
Obsolete. a collection of such stories or stories like them.
This wouldn't divide opinions as much if someone could define what a "legend" is in the context of football players. The dictionary doesn't clarify:legend
[lej-uh nd]
noun
1.
a nonhistorical or unverifiable story handed down by tradition from earlier times and popularly accepted as historical.
2.
the body of stories of this kind, especially as they relate to a particular people, group, or clan:
the winning of the West in American legend.
3.
an inscription, especially on a coat of arms, on a monument, under a picture, or the like.
4.
a table on a map, chart, or the like, listing and explaining the symbols used.
Compare key1 (def 8).
5.
Numismatics, inscription (def 8).
6.
a collection of stories about an admirable person.
7.
a person who is the center of such stories:
She became a legend in her own lifetime.
8.
Archaic. a story of the life of a saint, especially one stressing the miraculous or unrecorded deeds of the saint.
9.
Obsolete. a collection of such stories or stories like them.
I disagree, I think it matters if you've seen the player play. I judge from personal experience, not the collected experience/wisdom of other people.
Not really what I was saying tbf. Best never went to City.
And yet he's still one of our greatest ever players, who spent the prime of his career here. How about Denis Law? Is he a United legend?
As I've previously stated, for me, he's definitely a legend. This debate got me thinking, though. What do you think the club would have achieved had he stayed? We've obviously had success even after his departure, but we'd have been a completely different animal with Ronaldo as our talisman. Ah...what could have been.
Read the comments above.
I know, but I was pointing out that you are being incredibly short sighted in who you consider a legend of United. There are ample stats/videos/books etc that talk about these players, they are part of our history and I'm actually amazed that just because you have never seen them play you won't acknowledge our Legends of old. Anyway, tis a bit derailing, so Ronaldo, not a legend for me.
I'm listing the legends who I've seen play within my lifetime. I can't speak on the past -- are they legends? They're legendary names, sure. Would I have thought Law as a traitor if I was alive at that time? I can't say, but probably.
I agree, Ronaldo is not a legend for me either.
It doesn't matter if you disagree. You're using logic and that logic is flawed unless you say Law isn't a legend.
Different eras. In Law's day United fans would watch City and United fans vice versa.
I disagree. My logic is that Schmeichel isn't a legend as I considered him a turncoat at the time. My personal experience/emotion influences my decision. That doesn't exist with Law -- in fact, the Law discussion is a non sequitur within the framework of the logic I'm using.
Schmikes gave his best years to United and was a significant factor in us winning several trophies including winning our first title in 26 years. One season doesn't change the fact that he's an absolute legend.
Like Rooney, he is a tough one to classify. I lean towards "yes" with Ronaldo as he was one of the best players in the world whilst at the club. Although his stay here wasnt the longest, what he achieved was astounding, and he has always seemed to genuinely love the club, despite leaving.
oh well and look at all the comments and the poll, you may have him on your legend list I may not, for me it symbolize something else than for you. Also I can argue that there are legends and legends..
I really like the guy and probably one of best footballers to have worn our jersey. But legend? Hmm he played six years for us and wanted to move to a club where he had his heart. I'd go with a no...
Players I've seen during my lifetime that I'd put above him...
Solskjaer
Cantona
Giggs
Scholes
Neville (G)
Hughes
Beckham
Rooney
Could probably rack up a couple of more, but those are the ones that popped up in my head straight away...
Players I've seen during my lifetime that I'd put above him...
Solskjaer
Cantona
Giggs
Scholes
Neville (G)
Hughes
Beckham
Rooney
Could probably rack up a couple of more, but those are the ones that popped up in my head straight away...
Yeah, I forgot Ole. Definitely a legend.
A great and brilliant player for us but a club legend I don't think so, if he had stayed then he would have reached legend status but as it is he is probably more of a Real Madrid legend than a United one.
The reason why I say 'yes' is that he played the key role in an era that, for me, was the most significant in my time as a fan (I started following in the late 90s.) The Mourinho-led Chelsea seemed invincible after 2 straight saunters to the title; United, on the other hand, had recently lost its captain (Keane,) and its talisman goalscorer (RVN.) So for Ronaldo to play the leading role in our emergence from that seemingly dire situation and lead us to 3 straight titles and a CL victory means that he is a legend in my book (although not up there with the likes of Scholes and Giggs.)
I understand why people might feel that he is a legend but for example Rooney scored more goals when Ronaldo was with us and the defense and Scholes were the soul of our team, Ronaldo was a great accessory.
Not in the last three seasons though, and you would expect that from a striker vs a winger
Why was Scholes the heart of the team? Philosophically of in terms of games?
When on form he made the entire team better, regarding Ronaldo the team continued to be successful without him, and in my opinion it's because he wasn't an indispensable cog in our machinery.
Did he really? During that 3 year purple patch (2006-7 to 2008-9,) I'd imagine Ronaldo was our leading scorer. I'm no fan of the man, but Ronaldo was a hell of a lot more than an accessory to United, particularly during his final 3 years.
Why do you limit it to those three years, why not all the time they spent together?
During those years Rooney was great, the defense was great, the goalkeeper was great, Park Ji Sung was great, I have never singled out Ronaldo, maybe in ten years I will look at that period differently but to me it was a real team and that team had Sir Alex Ferguson written all over it. The only thing that was very special in that special team, was the defense. Ronaldo was a member of that team, an incredible member but only a member. The only thing that make me accept the legendary status is the 42 goals in season, but I'm not a fan of individual records in a collective game.
Icons v Legends v Greats...
For me there needs to be a distinction between Icon v Legend v Great v Club Stalwart (or a different term) .. you need almost 4 tiers of greatness in order to differentiate which player is deserving of more praise and respect than another. I apologise if the terms I use are incorrectly defined i.e. some might see the term Icon as being of a lesser status than the term Legend but just assuming that Icon means more than Legend.. this is how I see it.
Icon
I would define an icon of the club as someone who transcends merely footballing achievement, demands worship almost to that of a deity.. a god like figure at a club. You not only identify him with the club but when you think of the club, you identify it with him.. the player is that legendary, he is part of the building blocks of the United myth. The sort of player who inspires you to support the club, the star man, makes you take up the sport of football as your first love, one you will research like mad.. he represents Manchester United as an identity in your mind. He must also be universally acclaimed, be beyond reproach and appeal to all generations. Statute worthy.
For me the following players are icons of Manchester United... Meredith, Edwards, Best, Law, Charlton, Robson, Cantona, Keane, Schmeichel*. Possibly including Giggs/Scholes.
Ronaldo and Beckham were for me iconic figures during their tenure here, Rooney and Giggs also had the opportunity to become icons.. but all 4 fall short for me. Ronaldo simply didn't stay long enough to be an icon of the club, he could have been this clubs greatest ever player and 'The' man you associate with United.. during his time here, he was the star attraction and the reason why many enjoyed watching United.. but he left far too soon to be part of the United myth. Beckham, when I was growing up was the most recognised of the 'best midfield unit in the world'. He was also alongside Keane the main man in that midfield, he was the least talented of that quartet but he had a confidence in his ability, a swag to his game which made him a formidable threat and he and Keane were truly world class in a mental sense.. they would not be found wanting at any level of football. He too left too early and it can be argued he just didn't have enough about his game near the end to push on and still be the star man.. the game was leaving him behind and he left perhaps at the right time.
Rooney and Giggs, two british wonder kids...both could have been the best players this club has ever seen but due to injuries, inconsistency never really became the star men in their sides at any stage during their United careers. Both were essentially, world class support acts but were never depended upon to lead the club to trophies.. both have produced iconic moments, Giggs v Arsenal for example but moments aren't enough, you need to be relied upon as the main man to be an icon.. someone to rally the team around and neither satisfied that criteria. My exclusion of Giggs might be seen as controversial, so I might be persuaded to put him down as an icon due to his longevity, which is iconic in of itself.
Scholes .. Scholes for me was unfairly perhaps never seen as the superstar of Manchester United, yet for the likes of Xavi etc he was an idol.. a reference point for what a midfielder should be like. He was also consistently world class for United, but for me an icon needs to also transcend the on the pitch stuff and be a big cultural/media reference and he was simply too quiet off the pitch and not enough of a star player on it to merit being an icon. Pirlo had teams built around him both at club level and internationally, which allowed him to earn iconic status but for me Scholes despite being equal to him as a player never quite demanded that level of respect from his managers.
Schmeichel for me is an icon due to his position on the pitch, he's the best goalkeeper United have ever had and he along with Oliver Khan were the the greatest keepers of the modern era, they transcended the position of goalkeeper to the point where they were considered captains, icons globally... like Casillas for Real Madrid yet they were greater both as men and keepers.
Legend
Giggs, Scholes and Irwin would be at the forefront of this group of players which in my opinion includes Beckham, Ronaldo and Ferdinand to name but a few. Again it should be restricted to truly great players who achieved legendary feats for this club and were key figures in writing the history of this club. I think Ronaldo was a legend purely because he was 'the' not just 'a' key component in our 3rd CL victory and our return to the forefront of European and domestic football. Lets not forget that post 2002... many of us were wondering whether United were ever going to match the success of the nineties and whether Chelsea would leave us behind. Ronaldo was the symbol of our resurgence, the reference point for that period of success.. once he left, we struggled on.. winning domestic trophies by the skin of our teeth but it became workmanlike, it was not the stuff you write about 50 years from now.. whereas the success from 2006-2009 was the stuff of dreams, the best football in the world was being played right here at Old Trafford and it is because Ronaldo was playing for us.. only one other footballer could have brought that same level of dynamism and electricity to our side.. and it was Messi, or Ronaldinho before him.
Beckham for me also deserves legendary status.. why? look at the list of number 7's before and after him.. yet was he ever seen as an inferior number 7 during his tenure here? feck was he, he was lauded as one of the world's greatest players and this was reflected in his runner up awards in the Fifa world player of the year awards where he finished second to Rivaldo. He was the world's most recognised footballer during his time here and helped this club become huge all round the world, much of our global success can still be attributed to the brand that Beckham helped build United to be..it was on the back of not just his looks and glamour, but his style of play.. look at Schneiderlin's interview where he talks almost in awe about Becks.. for most of us young fans, we all went through that phase.. he was the man for many of us and he never really enjoyed success post us, so he is still ours.
Rooney.. possibly gets in on the skin of his teeth, but not for me though. In the 2010/11 season he was a talisman at the key moments, throughout his career he has been extremely erratic and has never led us to glory on the back of his own brilliant performances. In the two campaigns where he was truly talismanic and brilliant we won feck all, was that his fault? or was he let down by the performances of his team mates.. one has to say he produced some mesmeric moments in his time here but again nowhere near the iconic moments others have under extreme pressure against the world's best clubs.. he does however have a CL final goal to his name. If he becomes the club's leading scorer, I think it is only fair he is named as a legend but there will always be an asterisk against his name for many, for a variety of reasons on and off the pitch.
Great
For me this where the likes of Steve Bruce, G. Pallister, Mark Hughes, Solksjaer go... great players, great memories but not quite of the quality of the men named above. Rooney most definitely gets into this category but a guy of his quality should have been an icon, not struggling to obtain legendary status. It is a shameful indictment of his failure to get the most of his talent that his status as a legend is even up for debate.
It is where I would put Van Der Sar, Vidic and Evra. An elite band of footballers but possibly didn't stay at the club long enough, or weren't renowned enough as the superstar of their team enough to be classed as a legend of the club. When you look at Maldini, despite being a defender.. he is still an icon for AC Milan, but for me these three players despite being the bedrock of our success from 06-12.. were legendary as a group, but individually I do not think they quite merited being called legends in their own right for what they achieved at United. Van Der Sar is rightfully remembered as a footballing legend, one of the all time best keepers for me but didn't stay enough at United to be a legend here.
Stalwart/Ambassador
This is for the best of the rest including cult figures. Players who deserve to be recognised for their service to United, are part of the United dynasty and brand.. your Nicky Butts, Park Ji Sungs etc.
For me there needs to be a distinction between Icon v Legend v Great v Club Stalwart (or a different term) .. you need almost 4 tiers of greatness in order to differentiate which player is deserving of more praise and respect than another. I apologise if the terms I use are incorrectly defined i.e. some might see the term Icon as being of a lesser status than the term Legend but just assuming that Icon means more than Legend.. this is how I see it.
Icon
I would define an icon of the club as someone who transcends merely footballing achievement, demands worship almost to that of a deity.. a god like figure at a club. You not only identify him with the club but when you think of the club, you identify it with him.. the player is that legendary, he is part of the building blocks of the United myth. The sort of player who inspires you to support the club, the star man, makes you take up the sport of football as your first love, one you will research like mad.. he represents Manchester United as an identity in your mind. He must also be universally acclaimed, be beyond reproach and appeal to all generations. Statute worthy.
For me the following players are icons of Manchester United... Meredith, Edwards, Best, Law, Charlton, Robson, Cantona, Keane, Schmeichel*. Possibly including Giggs/Scholes.
Ronaldo and Beckham were for me iconic figures during their tenure here, Rooney and Giggs also had the opportunity to become icons.. but all 4 fall short for me. Ronaldo simply didn't stay long enough to be an icon of the club, he could have been this clubs greatest ever player and 'The' man you associate with United.. during his time here, he was the star attraction and the reason why many enjoyed watching United.. but he left far too soon to be part of the United myth. Beckham, when I was growing up was the most recognised of the 'best midfield unit in the world'. He was also alongside Keane the main man in that midfield, he was the least talented of that quartet but he had a confidence in his ability, a swag to his game which made him a formidable threat and he and Keane were truly world class in a mental sense.. they would not be found wanting at any level of football. He too left too early and it can be argued he just didn't have enough about his game near the end to push on and still be the star man.. the game was leaving him behind and he left perhaps at the right time.
Rooney and Giggs, two british wonder kids...both could have been the best players this club has ever seen but due to injuries, inconsistency never really became the star men in their sides at any stage during their United careers. Both were essentially, world class support acts but were never depended upon to lead the club to trophies.. both have produced iconic moments, Giggs v Arsenal for example but moments aren't enough, you need to be relied upon as the main man to be an icon.. someone to rally the team around and neither satisfied that criteria. My exclusion of Giggs might be seen as controversial, so I might be persuaded to put him down as an icon due to his longevity, which is iconic in of itself.
Scholes .. Scholes for me was unfairly perhaps never seen as the superstar of Manchester United, yet for the likes of Xavi etc he was an idol.. a reference point for what a midfielder should be like. He was also consistently world class for United, but for me an icon needs to also transcend the on the pitch stuff and be a big cultural/media reference and he was simply too quiet off the pitch and not enough of a star player on it to merit being an icon. Pirlo had teams built around him both at club level and internationally, which allowed him to earn iconic status but for me Scholes despite being equal to him as a player never quite demanded that level of respect from his managers.
Schmeichel for me is an icon due to his position on the pitch, he's the best goalkeeper United have ever had and he along with Oliver Khan were the the greatest keepers of the modern era, they transcended the position of goalkeeper to the point where they were considered captains, icons globally... like Casillas for Real Madrid yet they were greater both as men and keepers.
Legend
Giggs, Scholes and Irwin would be at the forefront of this group of players which in my opinion includes Beckham, Ronaldo and Ferdinand to name but a few. Again it should be restricted to truly great players who achieved legendary feats for this club and were key figures in writing the history of this club. I think Ronaldo was a legend purely because he was 'the' not just 'a' key component in our 3rd CL victory and our return to the forefront of European and domestic football. Lets not forget that post 2002... many of us were wondering whether United were ever going to match the success of the nineties and whether Chelsea would leave us behind. Ronaldo was the symbol of our resurgence, the reference point for that period of success.. once he left, we struggled on.. winning domestic trophies by the skin of our teeth but it became workmanlike, it was not the stuff you write about 50 years from now.. whereas the success from 2006-2009 was the stuff of dreams, the best football in the world was being played right here at Old Trafford and it is because Ronaldo was playing for us.. only one other footballer could have brought that same level of dynamism and electricity to our side.. and it was Messi, or Ronaldinho before him.
Beckham for me also deserves legendary status.. why? look at the list of number 7's before and after him.. yet was he ever seen as an inferior number 7 during his tenure here? feck was he, he was lauded as one of the world's greatest players and this was reflected in his runner up awards in the Fifa world player of the year awards where he finished second to Rivaldo. He was the world's most recognised footballer during his time here and helped this club become huge all round the world, much of our global success can still be attributed to the brand that Beckham helped build United to be..it was on the back of not just his looks and glamour, but his style of play.. look at Schneiderlin's interview where he talks almost in awe about Becks.. for most of us young fans, we all went through that phase.. he was the man for many of us and he never really enjoyed success post us, so he is still ours.
Rooney.. possibly gets in on the skin of his teeth, but not for me though. In the 2010/11 season he was a talisman at the key moments, throughout his career he has been extremely erratic and has never led us to glory on the back of his own brilliant performances. In the two campaigns where he was truly talismanic and brilliant we won feck all, was that his fault? or was he let down by the performances of his team mates.. one has to say he produced some mesmeric moments in his time here but again nowhere near the iconic moments others have under extreme pressure against the world's best clubs.. he does however have a CL final goal to his name. If he becomes the club's leading scorer, I think it is only fair he is named as a legend but there will always be an asterisk against his name for many, for a variety of reasons on and off the pitch.
Great
For me this where the likes of Steve Bruce, G. Pallister, Mark Hughes, Solksjaer go... great players, great memories but not quite of the quality of the men named above. Rooney most definitely gets into this category but a guy of his quality should have been an icon, not struggling to obtain legendary status. It is a shameful indictment of his failure to get the most of his talent that his status as a legend is even up for debate.
It is where I would put Van Der Sar, Vidic and Evra. An elite band of footballers but possibly didn't stay at the club long enough, or weren't renowned enough as the superstar of their team enough to be classed as a legend of the club. When you look at Maldini, despite being a defender.. he is still an icon for AC Milan, but for me these three players despite being the bedrock of our success from 06-12.. were legendary as a group, but individually I do not think they quite merited being called legends in their own right for what they achieved at United. Van Der Sar is rightfully remembered as a footballing legend, one of the all time best keepers for me but didn't stay enough at United to be a legend here.
Stalwart/Ambassador
This is for the best of the rest including cult figures. Players who deserve to be recognised for their service to United, are part of the United dynasty and brand.. your Nicky Butts, Park Ji Sungs etc.
Last edited:
Because he was a good, promising player who blossomed into arguably the best in the world during those 3 years. I'm not discrediting the other players - that 2006-7 was my favourite ever precisely because of how great the team was (Scholes, Giggs, Vidic, Rio, etc.) But Ronaldo was epic (in my opinion, even better in 2006-7 than the following 42-goal season.) Without him, I don't see us winning 3 in a row, nor a Champion's League.
That in no way discredits the rest of the team (take away Kaka, and a Milan team featuring the likes of Pirlo, Seedorf and Cafu likely doesn't win in 2007; take away Messi, and Barca doesn't dominate in the same way, despite the presence of Xavi, Iniesta and the rest.) Ronaldo's legendary performance during that time in no way lessens the impact of the others, but he was by far our best player during that time, and for many, one of the best they'd ever seen play for United (I didn't see Cantona, Best, Edwards, Charlton and the rest, so I'm not qualified to say how measures against those players.)
@Raees I like your post and will follow your nomenclature.
If someone wins Ballon d'or and UEFA player of the year playing for any club, he would be a legend.
His songs is still sung on the terraces ffs.
I've never been at a game and found a united fan who doesn't like Ronaldo. The dislike seems to stem from online fans.
I've never been at a game and found a united fan who doesn't like Ronaldo. The dislike seems to stem from online fans.
Absolutely!
What kind of a sick, disgusting, joke of a question is this?
What kind of a sick, disgusting, joke of a question is this?
I dont know if thats true. What about brazillian ronaldo moving from barcelona to madrid.
If i had to dislike one team outside our competitive rivals it has to be madrid. They aren't even a particularly successful club these days but gets players; our players by joining some sort of elite mafia like team.
Ronaldo for me not only effected our 'biggest club on the planet' target; but he also made a pathway for players like de gea to leave us under the same circumstances.
No he's not. He had given his best years to Real Madrid. Great player. Not a Utd legend.
another all-time great Portuguese attacking player one generation before CR7, ask any fans of his former team if they fondly remember him
I assume you're talking about Luis Figo? Madrid fans may look at him with some fondness. However petty it may sound, Barça requested Figo have nothing to do with a Barça legends match heading into the Champions League final last season.
I certainly mean Barca as 'former team', though that was quite a clumsy phrase, should have been worded better
This.
I think he is for what he achieved (in what was a relatively short time). He probably isn't ranked as high as some others because he left and became a legend at another team, but I would consider him a United legend.
Both a legend and a bellend.
- Status