Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance

[Peyroteo]

Ronaldo creating more chances than anyone else in Real Madrid? I'm fairly certain it is not the case, not for the last 3-4 seasons anyway. Do you have some data to back it up perhaps?

I was referring to the comments in the performances thread yesterday or a few days ago where people were saying that he did nothing but poach in some goals in the CL last season when besides scoring 10 goals noone in a Real Madrid shirt created more chances than him, he contributed defensively, got Javi Martinez sent off, etc..

I can't find the full numbers and I'm not even sure they're availiable anywhere but I wouldn't be surprised if he was the Real Madrid player with more chances created for the past 2, 3 or 4 seasons.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

The problem with Ronaldinho is when we talk about career length to say who's the best, peak Ronaldinho has a decent claim against almost anyone for best player ever but his peak was so short...

Ronaldo has a similar problem, longer career but tons of injuries, still everyone keeps bringing international trophies to bring down Messi vs Maradona and Cristiano now, if we talk about international level, Ronaldo was a monster at WC level, specially in 2002, and he totally could deserve being in the comparison.

Everyone is so interested in steering the arguments to their ground that it's hard to say right now what are we judging, if we talk about international + club level, skill, scoring, career longevity and titles no one comes close to Messi, he's the one that ticks most boxes (International finals, scoring records, scoring ratio, club titles and career length), a WC is the only thing he lacks to be the indisputed king, and that's were everyone has a excuse to use against him.

LeBron was in a similar spot back in 2010, haters basically said "he's so good but not a title", once he won one (and specially after losing vs Dallas) it basically broke his shackles about being regarded the best player in the league, not many dared to compare him to Kobe after that.

You're quite right with the first bold bit.

Second bit "no one comes close to Messi.... etc, etc....". So Messi has scored more club goals?, Messi has scored more international goals?, Messi has been playing (for a "top club") longer?, Messi has more international tournament medals?

 

[Ishdalar]

No, the most biased thing you've read around here is that the media has not praised Modric as much as Xavi because they want to make Ronaldo look good. It's not just biased, it's insane and a product of how far Barcelona fans go with their propaganda on this subject, especially compared with Madrid fans who mostly don't really give a shit.

I don't blame Modric for not winning 2 Euros and a WC, my point was that he has performed nowhere near the standard Xavi has internationally (and not as good for his club either imo) which is why they're not equals and the media doesn't treat them the same. Not because of an hidden agenda.



C) Not similar players with similar stats? So much work and then a completely nonsensical conclusion. That's terrible logic. Since when do 2 players having similar stats means they were similar players?

The magnitude being in the hundreds and thousands actually makes the stat worse, not better.

The problem with using goals or goals+assists per game or minutes with Cristiano Ronaldo is very simple and I've explained you this before but I'll do it again. The problem with stats in this sport (or sports in general) is you can use them to say whatever the hell you want when you don't treat them objectively and take them out of context.

Player A out of his prime in 5 years has scored 100 goals in 200 games (0.50 goals per game).
Player B out of his prime in 5 years has scored 150 goals in 280 games (0.54 goals per game).

Player A in his prime in 10 years has scored 700 goals in 700 games (1 goal per game).
Player B in his prime in 10 years has scored 580 goals in 560 games (1.04 goals per game).

Career stats:

Player A scored 800 goals in 900 games (0.89 goals per game)
Player B scored 730 goals in 840 games (0.87 goals per game)

Player B has been the better goalscorer throughout their careers but if you look at their career stats you'd reach a different conclusion. Career stats are not a good way of looking at things despite being very easy to check wikipedia for them. Ronaldo played an enormous amount of games as a youngster that skews his stats. With assists there's an even bigger possiblity of this exact thing happening since assists per game are lower than goals per game. To make a proper analysis of their stats you'd need a lot more information that that.

All of this to simply say Cristiano Ronaldo and Gerd Muller were completely different players and that I wasn't insulting Muller or calling him just a poacher, I'd have him just outside of my top 10 players of all time. The fact that it's a comparison made again and again to try and discredit Ronaldo as was done above is laughable.

You really don't believe the media have been underrating Modric for years for who knows what reason?. Real win the UCL in 2014, a lot of people say Modric was one of their best players, in fact:

Modric plays 52 games
He's chosen in the UCL 2014 team of the season
Chosen best midfielder in La Liga
He puts the corner in Ramos head (nothing for some players, a feat for others if we want to hype them)

He ends up out of the top 23 in the Ballon d'Or list, guys who end up ahead of him in the list

Andres Iniesta: Midfielder in La Liga (were Modric wins the trophy), 0 titles, historical embarassment with Spain in the WC.
Karim Benzema: 24 goals in 52 games with Real Madrid
Paul Pogba: Knocked out in UCL group stage behind Galatasaray

Last four seasons, Real Madrid have managed to win 3 UCL titles, the one round they've lost of their last 15 UCL rounds? The one Modric didn't play a single minute


UCL team of the season, UEFA team of the year 15/16 and 16/17, UCL Midfielder of the year 2017, La Liga midfielder of the year 2016, FIFPro team 15' 16' and 17'...

Players that have received the same or more votes than him with fewer titles or less accolades in the last 2 BdO? Aubameyang, Vidal, Lewandowski, Ibrahimovic, Payet, Neymar (one cup and 20 goals in 2017, lol).

Just this year he got 4th in the last Ballon d'Or and 6th in The Best, it has taken the world 4 years to start appreciating his role for Real Madrid, now tell me, do you find a better explanation about media shutting him down of trophies for almost 4 season? I can accept that Xavi and Iniesta were crucial for Messi to win colective and individual titles, and their role was more than appreciated with their podiums in the BdO, but you're going to tell me that Modric never had that importance in Real Madrid for Ronaldo? That he hasn't been a top 5 contender since 2014?. The only difference between what he does with a ball on his feet and what Xavi and Iniesta did is that they had a better national squad, beyond that, they're on the same level.

You may, again, claim that numbers are but a coincidence, and that Messi won 3 UCL titles with Iniesta/Xavi (let's discount 2006 because Xavi and Leo were injured) and similarly Ronaldo won 3 titles with an elite midfielder like Modric merely by chance, not because great teams like Barcelona and Real need playmakers of the greatest level, since Xavi's decline around 2012 no other player has dominated European midfields like Luka, is no coincidence that he's the best midfielder of a 3 time UCL winning team. And when I say 3, it could be 2 or 4, doesn't matter, in modern football Strikers win games, Midfielders win titles.


As for your stat salad, I don't get what you're trying to get into, that Ronaldo's stat are skewed by his younger years?. You can somewhat use that argument when we talk Messi vs Ronaldo because we talk about the same era and Messi played more centrally since being younger, but do you think Müller's ratios didn't improve with age the same way Ronaldo did? Bayern Munich were a 2nd division team in Germany in his first year, it took him 4 seaons to achieve a 1:1 goal ratio in a season, we're not talking about a guy joining EPL winners Manchester United, or Real "9 UCL titles" Madrid.

You're really going to use the "Younger years skewed stats" card here? At least you could remain fair comparing those early years, Ronaldo trained with Sporting, a club famous for developing world class wingers, and got signed by MU and Alex Ferguson, Müller started his career in a 7th tier unknown team and swapped to a 2nd tier team that had only won two titles in their history (31/32 league and 56/57 cup).

And you think stats are skewed against Ronaldo in this situation? Thank god I didn't talk about international level here, you were the first that brought back stats to the table with your "200 assists, he creates a lot of chances, unlike Müller", you might fool a lot of people bringing raw numbers without showing what we're comparing him against, but if you want to throw stats at our faces, at least be ready to recive some of them too, as the video before shows, I've seen Ronaldo for more than a decade, I know how he plays and how his assists are created, it was only obvious that a guy like Müller in a team capable of 100+ goals per season could replicate those stats, because those teams pour chances all over their strikers.


"The magnitude being in the hundreds and thousands actually makes the stat worse, not better.", so, now stats measuring great iterations of data are worse than stats from lower and most specific samples?. Nice to know

And to sum it up, of course they were completely different players, any player from the 60's is totally different from an elite player post-90's, guys like Cruyff and Best survived eras in the collective mind because their style was totally ahead of their time and yet they might look "outdated" now, that doesn't mean that what we're talking about, the actual output and impact they had for their team, can't be measured, and for that stats are as valid as any other argument when we're talking about forwards, and if they look so absurdly close after careers of 15+ years then some truth might be about them.

 

[De Portago]

I was referring to the comments in the performances thread yesterday or a few days ago where people were saying that he did nothing but poach in some goals in the CL last season when besides scoring 10 goals noone in a Real Madrid shirt created more chances than him, he contributed defensively, got Javi Martinez sent off, etc..

I can't find the full numbers and I'm not even sure they're availiable anywhere but I wouldn't be surprised if he was the Real Madrid player with more chances created for the past 2, 3 or 4 seasons.

I have no idea how reliable Whoscored is, as far as i can recall their raw data is provided by OPTA. I used the key passes statistic (these are averages per game by competition):

UCL 16/17
1st Kroos 2.8
4th Ronaldo 1.5

La Liga 16/17
1st Kroos 2.8
10th Ronaldo 1.1

UCL 15/16
1st Bale 2.6
5th Ronaldo 1.9

La Liga 15/16
1st Hames 2.3
7th Ronaldo 1.4

UCL 14/15
1st Hames 3
7th Ronaldo 1.3

La Liga 14/15
1st Hames 2.7
2nd Ronaldo 2.2

I do try to catch as much of Real and Barca's games as possible, and for what it's worth these stats seem to support my impressions, namely that Ronaldo is nowhere near the top in regards of chances created, and that he is more or less regressing with each passing season.

 

[Ishdalar]

You're quite right with the first bold bit.

Second bit "no one comes close to Messi.... etc, etc....". So Messi has scored more club goals?, Messi has scored more international goals?, Messi has been playing (for a "top club") longer?, Messi has more international tournament medals?

Second bit is about if we're talking about facing all angles of what a player needs to be consider the greatest one.

Maradona - Epic WC performances, wonderful skill, international success, turned a team into league contenders - Lacks scoring, European level titles, a longer and stable career (if we take Ronaldo/Messi as staples, with 10+ years in their legs being top 3)
Pele - The greatest from every POV, but the Euro-centric view in football today will hurt his legacy, even though probably South-American football was better or equal to Europe (shared dominance of the Intercontinental with Real and Inter for a decade), has everything else in spades (skill, goals, longevity and titles at every level)
Di Stefano? Similar to Di Stefano, he had everything too and even won an international title, but no World Cup appearances hurt his legacy
Cruyff - Another insance career that covers all bases, we could even "forgive" he never won an international title because at least he played in a final, but if we're not going to fogive Pelé and Di Stefano a single stain, we can't do the same with him
Messi - Up there with anyone else in every term, except, like Cruyff, lack of international success, you can argue he never won a title with Argentina BUT he played 4 finals, and then you could also argue that he lost 4 finals.
Cristiano - Same as Messi, he has won indeed a Euro, but he's also the only one in this list that never played a WC final, and we're not forgiving anything to anyone, he's also regarded as the less "skilled" of all these guys by people, even tho his output is better than almost all of them

Then there's the outlayers that could have a chance to get there, but never were in the talk.

Müller - As successful and impactful as everyone else above, won every title, won some of them various times, yet I've never seen him in the GOAT talk, and I guess it's because lack of that "magic" skill
Beckenbauer - Another one that has it all and could be a fair shout, but basically a defender, no defender will ever be in the talk for the GOAT throne
Ronaldo Nazario - As always, he's the weird one here, his career wasn't consistent, but it was indeed long, lacks European level success (neve won a UCL), but had skills, goals and international performances to bore us for a couple days.
Zidane - WC Winner, European success, but his lack of what almost everyone on this list has (goal) hurts his chances, that and those years in Juventus after Del Piero's injury (personal opinion, Zidane should've done better there, he basically lost his chance to the throne those seasons)
Xavi and Iniesta - No one talks about this, we all know what they did with Barcelona (and most people think thanks to Messi), but they translated that to the national team, probably the most influential duo in he story of football alongside Gerd/Franz, but their lack of goal product will secure they're never there (that and sharing a locker room with Messi)

Key part here is, the greatest ever debate never was a fair fight, as someone raised in the 90's and fully understanding football through the 00's the talk was always about Pelé and Maradona, but if you look at it with a cold head, Maradona had no business being there if the standards he was subject were similar ti what we ask in this era, then Müller's lack of flair or that magic connection Maradona seem to have with a whole country would be less important.

Personally, now here, thinking carefully about it and today (I might change my biased opinion), Pelé should be the absolut king of football, he was a flair player as the best ones (Cruyff, Messi or Maradona), he scored like the greates ones (Messi, Ronaldo and Müller), had a career as long as anyone but won most titles than almost all of them combined, especially World Cups, Brazil was loaded in that era?. Probably, but also Barcelona and Real Madrid and we keep praising Leo and Cris, when we put them in worse squads like Portugal or Argentina the evidence crystal clear.

The fact that Pelé isn't considered the best without discussion anymore is because most of us think of South-American level as a joke, but it wasn't that way in his era.

 

[Ishdalar]

I have no idea how reliable Whoscored is, as far as i can recall their raw data is provided by OPTA. I used the key passes statistic (these are averages per game by competition):

UCL 16/17
1st Kroos 2.8
4th Ronaldo 1.5

La Liga 16/17
1st Kroos 2.8
10th Ronaldo 1.1

UCL 15/16
1st Bale 2.6
5th Ronaldo 1.9

La Liga 15/16
1st Hames 2.3
7th Ronaldo 1.4

UCL 14/15
1st Hames 3
7th Ronaldo 1.3

La Liga 14/15
1st Hames 2.7
2nd Ronaldo 2.2

I do try to catch as much of Real and Barca's games as possible, and for what it's worth these stats seem to support my impressions, namely that Ronaldo is nowhere near the top in regards of chances created, and that he is more or less regressing with each passing season.

Chances created in whoscored (and probably by Opta) depend greatly on set pieces, Kroos has been taking lateral fouls and corners since he got there, so he fills his key passes with "effortless" crosses that aren't really as dangerous as the usual chance Modric, Marcelo or even Benzema can create in a game, that's also why James shows as 1st iirc.

For example, if you look at the kind of key passes in their 14/15 season

James has 3, 1 comes from Crosses, 0.8 from Corners and 0.1 from FK
Ronaldo has 1.3, 0.3 come from crosses and 1.1 come from other, they almost create the same amount of chances from open play.

He has 0 from throughballs and the distance of the passes he created was "short" on another table, so every chance Ronaldo made that UCL season was either a ball deflecting on him, him extending it with the head or a pass inside the area. Now, you can put different "value" in the amount of chances a player creates, a 1 meter pass from Ronaldo to Benzema is indeed still a chance, and a goal comes from it, the question (and why I always say midfielders are important) is the amount of work and quality the team had behind all the actions that resulted to bring the ball to Ronaldo inside the area to create that chance, he used to do that on his own a lot when he was younger, but lately he's already there or comes from a space, he rarely drives the ball to create the chance, it's still a tangible benefit from his game, but it's something that probably requires great players like Marcelo, Kroos or Modric to keep beating the rival midfielders to get the ball there.

How many chances would create Beckham, Figo or Quaresma for a team coached by Moyes?. Well, according to Opta stats probably a lot, but it doesn't mean that their 3 or 5 Key Passes per game are better than the 2 or 3 Messi or Ozil can give you, from a cross you need to fight the defender and it's usually a hard chance to earn and even harder to hit right, with Ozil if you're somehow smart he might beat 3 defenders for you and you only have to beat the Keeper with your good leg after just a 5 meter run, that's why I believe Messi is a better creator than Ronaldo, not only in raw output but also the chances he creates are more valuable than the ones from Ronaldo, he beats rivals and meters with ease, and almost without help from his teammates like in Alba's goal today.

 

[Peyroteo]

You really don't believe the media have been underrating Modric for years for who knows what reason?. Real win the UCL in 2014, a lot of people say Modric was one of their best players, in fact:

Modric plays 52 games
He's chosen in the UCL 2014 team of the season
Chosen best midfielder in La Liga
He puts the corner in Ramos head (nothing for some players, a feat for others if we want to hype them)

He ends up out of the top 23 in the Ballon d'Or list, guys who end up ahead of him in the list

Andres Iniesta: Midfielder in La Liga (were Modric wins the trophy), 0 titles, historical embarassment with Spain in the WC.
Karim Benzema: 24 goals in 52 games with Real Madrid
Paul Pogba: Knocked out in UCL group stage behind Galatasaray

Last four seasons, Real Madrid have managed to win 3 UCL titles, the one round they've lost of their last 15 UCL rounds? The one Modric didn't play a single minute


UCL team of the season, UEFA team of the year 15/16 and 16/17, UCL Midfielder of the year 2017, La Liga midfielder of the year 2016, FIFPro team 15' 16' and 17'...

Players that have received the same or more votes than him with fewer titles or less accolades in the last 2 BdO? Aubameyang, Vidal, Lewandowski, Ibrahimovic, Payet, Neymar (one cup and 20 goals in 2017, lol).

Alright so we're not going to agree on the positions and there's no point arguing about it (and I agree with most, Modric has gone through several periods of bad form in the past 4 years, he doesn't dominate a midfield like a Xavi did, has defensive lapses and doesn't have a lot of impact in the final third. big game performances especially in the CL have rightly elevated him) but the bottom line is this and it's really this simple: Again, not arguing the positions but if you think Modric has had those positions in the Ballon D'Or race because the media want to make Ronaldo look better by making Modric look bad you are out of your mind.

As for your stat salad, I don't get what you're trying to get into, that Ronaldo's stat are skewed by his younger years?

My point is that career stats are irrelevant and should not in any way be used as a measurement of a player's quality without having the proper context behind them. It's not just that they're skewed by his younger years, they may also be skewed by the number of games he's played in his prime for example. If he keeps playing until he's 50 he'll end his career will a goal per game ratio lower than 0.5 but that won't mean he wasn't as good of a goalscorer as Messi or Pelé.

You can somewhat use that argument when we talk Messi vs Ronaldo because we talk about the same era and Messi played more centrally since being younger, but do you think Müller's ratios didn't improve with age the same way Ronaldo did? Bayern Munich were a 2nd division team in Germany in his first year, it took him 4 seaons to achieve a 1:1 goal ratio in a season, we're not talking about a guy joining EPL winners Manchester United, or Real "9 UCL titles" Madrid.

It doesn't just depend on their teams, how good they were or their position. It depends on the number of games they played, if they were substitutes, etc..

You're really going to use the "Younger years skewed stats" card here? At least you could remain fair comparing those early years, Ronaldo trained with Sporting, a club famous for developing world class wingers, and got signed by MU and Alex Ferguson, Müller started his career in a 7th tier unknown team and swapped to a 2nd tier team that had only won two titles in their history (31/32 league and 56/57 cup).

My point is that it's impossible to compare using those stats. Not that Ronaldo did better... I didn't say that anywhere. Also, Cristiano Ronaldo did not have it easy at all.

And you think stats are skewed against Ronaldo in this situation? Thank god I didn't talk about international level here, you were the first that brought back stats to the table with your "200 assists, he creates a lot of chances, unlike Müller"

I didn't do that or at least I didn't mean it that way. I said he had 200 assists as a response that he was nothing else but a poacher, not as a comparison to Muller.

I know how he plays and how his assists are created, it was only obvious that a guy like Müller in a team capable of 100+ goals per season could replicate those stats, because those teams pour chances all over their strikers.

He's assisted goals in every possible way imaginable. If you see Muller assisting goals by passing the ball 50 meters on his left foot or by running the length of the pitch in a few seconds then that's fine but I don't. The number of assists other great strikers have in comparison to Ronaldo throughout the years in equally dominant teams is significantly smaller.

"The magnitude being in the hundreds and thousands actually makes the stat worse, not better.",

so, now stats measuring great iterations of data are worse than stats from lower and most specific samples?. Nice to know

Well, obviously... as my example very clearly showed. Comparing 2 player's goals per game stats in a season is a much better use of stats than to compare those 2 player's stats for their careers.

And to sum it up, of course they were completely different players, any player from the 60's is totally different from an elite player post-90's, guys like Cruyff and Best survived eras in the collective mind because their style was totally ahead of their time and yet they might look "outdated" now, that doesn't mean that what we're talking about, the actual output and impact they had for their team, can't be measured, and for that stats are as valid as any other argument when we're talking about forwards, and if they look so absurdly close after careers of 15+ years then some truth might be about them.

There might be some true to it is not a proper argument. They didn't occupy the same area of the pitch, they shot differently, passed differently, ran differently, thought about the game differently, different size and athleticism, entirely different playstyles.

Also, I'll finish by asking this since it's more to the point rather than arguing about things that are far away from the main subject. Hopefully that's more interesting as we've gone a bit off topic. Do you think you need to be a certain type of player or have a particular set of atributes to be regarded as one of the greatest players of all time? Because I think more than bias the fact people keep imo underrating Cristiano Ronaldo when it comes into where he stands besides other all time greats is his style of play rather than his achievements.

 

[Ishdalar]

There might be some true to it is not a proper argument. They didn't occupy the same area of the pitch, they shot differently, passed differently, ran differently, thought about the game differently, different size and athleticism, entirely different playstyles.

Also, I'll finish by asking this since it's more to the point rather than arguing about things that are far away from the main subject. Hopefully that's more interesting as we've gone a bit off topic. Do you think you need to be a certain type of player or have a particular set of atributes to be regarded as one of the greatest players of all time? Because I think more than bias the fact people keep imo underrating Cristiano Ronaldo when it comes into where he stands besides other all time greats is his style of play rather than his achievements.

I kinda find funny the comparison about running, shooting and everything of course, it's a different sport altogether, from the pitch, to boots and the ball, I don't think Ronaldo could score screamers with higher grass, a telstar and the 74' Adidas World Cup boots, and this is also valid for Messi, he wouldn't dribble or pinpoint passes like he does now, we all probably coincide on that


And well, for your question, it seems today is no longer needed to have a set of attributes (in this case, used to be flair, skill, or call it how you want it), but if I was raised in a world of Pele vs Maradona while Müller was forgotten, I guess it was for a reason, so I'm probably going to put a guy like Messi over Ronaldo all the time, because not only he can replicate Ronaldo's numbers, he also has the same flair the other 2 had.

Is it fair? Well I don't know, but I also don't feel fair that I got to enjoy "a Maradona" for years, and my rivals had not a Pelé (like they wanted with Robinho) but a player profile that either didn't exist before (which I doubt), or something close to what Müller was, so they (and the press imo) turned 21st century Müller into a rival for 21st century Maradona, and that almost sounds bollocks.


Which relates to the Modric thing, do I think that there was a global media conspiracy to belittle Modric in order to enlarge Ronaldo's legend? No. Do I believe that the guy has been unfairly ignored for too long because no one was interested in "why is Cristiano winning now when he wasn't before?" hell yeah. It happened with Xavi, I liked him when he was on the verge of getting sold by Barcelona, I thought he was world class back in 2003 with Antic and 2004/5 before the knee injury, people laughed at what I was saying and called me a fanboy, then the 2008 Euro happened and also Guardiola, everyone was "Oh Xavi is so good", he was good for the past 5 years, he was doing the same since Antic moved him from the 4 role and made him play 20 meters ahead, the only difference is that now he was with good players. Midfielders like him or Modric usually don't get the recognition they deserve unless they reach some absurd heights team-wise (hence Xavi's explosion in awards and global recognition after he started winning with two different teams).

When I say Real last victories rest in Modric shoulder's it may sound as an attack to Ronaldo, it could be considered like that, but I also say, what would happen if 2009/2013 Ronaldo played with a midfield of Modric and Kroos? Or with Xavi and Iniesta and coached by Guardiola?. While I consider Messi a better player than Ronaldo, I conceed that they are probably different in style but equal scorers, god knows what he could achieve at his peak with those guys instead of Khedira, On/Offzil and Jose Mourinho

 

[shamans]

Yeah Ronaldo "won" Portugal the Euros whereas Messi got Argentina to the final. In reality, both players only got their teams to the final. Ronaldo didn't play that final so he can't get credit for winning a final. To me Portugal winning that final shows that they were a decent outfit even without Ronaldo. Also, Nani was just as good for Portugal in the Euros.

 

[wr8_utd]

There's no argument for Ronaldo being a better footballer.

It's insane that people can watch both play and come away thinking Ronaldo is better to me.

Messi is in a different tier entirely. He's up there with Pele, Maradona, etc. Ronaldo is in the tier below.

You'll find its usually just United or Portugal ones. I struggle to find neutrals who think this way.

 

[RedRonaldo]

The problem with Ronaldinho is when we talk about career length to say who's the best, peak Ronaldinho has a decent claim against almost anyone for best player ever but his peak was so short...

Ronaldo has a similar problem, longer career but tons of injuries, still everyone keeps bringing international trophies to bring down Messi vs Maradona and Cristiano now, if we talk about international level, Ronaldo was a monster at WC level, specially in 2002, and he totally could deserve being in the comparison.

Everyone is so interested in steering the arguments to their ground that it's hard to say right now what are we judging, if we talk about international + club level, skill, scoring, career longevity and titles no one comes close to Messi, he's the one that ticks most boxes (International finals, scoring records, scoring ratio, club titles and career length), a WC is the only thing he lacks to be the indisputed king, and that's were everyone has a excuse to use against him.

LeBron was in a similar spot back in 2010, haters basically said "he's so good but not a title", once he won one (and specially after losing vs Dallas) it basically broke his shackles about being regarded the best player in the league, not many dared to compare him to Kobe after that.

I think C.Ronaldo come close (since it’s Messi vs Ronaldo thread)
You may argue Messi has better skills (dribbling, ball control, playmaking), but for argument sake, in terms of “other” type of skills (header, jumping, off ball movement) Ronaldo shines more too.

 

[In Rainbows]

Nani did have a good Euros.

 

[Culero]

@Peyroteo

Quick question. Do you believe Cristiano Ronaldo is a better football player than Lionel Messi? Disregard titles and team achievements. Whose the better player for you?

 

[Lord SInister]

I don't get why people want Cal, Peyroteo and co, to accept Messi is better player.
Let these frat boys live in peace with their choice and preference

 

[VorZakone]

Messi > Ronaldo.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Second bit is about if we're talking about facing all angles of what a player needs to be consider the greatest one.

Maradona - Epic WC performances, wonderful skill, international success, turned a team into league contenders - Lacks scoring, European level titles, a longer and stable career (if we take Ronaldo/Messi as staples, with 10+ years in their legs being top 3)
Pele - The greatest from every POV, but the Euro-centric view in football today will hurt his legacy, even though probably South-American football was better or equal to Europe (shared dominance of the Intercontinental with Real and Inter for a decade), has everything else in spades (skill, goals, longevity and titles at every level)
Di Stefano? Similar to Di Stefano, he had everything too and even won an international title, but no World Cup appearances hurt his legacy
Cruyff - Another insance career that covers all bases, we could even "forgive" he never won an international title because at least he played in a final, but if we're not going to fogive Pelé and Di Stefano a single stain, we can't do the same with him
Messi - Up there with anyone else in every term, except, like Cruyff, lack of international success, you can argue he never won a title with Argentina BUT he played 4 finals, and then you could also argue that he lost 4 finals.
Cristiano - Same as Messi, he has won indeed a Euro, but he's also the only one in this list that never played a WC final, and we're not forgiving anything to anyone, he's also regarded as the less "skilled" of all these guys by people, even tho his output is better than almost all of them

Then there's the outlayers that could have a chance to get there, but never were in the talk.

Müller - As successful and impactful as everyone else above, won every title, won some of them various times, yet I've never seen him in the GOAT talk, and I guess it's because lack of that "magic" skill
Beckenbauer - Another one that has it all and could be a fair shout, but basically a defender, no defender will ever be in the talk for the GOAT throne
Ronaldo Nazario - As always, he's the weird one here, his career wasn't consistent, but it was indeed long, lacks European level success (neve won a UCL), but had skills, goals and international performances to bore us for a couple days.
Zidane - WC Winner, European success, but his lack of what almost everyone on this list has (goal) hurts his chances, that and those years in Juventus after Del Piero's injury (personal opinion, Zidane should've done better there, he basically lost his chance to the throne those seasons)
Xavi and Iniesta - No one talks about this, we all know what they did with Barcelona (and most people think thanks to Messi), but they translated that to the national team, probably the most influential duo in he story of football alongside Gerd/Franz, but their lack of goal product will secure they're never there (that and sharing a locker room with Messi)

Key part here is, the greatest ever debate never was a fair fight, as someone raised in the 90's and fully understanding football through the 00's the talk was always about Pelé and Maradona, but if you look at it with a cold head, Maradona had no business being there if the standards he was subject were similar ti what we ask in this era, then Müller's lack of flair or that magic connection Maradona seem to have with a whole country would be less important.

Personally, now here, thinking carefully about it and today (I might change my biased opinion), Pelé should be the absolut king of football, he was a flair player as the best ones (Cruyff, Messi or Maradona), he scored like the greates ones (Messi, Ronaldo and Müller), had a career as long as anyone but won most titles than almost all of them combined, especially World Cups, Brazil was loaded in that era?. Probably, but also Barcelona and Real Madrid and we keep praising Leo and Cris, when we put them in worse squads like Portugal or Argentina the evidence crystal clear.

The fact that Pelé isn't considered the best without discussion anymore is because most of us think of South-American level as a joke, but it wasn't that way in his era.

Thanks for the essay but your point said that on certain categories, no one was close to Messi... can't see reply.

And the bit in bold above - Maradona, no European level titles??

 

[Culero]

I don't get why people want Cal, Peyroteo and co, to accept Messi is better player.
Let these frat boys live in peace with their choice and preference

I honestly don't mind what player you prefer. I just wonder having watched both players if you strip away titles and achievements who they think is the superior player.

 

[Gareth williams]

I think C.Ronaldo come close (since it’s Messi vs Ronaldo thread)
You may argue Messi has better skills (dribbling, ball control, playmaking), but for argument sake, in terms of “other” type of skills (header, jumping, off ball movement) Ronaldo shines more too.

Isn't heading and jumping really the same thing

 

[Norris]

Isn't heading and jumping really the same thing

FM begs to differ.

 

[IFC 1905]

Messi is at least as good as Ronaldo at Off ball movement.





The movement Messi does during the whole play to end alone in the box at the exact moment and place to score just shows how good he is at it. He's able to "dissapear" in the caos and appear out of nowhere to finish the play. In Argentina, people who don't understand football quite well criticize Messi saying that "He doesn't run on the field, he's always walking". You don't need to run the whole time. That goal is a masterclass about when to run, in order to make an impact.

 

[Ish]

That’s actually a fair comment imo. I’d say mascherano/their defense had debatably as good a wc 2014 as Messi as well.

 

[GuyfromAustria]

Messi is at least as good as Ronaldo at Off ball movement.

I was going to say the same, how would it be possible to score absolute shitloads of goals over such a long time without having good movement off the ball?

 

[Cal?]

So Ronaldo won 2017 despite the Messi fans crying over the last couple of months of the year.

2018 has just begun...

 

[SteveW]

So Ronaldo won 2017 despite the Messi fans crying over the last couple of months of the year.

2018 has just begun...

Timing fell right for Ronnie. He was crap for the first half of the last two seasons now. But managed to hit form at the right time last season to sneak the awards. It's arguably a Real v Barca award these days anyway

 

[Cal?]

Timing fell right for Ronnie. He was crap for the first half of the last two seasons now. But managed to hit form at the right time last season to sneak the awards. It's arguably a Real v Barca award these days anyway

Timing being Ronaldo turned it on in the key part of the season whereas Messi went missing.

 

[gingerless]

12 vs 18 assists in the 16/17 season. You woulnd't say there's much incredible difference between them in terms of numbers, as almost every Ronaldo fan does.

Then you watch & analyze 'em









It's even funny

i knew something like this was the case but seeing it is just too funny. literally most of his assists are missed headers, fluffed shots, rebounds off the keeper etc

 

[Sunny Jim]

As much as i like Rolando the difference between him and Messi boils down to this: one has enormous talent, the other enormous will to work on himself. One is a god, the other just a super human.

 

[Gareth williams]

Ronaldo and Messi are very comparable as strikers. The difference is Messi is a better xavi than xavi and a better iniesta than iniesta.

People talk about Ronaldo being more complete because he's good in the air. The reality is Messi is almost complete at worlds greatest level. He's a phenomenon at almost everything.

 

[Ishdalar]

I think C.Ronaldo come close (since it’s Messi vs Ronaldo thread)
You may argue Messi has better skills (dribbling, ball control, playmaking), but for argument sake, in terms of “other” type of skills (header, jumping, off ball movement) Ronaldo shines more too.

Well maybe that's more a personal opinion in this case, Ronaldo is better at Jumping (not a chance Messi could beat him unless he had de legs of Zamorano) but at the rest, they're both great headers and off ball players, it just happens to be that Messi's height disadvantage makes him try less headers, and his desire to play with the ball hides his off ball movement, but I'd give any creative player credit on his off ball movement, because it's what makes them be able to receive the ball free, and look for other free people on the pitch.

But again, this I guess is a biased debate

Thanks for the essay but your point said that on certain categories, no one was close to Messi... can't see reply.

And the bit in bold above - Maradona, no European level titles??

Ay, that's because as everyone, I keep jumping or changing the standard of the GOAT debate like we've done for decades, from our Eurocentric point of view, no one comes close to Messi because Pelé didn't play here, and despite Ronaldo's career matching Messi in almost every stat performance-wise, general opinion is that he doesn't have the qualities that the former top 2 (Pelé and Maradona) had, Messi has always been considered in their level on skill, and that's why Müller (who was never touted against the other 2) comes into debate when we talk about Ronaldo, and as I said, maybe everyone underrated Müller, I don't know, but that's another topic.


And Maradona, yeah, he won a UEFA, that's not enough to be there, I had to point out I was talking about UCL titles or at least reaching final stages, not just losing in both his first legs. Otherwise Ronaldo would become relevant again for the throne due to his Cup's winner Cup and UEFA titles, but those are not top level tournaments.

 

[Cal?]

@Ishdalar

You seriously going to compare Messi’s heading to Ronaldo?

You can argue that Messi is a good header for his height, but that’s it, he’s nowhere comparable to Ronaldo in terms of heading.

Ronaldo is better at dribbling for his height than Messi is heading for his lack of height.

 

[Peyroteo]

@Peyroteo

Quick question. Do you believe Cristiano Ronaldo is a better football player than Lionel Messi? Disregard titles and team achievements. Whose the better player for you?

Right now Messi is the better player but if the end of the season comes and Messi fails to show up in the CL and World Cup while Ronaldo does that will change. It makes no sense to judge them solely on how consistently good their performances are when the 2 bigger competitions of the season aren’t won by being consistent.

In terms of their whole career I’d put Ronaldo ahead so far because I believe he’s outperformed him both in the Champions League and internationally but Messi is in better form, he’s 2 years younger and he has everything to change that. If he has an historically great WC and Ronaldo flops that would 100% do it, if he has a CL campign like in 2010-11 or 2014-15 that would most likely do it too.

The matches they’ll play in the months of June and July will be bigger for them than what happens in the next 2 or 3 years outside of it.

 

[IFC 1905]

@Ishdalar


Ronaldo is better at dribbling for his height than Messi is heading for his lack of height.

 

[Cal?]

Scoring a goal whilst completely unmarked makes him great at heading?

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Well maybe that's more a personal opinion in this case, Ronaldo is better at Jumping (not a chance Messi could beat him unless he had de legs of Zamorano) but at the rest, they're both great headers and off ball players, it just happens to be that Messi's height disadvantage makes him try less headers, and his desire to play with the ball hides his off ball movement, but I'd give any creative player credit on his off ball movement, because it's what makes them be able to receive the ball free, and look for other free people on the pitch.

But again, this I guess is a biased debate



Ay, that's because as everyone, I keep jumping or changing the standard of the GOAT debate like we've done for decades, from our Eurocentric point of view, no one comes close to Messi because Pelé didn't play here, and despite Ronaldo's career matching Messi in almost every stat performance-wise, general opinion is that he doesn't have the qualities that the former top 2 (Pelé and Maradona) had, Messi has always been considered in their level on skill, and that's why Müller (who was never touted against the other 2) comes into debate when we talk about Ronaldo, and as I said, maybe everyone underrated Müller, I don't know, but that's another topic.


And Maradona, yeah, he won a UEFA, that's not enough to be there, I had to point out I was talking about UCL titles or at least reaching final stages, not just losing in both his first legs. Otherwise Ronaldo would become relevant again for the throne due to his Cup's winner Cup and UEFA titles, but those are not top level tournaments.

Apart from biased comments, you change the discussion to suit and/or don't reply to people.

Your previous post said no one comes close to Messi and I asked you about certain categories (where Ronaldo has more) which you just ignored and wrote an essay.

Then you try and diminish Maradona because he hasn't one a European title (even though he has) and that he helped his team-mates .... he dragged Napoli to the title. On top of that, while Argentina 86 had some good players, no-one could argue that Maradona wasn't an absolute key member and they wouldn't have won it without him..... unlike other times when Argentina needed someone to do that?

And the height comments....

P.S. before the inevitable argument/pro-Messi comments, I think Messi is one of the best players I've ever seen but when people say silly things and/or inaccurate stat comments, you'll get pulled

 

[Ishdalar]

@Ishdalar

You seriously going to compare Messi’s heading to Ronaldo?

You can argue that Messi is a good header for his height, but that’s it, he’s nowhere comparable to Ronaldo in terms of heading.

Ronaldo is better at dribbling for his height than Messi is heading for his lack of height.

Do I need to argue about that?, he's 170cm, can you name any player better at headers than him at 170? Salas was 172, and then you start finding legit headers like Larsson at 175 or Zamorano at 178, both were considered "exceptional headers for such small height" and they have 5 and 8 cm on Messi, for his height he's a great header, maybe the best ever if you look at players <170cm

Scoring a goal whilst completely unmarked makes him great at heading?

What makes him great at heading is the heading technique, while he's not a heading threat like Ronaldo due to his lack of cm's and lower mass centre (worse air time and stability), he marks the times of a header and is able to direct it as a specialist.

We're not talking about contested headers here, he's at a huge disadvantage that would be almost impossible to overcome due to his body, but the technique behind the headers? It's comparable to Ronaldo when they're unmarked.

As for "Ronaldo is better at dribbling for his height than Messi is heading for his lack of height." Maybe you can tell me about 170cm players better than Messi or comparable at heading, you know good dribblers around Ronaldo's height? Benzema, Bergkamp, Henry, Cantona, Kane, Ronaldo, Rivaldo...

 

[Peyroteo]

Do I need to argue about that?, he's 170cm, can you name any player better at headers than him at 170? Salas was 172, and then you start finding legit headers like Larsson at 175 or Zamorano at 178, both were considered "exceptional headers for such small height" and they have 5 and 8 cm on Messi, for his height he's a great header, maybe the best ever if you look at players <170cm

 

[Ishdalar]

Apart from biased comments, you change the discussion to suit and/or don't reply to people.

Your previous post said no one comes close to Messi and I asked you about certain categories (where Ronaldo has more) which you just ignored and wrote an essay.

Then you try and diminish Maradona because he hasn't one a European title (even though he has) and that he helped his team-mates .... he dragged Napoli to the title. On top of that, while Argentina 86 had some good players, no-one could argue that Maradona wasn't an absolute key member and they wouldn't have won it without him..... unlike other times when Argentina needed someone to do that?

And the height comments....

P.S. before the inevitable argument/pro-Messi comments, I think Messi is one of the best players I've ever seen but when people say silly things and/or inaccurate stat comments, you'll get pulled

I didn't ignore it, you said Ronaldo was better at Jumping, heading and off the ball movement, I said that Ronaldo was better at Jumping, and in headers/off the ball movement I considered them equal, Messi is a great header, he just can't exploit it enough because 1) He's 170cm and 2) He's not a target man in the area, but if you let him take 10 headers inside the area, they will take goal the same amount and dangerous directions Ronaldo's would do. You guys are also forgetting that it's also harder to give a dangerous direction to a header from a 180/190 cm height which would be Messi's most common jumping height, than 2M/2,10M which is where Ronaldo makes contact on a header.

So, if we separate Jumping as the quality of winning headers, hitting it higher and aerial prowess, and Heading as the skill required to hit a ball to where you want to put it, then Ronaldo is obviously better at jumping, and Messi holds his own fairly well against Ronaldo in heading.

Off the ball movement?



What are you going to bring against that, Ronaldo scoring on the counter? Leo plays in a team that stretches the field to 30 meters of the pitch and with 2 or even 3 players marking him, and still finds openings at the space to both attack the goal or come to the middle/wings of the pitch and receive alone, isn't that off the ball movement?.

Nice, you showed us Messi is not really that special by bringing a video of Pelé to argue that he's not unique as a great header at 170cm.

Next time you say Ronaldo is great at free kicks I should link a video of Mihajlovic to prove he's not really that special

 

[Peyroteo]

Nice, you showed us Messi is not really that special by bringing a video of Pelé to argue that he's not unique as a great header at 170cm.

Next time you say Ronaldo is great at free kicks I should link a video of Mihajlovic to prove he's not really that special

I actually agree with you, Messi is a good header of the ball for his height. Only brought it up because you were listing examples and he's Pele.

 

[Ishdalar]

I actually agree with you, Messi is a good header of the ball for his height. Only brought it up because you were listing examples and he's Pele.

Saddest part is I actually like Ronaldo'd heading technique, how he marks the time and stays in the air, is a thing of beauty, but people will think I'm just underrating that skill because I think Messi is good at that too.

For example, if Ibra could head the ball like Ronaldo or Ramos, he'd be an even biggest threat in the area, or Yerry Mina, he's known for scoring a lot, he's good in the air and definitely a threat, but the way he attacks the ball... while effective, it's no as beautiful as Cristiano

 

[Kinsella]

Also, I'll finish by asking this since it's more to the point rather than arguing about things that are far away from the main subject. Hopefully that's more interesting as we've gone a bit off topic. Do you think you need to be a certain type of player or have a particular set of atributes to be regarded as one of the greatest players of all time? Because I think more than bias the fact people keep imo underrating Cristiano Ronaldo when it comes into where he stands besides other all time greats is his style of play rather than his achievements.

For me the answer to this is a definite Yes. I think most people have an almost intuitive sense of what a 'Greatest of all Time' contending player should be like and the starting point is that he must be exceptional with the ball at his feet. Messi fulfils this criteria - he's an exceptional dribbler; an exceptional passer; an exceptional goalscorer (I'd include off the ball movement under goalscoring); his vision and creativity is exceptional and so on so forth. Ronaldo is an exceptional goalscorer but he isn't exceptional in those other facets. That's not to say he isn't good at them, it's just that he isn't exceptional at them. Also, the idea that other things like heading, of which Ronaldo is the best I've seen, are equivalent to the above is laughable. I can see a case for leadership attributes elevating Ronaldo somewhat however.

Another thing I've noticed is that those in this thread who use phrases like 'style of play' and 'aesthetically pleasing' in a kind of dismissive way do so almost as if a player has consciously chosen to play a particular way. This is putting the cart before the horse. A player's 'style of play' emanates from his natural talent and to a lesser extent his physical/athletic ability. The reason Ronaldo doesn't play like Messi does isn't because he has chosen not to, it's because he can't. He doesn't have the ability to do so.

Finally, I'd disagree that people are underrating Ronaldo as most put him in the top 10. That's hardly an insult now is it?

All of this to simply say Cristiano Ronaldo and Gerd Muller were completely different players and that I wasn't insulting Muller or calling him just a poacher, I'd have him just outside of my top 10 players of all time. The fact that it's a comparison made again and again to try and discredit Ronaldo as was done above is laughable.

Gerd Muller was mentioned to demonstrate that the phrase "Lies, damned lies and statistics" applies heavily to this thread; in other words he was used to highlight the flaw of the continued use of statistics to bolster an argument. He wasn't being compared to Ronaldo as an overall player. Muller was also a phenomenal goalscorer but why isn't he mentioned alongside the other 'GOAT' players, given said scoring record and trophies won? Because outside of goalscoring he wasn't exceptional at anything.