Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance

Messi or Ronaldo

  • Messi

  • Ronaldo


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
:lol: so the world is blind (the landslide Ballon D’or win) and you’re the only one who knows football.

I’ve said many times I can accept some people think that Messi is better, but to claim Messi is MUCH superior nowadays is nothing more than fanboiism.

Fanboyism is you switching your criteria based on what suits Cristiano at very moment. You still have to explain why you thought Cristiano was better before 2013 when results and big game performances matter for you. Even more, you still haven't explained why you rate Iniesta and Xavi for their brillant passimg and dribbling abilities while you don't give Messi the credit for dropping deep and doing exactly what they did besides being a similarly impressive goal scorer as Ronaldo.

You should never ever accuse someone of being a fan boy. In fact, you are the prototype of such people.
 
You don’t seriously think the WC is higher quality than the CL, do you?

So why do you like to use the argument that Ronaldo won the Euro with Portugal then? For Portugal’s route to the final they played worse teams than what Real face in La Liga.

The WC back then was the pinnacle, just like the CL now. If Ronaldo won 3 WC’s and no CL you would be saying that the WC is the highest quality tournament.
 
:lol: so the world is blind (the landslide Ballon D’or win) and you’re the only one who knows football.

I’ve said many times I can accept some people think that Messi is better, but to claim Messi is MUCH superior nowadays is nothing more than fanboiism.

More likely realism. Tell me in what world you see Ronaldo starting from the wing dribbling past 2-3 players, then drift in the center to spray passes with amazing vision and accuracy and finish moves in the box with world class finishing all in the same game ? That happens with Messi almost every game.

Messi being much better a footballer is today more evident then ever.
 
Fanboyism is you switching your criteria based on what suits Cristiano at very moment. You still have to explain why you thought Cristiano was better before 2013 when results and big game performances matter for you. Even more, you still haven't explained why you rate Iniesta and Xavi for their brillant passimg and dribbling abilities while you don't give Messi the credit for dropping deep and doing exactly what they did besides being a similarly impressive goal scorer as Ronaldo.

Are you actually pretending Messi helps in controlling the midfield the way Iniesta and Xavi did? Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets built up the play and they did it with Messi there and without Messi being there. Messi's main impact on the game by far is his direct contribution to his team's goals, not dominating the midfield or controlling the tempo of the game.

And I agree with you on the rest by the way, in 2012 I said Messi was the better player and if he goes on to dominate the WC while Ronaldo fails then that will be the case again in my opinion.
 
Fanboyism is you switching your criteria based on what suits Cristiano at very moment. You still have to explain why you thought Cristiano was better before 2013 when results and big game performances matter for you. Even more, you still haven't explained why you rate Iniesta and Xavi for their brillant passimg and dribbling abilities while you don't give Messi the credit for dropping deep and doing exactly what they did besides being a similarly impressive goal scorer as Ronaldo.

You should never ever accuse someone of being a fan boy. In fact, you are the prototype of such people.
Because as I've been saying for years, Messi needed Xaviesta for all his brilliance pre-2013, and I was one of the few who saw through the trophies and 90+ goals year that Ronaldo is the better player.
So why do you like to use the argument that Ronaldo won the Euro with Portugal then? For Portugal’s route to the final they played worse teams than what Real face in La Liga.

The WC back then was the pinnacle, just like the CL now. If Ronaldo won 3 WC’s and no CL you would be saying that the WC is the highest quality tournament.
Ronaldo won the Euro with Portugal, much more impressive than Messi failing time and again to win the Copa with Argentina.

Did I ever say the level of football in the Euro was higher than the CL? :confused:
More likely realism. Tell me in what world you see Ronaldo starting from the wing dribbling past 2-3 players, then drift in the center to spray passes with amazing vision and accuracy and finish moves in the box with world class finishing all in the same game ? That happens with Messi almost every game.

Messi being much better a footballer is today more evident then ever.
:lol: Football is about winning, NOT about dribbling past players and spraying passes.

A Real Madrid fan claiming Messi is MUCH better? :lol:
 
Are you actually pretending Messi helps in controlling the midfield the way Iniesta and Xavi did? Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets built up the play and they did it with Messi there and without Messi being there. Messi's main impact on the game by far is his direct contribution to his team's goals, not dominating the midfield or controlling the tempo of the game.

And I agree with you on the rest by the way, in 2012 I said Messi was the better player and if he goes on to dominate the WC while Ronaldo fails then that will be the case again in my opinion.

Jesus Christ

He can't do exactly the same that Xavi or Iniesta did because that midfield was Xavi + Iniesta, and they had Alves who helped more than Sergi Roberto in the build up, and Messi as a false 9, who made link-up play easier, and Pedro who was more akin to the passing style than Suarez, Dembele or Paulinho, that's why you won't see Messi kneading the ball in midfield like Xavi because the WHOLE team lacks the quality to do so, that's why we went from 750 passes per game in 2011, to 679 in 2015 and 644 now. You can't snowball the passing or touches stats alone, you need capable teammates around.

That's how we went from total midfield domination

MYz2es0.png



To uninspired defensive passing

j3WuG4v.png

While there's another team right now that has Kroos as #2 with most passes, Isco as #6 and Modric as #14, Kroos who, also, is the player with the best pass completion since 2014.

https://www.realmadrid.com/en/news/2018/03/kroos-has-been-laligas-top-passer-since-2014

The Whites' midfielder boasts an impressive 92.7% passing accuracy and tops the division's standings for the number of successful passes. Coming in behind him are Sergio Busquets (90.41%) and teammate Luka Modric (90.21 %).


So, Barcelona's midfield is dysfunctional or, barely passable, most of our touches are between the 2 CB's and the 2 DM's, so tell me, have you watched more than 10 league games this season?, there's only one player capable of consistently linking our DM's (who roam our own half of the pitch or the mid line) and our attack, and that guy is Lionel Messi, he's not doing exactly the same things Xavi and Iniesta were doing 8 years ago, but he's filling that role of midfield maestro for Barcelona.

Anyone that watched us consistently knows that neither Busquets, Rakitic, Iniesta or Paulinho are even close to what Messi does dominating and dictating our tempo, and he's not doing what Xavi and Iniesta were doing before because he lacks the teammates those two had, we're talking about playing 20 meters deeper in the pitch, with 2 CM goats, a top-5 DM, top 10 ever RB and Messi, everyone at their peak. Are you really going to judge Messi as "not quite Iniesta or Xavi" with the difference in squad between both iterations of Barcelona?.
 
Ronaldo won the Euro with Portugal, much more impressive than Messi failing time and again to win the Copa with Argentina.

What I am saying is you would change your tune and say the WC is better than the CL if Ronaldo had won 3 WC’s and 0 CL’s. You pick and choose what you want so that is makes Ron look better.

The Euro may be better but Portugal’s route to the final was no better than Argentina’s route to the final. Ffs the only goal Ronaldo scored out of the groups was against Wales. They are not exactly powerhouses are they.

Messi did more in every CA tournament than what Ron did in the Euro.

Messi is a considerably better footballer, anyone who understands football and watches it without just using stats can see that.

Ronaldo and Messi are very close in goal scoring, Messi is better at providing for others. Ronaldo may be a better goal scorer (which is debatable) but arguing that Ronaldo is a better footballer is ridiculous.

Besides scoring, what is Ronaldo better than Messi at? Besides in the air which is silly to debate because it isnt hard to be better in the air when you are 8 inches taller.
 
The Messi vs Ronaldo Era

La Liga Winner

2009 – 10: Barcelona
2010 – 11: Barcelona
2011 – 12: Real Madrid
2012 – 13: Barcelona
2013 – 14: Atletico Madrid
2014 – 15: Barcelona
2015 – 16: Barcelona
2016 – 17: Real Madrid
2017 – 18: Barcelona

Barcelona 6 – 2 Real Madrid

Copa del Rey Winner


2009 – 10: Sevilla
2010 – 11: Real Madrid
2011 – 12: Barcelona
2012 – 13: Atletico Madrid
2013 – 14: Real Madrid
2014 – 15: Barcelona
2015 – 16: Barcelona
2016 – 17: Barcelona
2017 – 18: Barcelona

Barcelona 5 – 2 Real Madrid

Spanish Super Copa Winer

2009 – 10: Barcelona
2010 – 11: Barcelona
2011 – 12: Barcelona
2012 – 13: Real Madrid
2013 – 14: Barcelona
2014 – 15: Atletico Madrid
2015 – 16: Athletic Bilbao
2016 – 17: Barcelona
2017 – 18: Real Madrid

Barcelona 5 – 2 Real Madrid

Spanish Player of the Year

2009 – 10: Lionel Messi
2010 – 11: Lionel Messi
2011 – 12: Lionel Messi
2012 – 13: Lionel Messi
2013 – 14: Cristiano Ronaldo
2014 – 15: Lionel Messi
2015 – 16: Antoine Griezmann
2016 – 17: Sergio Ramos
2017 – 18: Lionel Messi (I'm assuming this will be the case)

Messi 6 – 1 Ronaldo

Adidas Power Rankings Best Player

2009 – 10: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 2nd)
2010 – 11: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 2nd)
2011 – 12: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 2nd)
2012 – 13: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 2nd)
2013 – 14: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 2nd)
2014 – 15: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 2nd)
2015 – 16: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 5th)
2016 – 17: Neymar (Messi was marginally 2nd, Ronaldo 5th)
2017 – 18: Lionel Messi (Ronaldo 2nd)

Messi 8 – 0 Ronaldo (Messi finished ahead of Ronaldo every season)

Pichichi Trophy

2009 – 10: Lionel Messi
2010 – 11: Cristiano Ronaldo
2011 – 12: Lionel Messi
2012 – 13: Lionel Messi
2013 – 14: Cristiano Ronaldo
2014 – 15: Cristiano Ronaldo
2015 – 16: Luis Suarez
2016 – 17: Lionel Messi
2017 – 18: Lionel Messi (I'm assuming this will be the case)

Messi 5 – 3 Ronaldo (worth nothing that Messi doesn't play as a forward now!)

Total Assists in all Competitions

2009 – 10: Messi 11 – 7 Ronaldo
2010 – 11: Messi 23 – 15 Ronaldo
2011 – 12: Messi 29 – 15 Ronaldo
2012 – 13: Messi 15 – 12 Ronaldo
2013 – 14: Messi 14 – 14 Ronaldo
2014 – 15: Messi 27 – 21 Ronaldo
2015 – 16: Messi 23 – 15 Ronaldo
2016 – 17: Messi 16 – 12 Ronaldo
2017 – 18: Messi 18 – 8 Ronaldo

Total: Messi 176 – 119 Ronaldo

Total Goals Scored

2009 – 10: Messi 47 – 33 Ronaldo
2010 – 11: Messi 53 – 53 Ronaldo
2011 – 12: Messi 73 – 60 Ronaldo
2012 – 13: Messi 60 – 55 Ronaldo
2013 – 14: Messi 41 – 51 Ronaldo
2014 – 15: Messi 58 – 61 Ronaldo
2015 – 16: Messi 41 – 51 Ronaldo
2016 – 17: Messi 54 – 42 Ronaldo
2017 – 18: Messi 43 – 42 Ronaldo

Total: Messi 470 – 448 Ronaldo

El Clasico Matches During this Time

Played 31, Barcelona Won 14, Real Madrid Won 7, Draws 10

Goals Scored: Messi 19 – 17 Ronaldo

El Clasico in La Liga and Champions League Only

Played 19, Barcelona Won 11, Real Madrid Won 4, Draws 4

Goals Scored: Messi 13 – 8 Ronaldo

Conclusion

Even looking at just raw statistics, Messi has clearly outperformed Ronaldo on a quite consistent basis. Statistics don't really tell the full story, as Ronaldo's game is absolutely geared to end product, whereas Messi plays deeper and does brilliant things all over the field that fundamentally contribute to winning games. But even so, he has been the better player statistically, and inspired Barcelona to dominate Spanish domestic football, regardless of his team-mates. In fact, he's having arguably his best and most influential season ever in what is probably the worst team he's played in, and consequently they've barely lost a game all season.

The only possible argument you can make for Ronaldo being better is that he has scored more goals in the Champions League. Even then, I certainly believe that Messi's peak performances in the Champions League have been better than Ronaldo, and he is more instrumental in Barcelona victories than Ronaldo is in Real wins. Nonetheless, there is no question that Ronaldo has been brilliant in the Champions League, and if he is fortunate then after this season he will have as many winners medals as Messi. Which one of the two of them has more winners medals in total isn't in doubt.

That's why the only people I've encountered who believe that Ronaldo is better are fans of Real Madrid or Man United. I've never encountered anyone that remotely fits the description of 'neutral' who believes that Ronaldo is a better player than Messi. Really, Ronaldo shouldn't even be compared to Messi, it should be acknowledged that he is a truly brilliant forward, one of best ever, possibly the very best ever. Ronaldo should be compared to Gerd Muller. Whereas Messi is the most complete player who has ever played the game, and certainly the most complete player today. It just so happens that he also scores 45-50 goals per season wherever you play him as well.

If he wasn't a prolific scorer then Messi would still have phenomenal passing, dribbling, balance, decision-making, control, first touch, etc, which is at least the equal of anyone that has ever played the game. But then he's scored 638 goals (and counting) as well. Whereas if you take Ronaldo's goals away, you don't have much left.
On your list you "forgot" the Champion League wins when everybody knows Real doesn't give 2 flying shits about the league, even when they won -last year I think, they had starters resting for the CL when they had Barca right behind them. So do be a bit fair, you should add all the goals Ronaldo scored and the fact he's the top scorer for 5 straight years, first player to hit the 100 goals, etc, etc. You see beating Deportivo's is not the same when they beat a top team and lately Barca strength is in La Liga.
 
How many teams have ever gone unbeaten in a league?

Ajax, Bayern and even Madrid have done the three in a row. With star-stacked squads and luck (lot of it in Madrid's case), it's not that hard; it's a cup competition after all.

In this 3-peat, you'd have won the league once - that's not greatness, it's just a very good cup team.
Even Leicester can win a league but PSG and City so far can't win the "cup league"so that "cup league" its harder than you think...actually look at Barca after Xaviesta duo - in this case Xavi left, they can't reach the semi-finals.
 
On your list you "forgot" the Champion League wins when everybody knows Real doesn't give 2 flying shits about the league, even when they won -last year I think, they had starters resting for the CL when they had Barca right behind them. So do be a bit fair, you should add all the goals Ronaldo scored and the fact he's the top scorer for 5 straight years, first player to hit the 100 goals, etc, etc. You see beating Deportivo's is not the same when they beat a top team and lately Barca strength is in La Liga.

You're deluded if you think Real doesn't care about the league.

Last year they rested some of the starters because they had a great bench, this year because they lost the league in December so the matches were pointless.
 
What I am saying is you would change your tune and say the WC is better than the CL if Ronaldo had won 3 WC’s and 0 CL’s. You pick and choose what you want so that is makes Ron look better.

The Euro may be better but Portugal’s route to the final was no better than Argentina’s route to the final. Ffs the only goal Ronaldo scored out of the groups was against Wales. They are not exactly powerhouses are they.

Messi did more in every CA tournament than what Ron did in the Euro.

Messi is a considerably better footballer, anyone who understands football and watches it without just using stats can see that.

Ronaldo and Messi are very close in goal scoring, Messi is better at providing for others. Ronaldo may be a better goal scorer (which is debatable) but arguing that Ronaldo is a better footballer is ridiculous.

Besides scoring, what is Ronaldo better than Messi at? Besides in the air which is silly to debate because it isnt hard to be better in the air when you are 8 inches taller.

I think Messi is the GOAT, but will just point out that you do the same in arguments, that is to pick and choose stats to make Messi the better player and make Ronaldo as a Gerd Muller Make II. Cal? has a reputation of being a bit of a clown, but you lot are no different, so it is kind of funny when you make out that he is some sort of a clown and anyone who disagrees with Cal? automatically becomes an objective football fan.

But carry on nonetheless.
 
Are you actually pretending Messi helps in controlling the midfield the way Iniesta and Xavi did? Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets built up the play and they did it with Messi there and without Messi being there. Messi's main impact on the game by far is his direct contribution to his team's goals, not dominating the midfield or controlling the tempo of the game.

And I agree with you on the rest by the way, in 2012 I said Messi was the better player and if he goes on to dominate the WC while Ronaldo fails then that will be the case again in my opinion.

Let me do a Peyroteo. "No I didn't. What the hell? I didn't even say that. You are making up arguments in order to disprove them albeit I never made such claims. This is completely ridiculous."

But seriously, I never said Messi controls the midfield the way those two did. I said that besides his scoring contribution and general attacking game, he also participates much in the build up, playmaking and ball retention. Things which are obviously extremely important to you (and Cal?) because otherwise you wouldn't give Iniesta and Xavi so much credit.
And yes, if he was asked to play their role, he would be just as good as them because his decision making, passing and dribbling is at least as good if not superior to theirs - both say it themselves. Can you say the same about Ronaldo? Can you imagine him in Modric's or Kroos' role? Does he, like Messi, drop deep and assist the midfield in one twos etc.? We both know the answer.

I know, you claim that Ronaldo compensates this through his brillant runs and box presence which allows his team to play easy balls in order to create chances, just because he is so good in positioning and finishing. Fair claim, albeit a wrong one in my opinion. But these are your criteria and I am sure that you consequently see Gerd Müller among top 10 footballers, too, since he was the prototype of this playing style. I mean, everything else would imply double standards and we all know that you would never use different criteria for different players based on your personal affection, right?

Because as I've been saying for years, Messi needed Xaviesta for all his brilliance pre-2013, and I was one of the few who saw through the trophies and 90+ goals year that Ronaldo is the better player.

Ah, of course. So Messi only succeeded because of Xavi and Iniesta while Ronaldo was carrying the completely incompetent likes of Kroos, Marcelo, Isco and Modric to multiple CL titles by having 30 ball contacts per game. Did you even see how many goals Messi initiated out of the midfield or through brillant dribbles and finishes? Then you see Cristiano finishing an attack after being invisible for the complete game and claim he carried the team? Jesus.

Changing the goal posts again. You are just as biased as it gets. The fact that you really think you're right and can't see past your heuristics.. wow. I'm really impressed, honestly. The degree of your ignorance is simply amazing. Every behavioral psychologist would love to work with you.

I don't even want to post in this thread anymore but the arguments you make are just too idiotic and contradictory to be ignored.
 
Even Leicester can win a league but PSG and City so far can't win the "cup league"so that "cup league" its harder than you think...actually look at Barca after Xaviesta duo - in this case Xavi left, they can't reach the semi-finals.

Even Porto and Liverpool can win a UCL, even Di Matteo can win one for the love of god.

Liverpol and Di Matteo have won one UCL title and 0 EPL, what kind of strange, intrincate point are you trying to get at with the Leicester mention? Does Liverpool situation make it look so it's easier to win a Champions League than a National League, how dense is that argument? what happens if it comes to the extremely feasible point (today) that Liverpool are able to win 2 UCL titles and 0 Leagues in the last 28 years, does that help your point or is just more banter for the sake of having ammo to throw at people with an opposed opinion to yours?
 
On your list you "forgot" the Champion League wins when everybody knows Real doesn't give 2 flying shits about the league, even when they won -last year I think, they had starters resting for the CL when they had Barca right behind them. So do be a bit fair, you should add all the goals Ronaldo scored and the fact he's the top scorer for 5 straight years, first player to hit the 100 goals, etc, etc. You see beating Deportivo's is not the same when they beat a top team and lately Barca strength is in La Liga.
I've already answered this once here:

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/messi-v-ronaldo.400526/page-249#post-22474858

Maybe, you know, read the actual post.

What I didn't mention previously is that I can bet my bottom dollar that Messi is ahead of Ronaldo in every statistical category in Champions League football apart from goals scored (assists, key passes, dribbles, etc), and Messi has a better goals-per-game ratio, I believe. But there is no doubt that Ronaldo has performed very well in the Champions League, I already acknowledged this.

I would say my post was fair, whereas your statement that Real "doesn't give 2 flying shits about the league" seems a bit ridiculous.
 
What I am saying is you would change your tune and say the WC is better than the CL if Ronaldo had won 3 WC’s and 0 CL’s. You pick and choose what you want so that is makes Ron look better.

The Euro may be better but Portugal’s route to the final was no better than Argentina’s route to the final. Ffs the only goal Ronaldo scored out of the groups was against Wales. They are not exactly powerhouses are they.

Messi did more in every CA tournament than what Ron did in the Euro.

Messi is a considerably better footballer, anyone who understands football and watches it without just using stats can see that.

Ronaldo and Messi are very close in goal scoring, Messi is better at providing for others. Ronaldo may be a better goal scorer (which is debatable) but arguing that Ronaldo is a better footballer is ridiculous.

Besides scoring, what is Ronaldo better than Messi at? Besides in the air which is silly to debate because it isnt hard to be better in the air when you are 8 inches taller.
You assume I'd change my tune but you have no proof.

Argentina beat Chile without Messi, yet with him on the pitch, they lost the final.

There we go again with the opinion = fact belief you Messi brigade have. :rolleyes:

It also isn't hard to be better dribbler when you are much shorter with much lower center of gravity. Your point being?
 
I've already answered this once here:

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/messi-v-ronaldo.400526/page-249#post-22474858

Maybe, you know, read the actual post.

What I didn't mention previously is that I can bet my bottom dollar that Messi is ahead of Ronaldo in every statistical category in Champions League football apart from goals scored (assists, key passes, dribbles, etc), and Messi has a better goals-per-game ratio, I believe. But there is no doubt that Ronaldo has performed very well in the Champions League, I already acknowledged this.

I would say my post was fair, whereas your statement that Real "doesn't give 2 flying shits about the league" seems a bit ridiculous.
https://www.statbunker.com/alltimestats/AllTimeCompetitionMostAssists?comp_code=UCL

Assists
Cristiano Ronaldo 34
Lionel Messi 26

Now, let's see where we should have you send your "bottom dollar" to. :smirk:
 
:lol: Football is about winning, NOT about dribbling past players and spraying passes.

A Real Madrid fan claiming Messi is MUCH better? :lol:

I'm a Real Madrid fan not a Ronaldo fanboy. He doesn't pay me or give me food in order to spend my life manufacturing facts and ideas about him being better than the best footballer ever. I don't care if he plays for Barcelona, he's just so much better than anyone I've ever seen.

Did Ronaldo do anything more at the Euro than Messi at the world cup anyway ? He didn't even play in the final
 
Last edited:
I think Messi is the GOAT, but will just point out that you do the same in arguments, that is to pick and choose stats to make Messi the better player and make Ronaldo as a Gerd Muller Make II. Cal? has a reputation of being a bit of a clown, but you lot are no different, so it is kind of funny when you make out that he is some sort of a clown and anyone who disagrees with Cal? automatically becomes an objective football fan.

But carry on nonetheless.

That is fair enough but I don’t ever state Messi is the best of all time, I only debate that Messi is better than Ronaldo, but he isn’t that much better.

I only try to give counter arguments, I don’t start debates with one sided stats and facts, I only counter Ronaldo stats and facts with Messi stats and facts.
 
You assume I'd change my tune but you have no proof.

Argentina beat Chile without Messi, yet with him on the pitch, they lost the final.

There we go again with the opinion = fact belief you Messi brigade have. :rolleyes:

It also isn't hard to be better dribbler when you are much shorter with much lower center of gravity. Your point being?

Don’t really need proof cos I can see exactly what you are like from your posts.

In the WC qualifiers for 2018, with Messi Argentina have won 5 with Messi and lost 1.

Without Messi they have won 1 drawn 4 and lost 2.

That is an 83% win percentage against a 14% win percentage.

Insinuating that Messi is to blame for Argentina losing against Chile is as ridiculous as me saying that Ronaldo almost lost Portugal the Euro for getting himself injured.

For all we know, Portugal may not have won with him on the field.

Using the term Messi brigade or Messi cult or fan boy or whatever makes you sound like a child. I am not even that big of a Messi fan, considering I used to always think Ronaldo was the better player for years. Mainly because I am a die hard United fan and because I never really watched Messi often.

I changed my mind after watching them both play constantly, we don’t need to look at stats to see who is the better player.

And okay, take out being better in the air for Ron and dribbling for Messi.

Then Messi is a better passer, more creative, better close control, better vision to play a killer pass, better control of the game.

Ronaldo has great positioning and knows when to arrive in the box. He is great at give and go counter attacking, but so is Messi.

Ronaldo relies on being in the right place to receive a pass from his team mates, half the time. Messi doesn’t do that.

It is no wonder Ronaldo has scored more CL goals though, as he does take about 10 more shots a game than any other player on the pitch.
 
Jesus Christ

He can't do exactly the same that Xavi or Iniesta did because that midfield was Xavi + Iniesta, and they had Alves who helped more than Sergi Roberto in the build up, and Messi as a false 9, who made link-up play easier, and Pedro who was more akin to the passing style than Suarez, Dembele or Paulinho, that's why you won't see Messi kneading the ball in midfield like Xavi because the WHOLE team lacks the quality to do so, that's why we went from 750 passes per game in 2011, to 679 in 2015 and 644 now. You can't snowball the passing or touches stats alone, you need capable teammates around.

That's how we went from total midfield domination

MYz2es0.png



To uninspired defensive passing

j3WuG4v.png

While there's another team right now that has Kroos as #2 with most passes, Isco as #6 and Modric as #14, Kroos who, also, is the player with the best pass completion since 2014.

https://www.realmadrid.com/en/news/2018/03/kroos-has-been-laligas-top-passer-since-2014

The Whites' midfielder boasts an impressive 92.7% passing accuracy and tops the division's standings for the number of successful passes. Coming in behind him are Sergio Busquets (90.41%) and teammate Luka Modric (90.21 %).


So, Barcelona's midfield is dysfunctional or, barely passable, most of our touches are between the 2 CB's and the 2 DM's, so tell me, have you watched more than 10 league games this season?, there's only one player capable of consistently linking our DM's (who roam our own half of the pitch or the mid line) and our attack, and that guy is Lionel Messi, he's not doing exactly the same things Xavi and Iniesta were doing 8 years ago, but he's filling that role of midfield maestro for Barcelona.

Anyone that watched us consistently knows that neither Busquets, Rakitic, Iniesta or Paulinho are even close to what Messi does dominating and dictating our tempo, and he's not doing what Xavi and Iniesta were doing before because he lacks the teammates those two had, we're talking about playing 20 meters deeper in the pitch, with 2 CM goats, a top-5 DM, top 10 ever RB and Messi, everyone at their peak. Are you really going to judge Messi as "not quite Iniesta or Xavi" with the difference in squad between both iterations of Barcelona?.

All of that and you actually agreed with what I said... great. We agree then. I was talking about Xavi and you somehow thought I was talking about this season? What the feck

Just disagree on the last part, Messi absolutely does not control or dictate the tempo in the current Barcelona team, complete and utter bullshit. Busquets and Rakitic do so, they’re just not as good at it as Xavi and Iniesta were

Don’t care how many crap stats you take out of whoscored, pretending Messi is a midfield maestro while he doesn’t even play in midfield is a whole new level. Dropping deep often does not make you a midfielder and he does not have similar responsibilities to the ones Iniesta or Xavi had in the slightest.

As for Kroos and Modric, when was the last time you saw Madrid's midfield play a great game of football?
 
Last edited:
I'm a Real Madrid fan not a Ronaldo fanboy. He doesn't pay me or give me food in order to spend my life manufacturing facts and ideas about him being better than the best footballer ever. I don't care if he plays for Barcelona, he's just so much better than anyone I've ever seen.

Did Ronaldo do anything more at the Euro than Messi at the world cup anyway ? He didn't even play in the final
Well, Ronaldo didn't finish the Euro final, certainly better than Messi LOSING the Copa final.
 
Don’t really need proof cos I can see exactly what you are like from your posts.

In the WC qualifiers for 2018, with Messi Argentina have won 5 with Messi and lost 1.

Without Messi they have won 1 drawn 4 and lost 2.

That is an 83% win percentage against a 14% win percentage.

Insinuating that Messi is to blame for Argentina losing against Chile is as ridiculous as me saying that Ronaldo almost lost Portugal the Euro for getting himself injured.

For all we know, Portugal may not have won with him on the field.

Using the term Messi brigade or Messi cult or fan boy or whatever makes you sound like a child. I am not even that big of a Messi fan, considering I used to always think Ronaldo was the better player for years. Mainly because I am a die hard United fan and because I never really watched Messi often.

I changed my mind after watching them both play constantly, we don’t need to look at stats to see who is the better player.

And okay, take out being better in the air for Ron and dribbling for Messi.

Then Messi is a better passer, more creative, better close control, better vision to play a killer pass, better control of the game.

Ronaldo has great positioning and knows when to arrive in the box. He is great at give and go counter attacking, but so is Messi.

Ronaldo relies on being in the right place to receive a pass from his team mates, half the time. Messi doesn’t do that.

It is no wonder Ronaldo has scored more CL goals though, as he does take about 10 more shots a game than any other player on the pitch.
It's clearly not the same, it's a fact that Argentina beat Chile without Messi and lost with him. There may have been other reasons but what I said is factually correct.

It's always the "eye test" with you Messi brigade (I can't think of a more appropriate word, except fanboi obviously, but kind of agreed not to used that).

We're back to the more shots point? :rolleyes: How is it better to dribble and lose the ball than shoot and have it saved? Shot-to-goal is just about the most pointless statistic there is.
 
But seriously, I never said Messi controls the midfield the way those two did. I said that besides his scoring contribution and general attacking game, he also participates much in the build up, playmaking and ball retention.

So you did say it... Messi playmakes, whatever that means. I'm assuming playmaking is creating chances for his teammates. He absolutely does not participate in the build up from the back. He loses the ball very often (usually because he's trying to create something, not because he's bad on the ball) so I'm not sure what you mean by ball retention either.

Things which are obviously extremely important to you (and Cal?) because otherwise you wouldn't give Iniesta and Xavi so much credit.
And yes, if he was asked to play their role, he would be just as good as them because his decision making, passing and dribbling is at least as good if not superior to theirs - both say it themselves. Can you say the same about Ronaldo? Can you imagine him in Modric's or Kroos' role? Does he, like Messi, drop deep and assist the midfield in one twos etc.? We both know the answer.

:wenger::wenger::wenger:

That's the stupidest and most disrespectful thing ever written about Xavi and Iniesta. Being a great passer, having great decision making and dribbling is all it takes to be as good as Xavi and Iniesta? You can't actually believe that. First of all, Messi's nowhere near as good at those as Xavi and Inesta were, secondly it takes a completely different mindset to play both roles and it takes a completely different skillset. The types of passing aren't the same, the dribbling isn't the same type of dribbling, etc. Doing it while running 11kms per match and actually working a lot defensively isn't the same..

So no. There's absolutely no way at all Messi could play the role of Xavi or Iniesta, nevermind actually be close in quality to them. Saying Messi could just fill in Xavi's shoes if he felt like it while Barcelona have had a Xavi sized whole in their team for 4 years is insane. Why doesn't he play that role for Argenitna then? They have plenty of great forwards and not many great midfielders. You're actually claiming that if Messi wanted to he could just do what arguably the greatest midfielder ever did, why doesn't he play there for his country then? Actually answer this question please. If Messi could be a great midfielder if he just felt like it why don't Argentina play him there and start playing Dybala ahead?

So fecking stupid, and then you acuse me of changing my arguments or being biased. You're to Messi what Cal is to Ronaldo and you still manage to look down on him... it's insane.

I know, you claim that Ronaldo compensates this through his brillant runs and box presence which allows his team to play easy balls in order to create chances, just because he is so good in positioning and finishing. Fair claim, albeit a wrong one in my opinion. But these are your criteria and I am sure that you consequently see Gerd Müller among top 10 footballers, too, since he was the prototype of this playing style. I mean, everything else would imply double standards and we all know that you would never use different criteria for different players based on your personal affection, right?

Oh my God. How many times? You've literally said the exact same shit 5 times already, I've wrote about 100 lines of why it's so stupid and it's not what I said and 10 pages later you write the same shit again as if I hadn't replied to it 5 times already :lol::wenger:

Ronaldo assists two to three times as much as Gerd Muller did. One did create loads of space through his movement, the other doesn't. BUT even if they both did, that does not mean I should rate them the same way like your stupid claim says I should. Just because two players are equally as good at a certain part of the game does not in any mean I should rate them the same way. Obviously this is especially true for Ronaldo and Muller since they do not play like eachother AT ALL despite idiots who don't even know how Muller played loving to pretend so.

When in a couple of pages you acuse of me the same shit again by completely ignoring this, I'm just going to start linking it to this.

Do it like Bart Simpson and write it on a board 100 times "Peyroteo does not change the way he rates players" so you can stop forgetting it and repeating it 1000 times.
 
Last edited:
It's clearly not the same, it's a fact that Argentina beat Chile without Messi and lost with him. There may have been other reasons but what I said is factually correct.

It's always the "eye test" with you Messi brigade (I can't think of a more appropriate word, except fanboi obviously, but kind of agreed not to used that).

We're back to the more shots point? :rolleyes: How is it better to dribble and lose the ball than shoot and have it saved? Shot-to-goal is just about the most pointless statistic there is.

For one Ronaldo has a lot more failed shots than Messi has failed dribbles. Dribbles allow a player to move up the field at pace to bring other players into the game. A billion shots means that players in better scoring positions miss out. Not to mention half of the shots Ron does are not saved, they go wide.

Shot-to-goal ratio allows us to see how good a player is at scoring as they are more efficient at it. More goals per shot shows that a player is better at actually shooting.

And give it a rest, you are more of a Ronaldo fan boi than half of these so called Messi fan boi’s. Which is a stupid phrase anyway. I don’t even think Messi is top 2 ever but you think Ronaldo is the best ever. Shows who the actually fan boi is.
 
For one Ronaldo has a lot more failed shots than Messi has failed dribbles. Dribbles allow a player to move up the field at pace to bring other players into the game. A billion shots means that players in better scoring positions miss out. Not to mention half of the shots Ron does are not saved, they go wide.

Shot-to-goal ratio allows us to see how good a player is at scoring as they are more efficient at it. More goals per shot shows that a player is better at actually shooting.

And give it a rest, you are more of a Ronaldo fan boi than half of these so called Messi fan boi’s. Which is a stupid phrase anyway. I don’t even think Messi is top 2 ever but you think Ronaldo is the best ever. Shows who the actually fan boi is.
Not at all, goals to min ratio shows how good a player is at scoring. Attempting to shoot and scoring 10% is just as efficient as attempting to dribble past defenders from 30 yards out and only shooting 2 yards out and scoring 10%.

Just shows that I don't get caught in the "good old days" mindset that lots of people do, thinking everything used to be better, including footballers.
 
So you did say it... Messi playmakes, whatever that means. I'm assuming playmaking is creating chances for his teammates. He absolutely does not participate in the build up from the back. He loses the ball very often (usually because he's trying to create something, not because he's bad on the ball) so I'm not sure what you mean by ball retention either.

Call it however you want. Messi always did participate in the passing machinery of Barcelona and was an important link up player for the tiki taka system. Even without Xavi and Iniesta, his link up play with Dani Alves and now Jordi Alba has been and still is absolutely brillant.


:wenger::wenger::wenger:

That's the stupidest and most disrespectful thing ever written about Xavi and Iniesta. Being a great passer, having great decision making and dribbling is all it takes to be as good as Xavi and Iniesta? You can't actually believe that. First of all, Messi's nowhere near as good at those as Xavi and Inesta were, secondly it takes a completely different mindset to play both roles and it takes a completely different skillset. The types of passing aren't the same, the dribbling isn't the same type of dribbling, etc. Doing it while running 11kms per match and actually working a lot defensively isn't the same..

So no. There's absolutely no way at all Messi could play the role of Xavi or Iniesta, nevermind actually be close in quality to them. Saying Messi could just fill in Xavi's shoes if he felt like it while Barcelona have had a Xavi sized whole in their team for 4 years is insane. Why doesn't he play that role for Argenitna then? They have plenty of great forwards and not many great midfielders. You're actually claiming that if Messi wanted to he could just do what arguably the greatest midfielder ever did, why doesn't he play there for his country then? Actually answer this question please. If Messi could be a great midfielder if he just felt like it why don't Argentina play him there and start playing Dybala ahead?

Disrespectful? I think Xavi would say it himself. Did you read his interviews where he talks about Barcelona, the Spanish/Catalan playstyle, all this time-space approach and especially Messi's role in it? He doesn't say in particular that Messi could play his position but at the very least it becomes clear that he possesses every attribute for it. He exemplarily said this:

"Sane would find it difficult to play inside because ge couldn't do that small turn that give you space, the turn that Messi, Iniesta, Silva, De Bruyne or Giindogan have... Even Sterling has it if he's forced to do it. Sane doesn't. He needs space. Like Bale: if you play them inside they won't be as good. They have to play on the wing, dribble. Like Cristiano. He has more difficulty playing in the middle because he doesn't profile his body the right way. De Bruyne and Silva are spectacular. It seems as if we're just now discovering Silva."

Or: "At Barca we understand football as a space-time concept. Who dominates that? Busquets, Messi, Iniesta: they're masters of space-time. They always know what to do when they're surrounded. Then you have midfielders like Casemiro who don't understand that. But at the same time, Busquets could never do the cover work that Casemiro does when the game is heads or tails."

Or: "Tactically he understands everything. It's shameful to compare him to anyone. Messi dominates every aspect. Space, time, where his teammate is, where the opposition player is. Before he used to unbalance games with pure ability and strength. Now he dribbles you like a bastard: he lures you in. He sees that he has a marker on him and he knows that the guy is scared of him so he waits for another opponent to come and then when he has like a 3x1 he passes the ball."

And why on earth would somebody play Messi in the Xavi role? Yes, it would solve the problem of his absence but however hard it is to replace Xavi, replacing Messi up front is even harder. His talents would simply be wasted since he also possesses his dribbling capabilities in the one on one as well as his brillant finishing. And if you think the running aspect would be the problem you are delusional. I don't think you understand why Messi covers so little ground as he does. Have you ever heard of fast twitching and slow twitching muscle fibres and how you can transition one into the other but not the other way round?

Besides all that, Barcelona don't play like they used to anymore. Xavi himself was nowhere near his best after Guardiola left.


So fecking stupid, and then you acuse me of changing my arguments or being biased. You're to Messi what Cal is to Ronaldo and you still manage to look down on him... it's insane.

I don't look down on him, I'm calling him a hypocrite who changes his arguments depending on his agenda. If you call that looking down on him, then I'm looking down on you, too, since you are doing the exact same thing, just in a not so obvious fashion. I'm still waiting for you to point out where I used double standards. My arguments are consistent, even if you disagree with them. And that's because I see the footballer and don't give two f*cks about the person. If Messi stopped playing like he does, I would criticize him for doing it, just like I do with Ronaldo.


Oh my God. How many times? You've literally said the exact same shit 5 times already, I've wrote about 100 lines of why it's so stupid and it's not what I said and 10 pages later you write the same shit again as if I hadn't replied to it 5 times already :lol::wenger:

Up until now, you never explained why Gerd Müller is no all time great for you and where he differs so much from Cristiano that you even get angry if someone just compares the two. That's why I repeated it. Glad you finally answered.


Ronaldo assists two to three times as much as Gerd Muller did. One did create loads of space through his movement, the other doesn't. BUT even if they both did, that does not mean I should rate them the same way like your stupid claim says I should. Just because two players are equally as good at a certain part of the game does not in any mean I should rate them the same way. Obviously this is especially true for Ronaldo and Muller since they do not play like eachother AT ALL despite idiots who don't even know how Muller played loving to pretend so.

Wrong. Since Ronaldo's move to Madrid, he assists 119 times in 434 apps (1 in 3.65). Müller has 103 assists in 427 Bundesliga matches (1 in 4.15). A slight difference (0.5), yes, but definitely Ronaldo did not assist "two to three times as much". Wonder who is the idiot "who don't even know how Müller played" now. And yes, this means you should rate them similarly because they do play like each other, at least in Ronaldo's later (legacy-defining) years.

Messi by the way has one assist in every 2.56 games.


Do it like Bart Simpson and write it on a board 100 times "Peyroteo does not change the way he rates players" so you can stop forgetting it and repeating it 1000 times.

Sorry to disappoint you but I won't because you in fact do rate players differently. Just because you claim that you don't do it doesn't mean that I have to believe you. All your conclusions and ratings simply suggest the opposite. You do the same as Cal? albeit not as obvious and at a less extreme level. But I am sure you are convinced of your objectivity.
 
Last edited:
And yes, if he was asked to play their role, he would be just as good as them because his decision making, passing and dribbling is at least as good if not superior to theirs - both say it themselves.
That's from the same school of though that people see Iniesta as Xavi+dribbling. Ignores the ball retention, positional discipline, stamina and decision-making that marked Xavi out as the best of all time at what he did. Messi would obviously make a superb 8, probably make a very good 6 as well, but he clearly falls short of Xavi on those factors above.
 
That's from the same school of though that people see Iniesta as Xavi+dribbling. Ignores the ball retention, positional discipline, stamina and decision-making that marked Xavi out as the best of all time at what he did. Messi would obviously make a superb 8, probably make a very good 6 as well, but he clearly falls short of Xavi on those factors above.

I understand that it may come across like a lazy argument. But these quotes

"Sane would find it difficult to play inside because ge couldn't do that small turn that give you space, the turn that Messi, Iniesta, Silva, De Bruyne or Giindogan have... Even Sterling has it if he's forced to do it. Sane doesn't. He needs space. Like Bale: if you play them inside they won't be as good. They have to play on the wing, dribble. Like Cristiano. He has more difficulty playing in the middle because he doesn't profile his body the right way. De Bruyne and Silva are spectacular. It seems as if we're just now discovering Silva."

"At Barca we understand football as a space-time concept. Who dominates that? Busquets, Messi, Iniesta: they're masters of space-time. They always know what to do when they're surrounded. Then you have midfielders like Casemiro who don't understand that. But at the same time, Busquets could never do the cover work that Casemiro does when the game is heads or tails."

"Tactically he understands everything. It's shameful to compare him to anyone. Messi dominates every aspect. Space, time, where his teammate is, where the opposition player is. Before he used to unbalance games with pure ability and strength. Now he dribbles you like a bastard: he lures you in. He sees that he has a marker on him and he knows that the guy is scared of him so he waits for another opponent to come and then when he has like a 3x1 he passes the ball."

are from Xavi himself and primarily regard Messi's decision making and how he solves tight situations in which he is surrounded by opponents. Yes, it is arguable if he would achieve such levels but it is definitely not a silly thing to say considering what Xavi thinks of him.
 
All of that and you actually agreed with what I said... great. We agree then. I was talking about Xavi and you somehow thought I was talking about this season? What the feck

Just disagree on the last part, Messi absolutely does not control or dictate the tempo in the current Barcelona team, complete and utter bullshit. Busquets and Rakitic do so, they’re just not as good at it as Xavi and Iniesta were

Don’t care how many crap stats you take out of whoscored, pretending Messi is a midfield maestro while he doesn’t even play in midfield is a whole new level. Dropping deep often does not make you a midfielder and he does not have similar responsibilities to the ones Iniesta or Xavi had in the slightest.

As for Kroos and Modric, when was the last time you saw Madrid's midfield play a great game of football?

You may think that Ivan and Sergio passing the ball around between them and the defenders, in our own half, its dictating the tempo of the game, but for me, and every Barcelona fan, is just endless possession recycling until the ball comes to someone that actually wants to activate the attacking part of the team, that guy is usually Messi

For example, in the 4-1 vs Roma (yay, more crap stats to explain to you how a team that you really seem to not pay attention to plays)

Umtiti, Pique, Busquets and Paulinho (sub), 209 of our 630 passes that game (33%)
dcKah6F.png

Rakitic, 87 passes, 36 in our own half (41%), 14 in the final third (16%)
SIVEpYC.png

Messi, 53 passes, ~29 in the final third (54%)
w675FDB.png

Iniesta, 60 passes, 20 in our own half (33%)
u7DhNg1.png

And now, let's compare that to the team/players you're putting him against in the last "great game" of the Guardiola era, Barcelona 3 United 1

Xavi, our most "defensive" midfielder, 150 passes. ~45 passes in his own half (30%, still better than any of our midfielders vs Roma, in a UCL final)
qNtfgKB.png

Iniesta, 116 passes, 25 in own half (21%)
TApLnWw.png

TL;DR, whos sharing the weight of driving Barcelona forward in the opposing half of the pitch in games like vs Roma?.

Rakitic 51 passes. Iniesta 40 passes. Messi 42 passes

Extra round, everything mashed up in a gif, which part of the pitch does each of those players influence compared to the rest?
iJGLTju.gif

In advance: "See, Rakitic beats Messi by 9 passes", Messi beats Rakitic by 8 dribbles (all of them in the last third), so Rakitic has the same specific weight in the opposing side of the pitch as Messi. But, again, if you watched the games you'd notice that most teams let us play freely in their own half of midfield, that's where Messi, with his 29 passes in the final third, becomes our maestro, or playmaker due to his task of moving the team against actual opposition, cue in common football knowledge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playmaker

The most complete and versatile playmakers are often known as advanced playmakers, or free role playmakers, as they can operate both in central, attacking midfield positions, as well as in wider positions on the wings. The attacking playmakers are sometimes called the "number 10" of the team, as they often wear the number 10 jersey. The attacking midfield playmaker will sit in a free role between the midfield and the forwards, either in the centre of the pitch or on either flank. These offensive playmakers will often make incisive passes to the wingers or forwards, seeing them through on goal or to deliver killer crosses, as well as scoring goals themselves. They are also usually quick, agile, and highly technical players with good vision, shooting, passing, crossing and dribbling ability; they are known for scoring goals as well as providing assists, through-balls, and initiating attacking play

If by this point, you still don't get that we lack the players to 1) Make Messi play a role similar to Xavi or Iniesta but he has the same key role of propelling us forward and 2) That everyone behinds Messi has defense-first duty, despite them having the ball or not, then I don't know if you watch football or volleyball.


Football is usually played on a 100m long pitch, for defensive teams (specially being attacked) midfield phase starts ~40m away from their goal, for most teams that phase starts around 50~m, and for the Barcelona style and the way more teams settle against us, midfielder phase starts around ~65m away from our goal, you're saying that Messi isn't a midfielder because he just "drops deep", but for Barcelona, Messi is just playing 5/10 meters ahead of where 2011 Iniesta (who you consider a midfielder) played, he's a midfielder in, at least, 90% of the concept that term defines, as the #10 definition said, "free role between midfield and forwards", in that free role, our game plan has Messi roaming into midfield whenever he's needed, and he's needed plenty.
 
Call it however you want. Messi always did participate in the passing machinery of Barcelona and was an important link up player for the tiki taka system. Even without Xavi and Iniesta, his link up play with Dani Alves and now Jordi Alba has been and still is absolutely brillant.




Disrespectful? I think Xavi would say it himself. Did you read his interviews where he talks about Barcelona, the Spanish/Catalan playstyle, all this time-space approach and especially Messi's role in it? He doesn't say in particular that Messi could play his position but at the very least it becomes clear that he possesses every attribute for it. He exemplarily said this:

"Sane would find it difficult to play inside because ge couldn't do that small turn that give you space, the turn that Messi, Iniesta, Silva, De Bruyne or Giindogan have... Even Sterling has it if he's forced to do it. Sane doesn't. He needs space. Like Bale: if you play them inside they won't be as good. They have to play on the wing, dribble. Like Cristiano. He has more difficulty playing in the middle because he doesn't profile his body the right way. De Bruyne and Silva are spectacular. It seems as if we're just now discovering Silva."

Or: "At Barca we understand football as a space-time concept. Who dominates that? Busquets, Messi, Iniesta: they're masters of space-time. They always know what to do when they're surrounded. Then you have midfielders like Casemiro who don't understand that. But at the same time, Busquets could never do the cover work that Casemiro does when the game is heads or tails."

Or: "Tactically he understands everything. It's shameful to compare him to anyone. Messi dominates every aspect. Space, time, where his teammate is, where the opposition player is. Before he used to unbalance games with pure ability and strength. Now he dribbles you like a bastard: he lures you in. He sees that he has a marker on him and he knows that the guy is scared of him so he waits for another opponent to come and then when he has like a 3x1 he passes the ball."

And why on earth would somebody play Messi in the Xavi role? Yes, it would solve the problem of his absence but however hard it is to replace Xavi, replacing Messi up front is even harder. His talents would simply be wasted since he also possesses his dribbling capabilities in the one on one as well as his brillant finishing. And if you think the running aspect would be the problem you are delusional. I don't think you understand why Messi covers so little ground as he does. Have you ever heard of fast twitching and slow twitching muscle fibres and how you can transition one into the other but not the other way round?

Besides all that, Barcelona don't play like they used to anymore. Xavi himself was nowhere near his best after Guardiola left.




I don't look down on him, I'm calling him a hypocrite who changes his arguments depending on his agenda. If you call that looking down on him, then I'm looking down on you, too, since you are doing the exact same thing, just in a not so obvious fashion. I'm still waiting for you to point out where I used double standards. My arguments are consistent, even if you disagree with them. And that's because I see the footballer and don't give two f*cks about the person. If Messi stopped playing like he does, I would criticize him for doing it, just like I do with Ronaldo.




Up until now, you never explained why Gerd Müller is no all time great for you and where he differs so much from Cristiano that you even get angry if someone just compares the two. That's why I repeated it. Glad you finally answered.




Wrong. Since Ronaldo's move to Madrid, he assists 119 times in 434 apps (1 in 3.65). Müller has 103 assists in 427 Bundesliga matches (1 in 4.15). A slight difference (0.5), yes, but definitely Ronaldo did not assist "two to three times as much". Wonder who is the idiot "who don't even know how Müller played" now. And yes, this means you should rate them similarly because they do play like each other, at least in Ronaldo's later (legacy-defining) years.

Messi by the way has one assist in every 2.56 games.




Sorry to disappoint you but I won't because you in fact do rate players differently. Just because you claim that you don't do it doesn't mean that I have to believe you. All your conclusions and ratings simply suggest the opposite. You do the same as Cal? albeit not as obvious and at a less extreme level. But I am sure you are convinced of your objectivity.

And you're not of yours? :lol: Anyone that actually thinks Messi could play Xavi's role as good as Xavi did is either insanely biased, has no idea what they're talking about or both... Those Xavi quotes are laughable and they do not even translate to what you said, he's just saying Messi is better in small spaces, no shit. Takes a lot more than that to be Xavi. If Argentina had Xavi and no Messi they'd be better of as of now, they'd get someone brilliant in midfield and Dybala would just play in Messi's place to make a partnership with Higuain that's been flourishing this season. So again, if like you say Messi could just arguably be the greatest midfielder in the history of the fecking sport if he felt like it, why the hell doesn't he do it when his country is desperate for it? Maybe he fecking can't. I certainly can't even believe I'm having to debate this.

And by the way, just like I think Xavi and Iniesta made Messi's job a lot easier I also think the opposite is very true. The main difference is that Xavi and Iniesta proved they could reach the same level on the big stages even without Messi while the opposite hasn't quite been the case. I give Messi a lot of credit for what he did in 2014-15 in a slightly different system to the Guardiola one by the way.

I do think Gerd Muller is an all time great player, top 20 all time for sure. He's still the greatest goalscorer ever imo. You claiming I don't think so is just absolute bullshit you just made up. Problem for Gerd Muller is he wasn't even the best player on his team which does take away from all he achieved. Those assists numbers.. nicely done. That's the problem with checking transfermarkt without any idea of what you're talking about. The 103 assists are from the league and the cup, not just the league. 103 assists in 400 games would make him the best creative player in the history of the league... He had 3 assists in 34 games in the Eruopean Cup too. And like I've always said here, I couldn't care less about all time numbers as they don't tell you anything and it's largely dependant on the way their games are distributed. Cristiano Roanldo and Gerd Muller are completely different players which played completely different roles, played in completely different areas of the pitch and moved through the pitch in a completely different way. Only thing that's similar is they're the two greatest goalscorers this sport has ever seen. The fact that these comparisons keep happening as if they were similar players is completely absurd and the worst part is people aren't comparing Ronaldo with Gerd Muller, they're comparing him with a caricature of Gerd Muller which is just an Inzaghi that scored more goals which couldn't be further from the truth.

You keep telling me to show me one example of you changing arguments while you keep acusing me of changing arguments without giving me one single example... you keep saying I change my arguments so that Roanldo is always the superior player when I've already told you 20 different times I thought Messi was the better player a few years ago... a few months ago in this thread I said that of Messi had great CL and WC campaigns this year while Ronaldo didn't I'd change my mind again and I'm telling you now that if Messi goes on to dominate the WC with an historic campaign I'll change it again.

And please actually write this on a board because I'm tired of saying the same things over and over again.
 
You may think that Ivan and Sergio passing the ball around between them and the defenders, in our own half, its dictating the tempo of the game, but for me, and every Barcelona fan, is just endless possession recycling until the ball comes to someone that actually wants to activate the attacking part of the team, that guy is usually Messi

For example, in the 4-1 vs Roma (yay, more crap stats to explain to you how a team that you really seem to not pay attention to plays)

Umtiti, Pique, Busquets and Paulinho (sub), 209 of our 630 passes that game (33%)
dcKah6F.png

Rakitic, 87 passes, 36 in our own half (41%), 14 in the final third (16%)
SIVEpYC.png

Messi, 53 passes, ~29 in the final third (54%)
w675FDB.png

Iniesta, 60 passes, 20 in our own half (33%)
u7DhNg1.png

And now, let's compare that to the team/players you're putting him against in the last "great game" of the Guardiola era, Barcelona 3 United 1

Xavi, our most "defensive" midfielder, 150 passes. ~45 passes in his own half (30%, still better than any of our midfielders vs Roma, in a UCL final)
qNtfgKB.png

Iniesta, 116 passes, 25 in own half (21%)
TApLnWw.png

TL;DR, whos sharing the weight of driving Barcelona forward in the opposing half of the pitch in games like vs Roma?.

Rakitic 51 passes. Iniesta 40 passes. Messi 42 passes

Extra round, everything mashed up in a gif, which part of the pitch does each of those players influence compared to the rest?
iJGLTju.gif

In advance: "See, Rakitic beats Messi by 9 passes", Messi beats Rakitic by 8 dribbles (all of them in the last third), so Rakitic has the same specific weight in the opposing side of the pitch as Messi. But, again, if you watched the games you'd notice that most teams let us play freely in their own half of midfield, that's where Messi, with his 29 passes in the final third, becomes our maestro, or playmaker due to his task of moving the team against actual opposition, cue in common football knowledge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playmaker

The most complete and versatile playmakers are often known as advanced playmakers, or free role playmakers, as they can operate both in central, attacking midfield positions, as well as in wider positions on the wings. The attacking playmakers are sometimes called the "number 10" of the team, as they often wear the number 10 jersey. The attacking midfield playmaker will sit in a free role between the midfield and the forwards, either in the centre of the pitch or on either flank. These offensive playmakers will often make incisive passes to the wingers or forwards, seeing them through on goal or to deliver killer crosses, as well as scoring goals themselves. They are also usually quick, agile, and highly technical players with good vision, shooting, passing, crossing and dribbling ability; they are known for scoring goals as well as providing assists, through-balls, and initiating attacking play

If by this point, you still don't get that we lack the players to 1) Make Messi play a role similar to Xavi or Iniesta but he has the same key role of propelling us forward and 2) That everyone behinds Messi has defense-first duty, despite them having the ball or not, then I don't know if you watch football or volleyball.


Football is usually played on a 100m long pitch, for defensive teams (specially being attacked) midfield phase starts ~40m away from their goal, for most teams that phase starts around 50~m, and for the Barcelona style and the way more teams settle against us, midfielder phase starts around ~65m away from our goal, you're saying that Messi isn't a midfielder because he just "drops deep", but for Barcelona, Messi is just playing 5/10 meters ahead of where 2011 Iniesta (who you consider a midfielder) played, he's a midfielder in, at least, 90% of the concept that term defines, as the #10 definition said, "free role between midfield and forwards", in that free role, our game plan has Messi roaming into midfield whenever he's needed, and he's needed plenty.

Except he isn't a midfielder and making a few passes in midfield areas is not what makes a midfielder. It's not numbers from one game that's going to prove anything. Barcelona players' average position for the past few games:

FBnqbfF.png

HVUIlxO.png

b3sremQ.png

cXgZ94u.png


i4PQ8ZL.png

gLKVOJm.png

sVymypY.png

How come a midfielder is playing closer to goal than your striker?

And by the way, I still don't see what you're saying even has to do with what I was talking about which was Messi back in the Xavi and Iniesta days, not Messi now.
 
Peyroteo, we went over this before, so to save me counting where Messi picks the ball up from the actual footage of the games let's just clarify what I think most people mean so you don't have to bring up those heatmaps again;

Messi takes the responsibilities of a midfielder on the ball but plays like a (lazy) striker off the ball.

Do you agree with that?
 
You may think that Ivan and Sergio passing the ball around between them and the defenders, in our own half, its dictating the tempo of the game, but for me, and every Barcelona fan, is just endless possession recycling until the ball comes to someone that actually wants to activate the attacking part of the team, that guy is usually Messi

For example, in the 4-1 vs Roma (yay, more crap stats to explain to you how a team that you really seem to not pay attention to plays)

Umtiti, Pique, Busquets and Paulinho (sub), 209 of our 630 passes that game (33%)
dcKah6F.png

Rakitic, 87 passes, 36 in our own half (41%), 14 in the final third (16%)
SIVEpYC.png

Messi, 53 passes, ~29 in the final third (54%)
w675FDB.png

Iniesta, 60 passes, 20 in our own half (33%)
u7DhNg1.png

And now, let's compare that to the team/players you're putting him against in the last "great game" of the Guardiola era, Barcelona 3 United 1

Xavi, our most "defensive" midfielder, 150 passes. ~45 passes in his own half (30%, still better than any of our midfielders vs Roma, in a UCL final)
qNtfgKB.png

Iniesta, 116 passes, 25 in own half (21%)
TApLnWw.png

TL;DR, whos sharing the weight of driving Barcelona forward in the opposing half of the pitch in games like vs Roma?.

Rakitic 51 passes. Iniesta 40 passes. Messi 42 passes

Extra round, everything mashed up in a gif, which part of the pitch does each of those players influence compared to the rest?
iJGLTju.gif

In advance: "See, Rakitic beats Messi by 9 passes", Messi beats Rakitic by 8 dribbles (all of them in the last third), so Rakitic has the same specific weight in the opposing side of the pitch as Messi. But, again, if you watched the games you'd notice that most teams let us play freely in their own half of midfield, that's where Messi, with his 29 passes in the final third, becomes our maestro, or playmaker due to his task of moving the team against actual opposition, cue in common football knowledge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playmaker

The most complete and versatile playmakers are often known as advanced playmakers, or free role playmakers, as they can operate both in central, attacking midfield positions, as well as in wider positions on the wings. The attacking playmakers are sometimes called the "number 10" of the team, as they often wear the number 10 jersey. The attacking midfield playmaker will sit in a free role between the midfield and the forwards, either in the centre of the pitch or on either flank. These offensive playmakers will often make incisive passes to the wingers or forwards, seeing them through on goal or to deliver killer crosses, as well as scoring goals themselves. They are also usually quick, agile, and highly technical players with good vision, shooting, passing, crossing and dribbling ability; they are known for scoring goals as well as providing assists, through-balls, and initiating attacking play

If by this point, you still don't get that we lack the players to 1) Make Messi play a role similar to Xavi or Iniesta but he has the same key role of propelling us forward and 2) That everyone behinds Messi has defense-first duty, despite them having the ball or not, then I don't know if you watch football or volleyball.


Football is usually played on a 100m long pitch, for defensive teams (specially being attacked) midfield phase starts ~40m away from their goal, for most teams that phase starts around 50~m, and for the Barcelona style and the way more teams settle against us, midfielder phase starts around ~65m away from our goal, you're saying that Messi isn't a midfielder because he just "drops deep", but for Barcelona, Messi is just playing 5/10 meters ahead of where 2011 Iniesta (who you consider a midfielder) played, he's a midfielder in, at least, 90% of the concept that term defines, as the #10 definition said, "free role between midfield and forwards", in that free role, our game plan has Messi roaming into midfield whenever he's needed, and he's needed plenty.
You are wasting your time. They´ll never accept the fact that Messi is total player and Ronaldo a goalscorer.
 
Football turned into statistics :S Back in the day you just saw the games and say this one do things than the others can't and that's it. So sad.
 
Peyroteo, we went over this before, so to save me counting where Messi picks the ball up from the actual footage of the games let's just clarify what I think most people mean so you don't have to bring up those heatmaps again;

Messi takes the responsibilities of a midfielder on the ball but plays like a (lazy) striker off the ball.

Do you agree with that?

No, he doesn’t play like a midfielder with the ball either
 
And you're not of yours? :lol: Anyone that actually thinks Messi could play Xavi's role as good as Xavi did is either insanely biased, has no idea what they're talking about or both... Those Xavi quotes are laughable and they do not even translate to what you said, he's just saying Messi is better in small spaces, no shit. Takes a lot more than that to be Xavi. If Argentina had Xavi and no Messi they'd be better of as of now, they'd get someone brilliant in midfield and Dybala would just play in Messi's place to make a partnership with Higuain that's been flourishing this season. So again, if like you say Messi could just arguably be the greatest midfielder in the history of the fecking sport if he felt like it, why the hell doesn't he do it when his country is desperate for it? Maybe he fecking can't. I certainly can't even believe I'm having to debate this.

This again shows how little understanding you have. Do you remember how anonymous Xavi seemed until Aragones and Guardiola became his managers? He was the best midfielder in history in a system that was tailored to La Masia players but in a different approach and a more classical midfield role he might've looked a lesser player, just like Sergio Busquets would feel like a fish out of water if he was asked to interpret his role like Casemiro, Kante or similar players. You don't place Xavi in the Argentinan team and they suddenly become Spain 2.0. You need the complete team to execute the tactical approach and a coach that teaches them ho to do it.

Xavi is a brillant technician and passer but that's not really what made him the best in his position. Players like Thiago, Isco or Modric are more gifted than him but they never really achieved the same level (Modric maybe has). The reason is his decision making and footballing brain. And in these areas, Messi excels according to Xavi. He literally claims that noone reads the game like him. So how on earth does that not translate to what I've said? Read his interviews and you will get a clearer picture.

And by the way, just like I think Xavi and Iniesta made Messi's job a lot easier I also think the opposite is very true. The main difference is that Xavi and Iniesta proved they could reach the same level on the big stages even without Messi while the opposite hasn't quite been the case. I give Messi a lot of credit for what he did in 2014-15 in a slightly different system to the Guardiola one by the way.

Half of Spain's team consisted of Catalan players respectively ones who had learned it. Besides each other, Iniesta and Xavi had Busquets, Fabregas, David Villa, Pedro, Pique and Puyol and later on Thiago and Jordi Alba. Accompanied by midfielders like Xabi Alonso, Santi Cazorla and David Silva who adapted to the system rather effortlessly plus coaches who asked them to play this way. Messi had Mascherano at most who wasn't even a Barcelona starter and not a single manager who played the Barca style. That's just not fair, Argentina played nothing like Barcelona.

I do think Gerd Muller is an all time great player, top 20 all time for sure. He's still the greatest goalscorer ever imo. You claiming I don't think so is just absolute bullshit you just made up. Problem for Gerd Muller is he wasn't even the best player on his team which does take away from all he achieved. Those assists numbers.. nicely done. That's the problem with checking transfermarkt without any idea of what you're talking about. The 103 assists are from the league and the cup, not just the league. 103 assists in 400 games would make him the best creative player in the history of the league... He had 3 assists in 34 games in the Eruopean Cup too. And like I've always said here, I couldn't care less about all time numbers as they don't tell you anything and it's largely dependant on the way their games are distributed. Cristiano Roanldo and Gerd Muller are completely different players which played completely different roles, played in completely different areas of the pitch and moved through the pitch in a completely different way. Only thing that's similar is they're the two greatest goalscorers this sport has ever seen. The fact that these comparisons keep happening as if they were similar players is completely absurd and the worst part is people aren't comparing Ronaldo with Gerd Muller, they're comparing him with a caricature of Gerd Muller which is just an Inzaghi that scored more goals which couldn't be further from the truth.

Do you have any proof for your claim? Because transfermarkt gets his goal numbers right. We are talking about a player who scored 365 goals in 427 Bundesliga games. An assist to goal ratio of 1/3 is quite usual for a playing striker. It also wouldn't make him the best creative player because assists =/= creativity. The problem with his assists in cup competitions is that they weren't tracked back then. That's why I chose the Bundesliga stats since it is the best sample set we have.

And no, they are not completely different players, at least in recent years. Actually, the late Ronaldo (the one who won three and possibly even more CLs with RM) has a similar style: Making runs, scoring ruthlessly, moving brillantly in the box and having a good link up play if he gets in these situations. The only difference is probably that he is more lethal from outside the box, better at heading (due to his height advantage) and has a higher top speed while Müller's movement in the box probably even edges Cristiano's. Your argument is that Ronaldo contributes to the game by making runs and his brillant positioning, thereby creating danger and making it easy for his team mates to create chances for him. Well, you can't deny that you can make the exact same argument for Müller.

You keep telling me to show me one example of you changing arguments while you keep acusing me of changing arguments without giving me one single example... you keep saying I change my arguments so that Roanldo is always the superior player when I've already told you 20 different times I thought Messi was the better player a few years ago... a few months ago in this thread I said that of Messi had great CL and WC campaigns this year while Ronaldo didn't I'd change my mind again and I'm telling you now that if Messi goes on to dominate the WC with an historic campaign I'll change it again.

And please actually write this on a board because I'm tired of saying the same things over and over again.

People tell you Messi has more impact on games and therefore they rate him higher although he scored less goals in big CL games in recent years. You argue that Ronaldo contributes in less fancy but still extremely efficient ways. Precisely, you say he does that through his excellent runs, instinct and brillant finishing which turns average crosses into great chances. I think with all due respect to Ronaldo's off the ball game, this takes it way too far, but fair enough, you can see it that way. However, I believe if you are consistent you would then have to rate Gerd Müller over Beckenbauer/Cruyff, Henry/van Nistelrooy over Zidane, Eto'o over Ronaldinho, Milito over Sneijder and so on in my opinion. Because all of these players made brillant runs and had genius finishing/instinct, too, and would thus create much more goal impact than all those playmaking greats. You make correct arguments for Ronaldo but you don't make them for other players. That's where I see your double standards. Your turn.
 
The most complete and versatile playmakers are often known as advanced playmakers, or free role playmakers, as they can operate both in central, attacking midfield positions, as well as in wider positions on the wings. The attacking playmakers are sometimes called the "number 10" of the team, as they often wear the number 10 jersey. The attacking midfield playmaker will sit in a free role between the midfield and the forwards, either in the centre of the pitch or on either flank. These offensive playmakers will often make incisive passes to the wingers or forwards, seeing them through on goal or to deliver killer crosses, as well as scoring goals themselves. They are also usually quick, agile, and highly technical players with good vision, shooting, passing, crossing and dribbling ability; they are known for scoring goals as well as providing assists, through-balls, and initiating attacking play

If by this point, you still don't get that we lack the players to 1) Make Messi play a role similar to Xavi or Iniesta but he has the same key role of propelling us forward and 2) That everyone behinds Messi has defense-first duty, despite them having the ball or not, then I don't know if you watch football or volleyball.

I don't think that Messi can play as a midfielder like Xavi and Iniesta do not because he lacks the skill like @Peyroteo says but because he doesn't have enough stamina and a midfielder must cover a lot of ground and get back to defend.

Messi plays like a number 10, but I've no idea if a number 10 is considered a midfielder or a forward. He plays in a similar position to Maradona, usually in front of the midfielders and behind a striker, with the difference of course that Barcelona are a possession oriented team unlike Napoli and that Barcelona almost always plays in the opponents' half.

Messi's role in the team anyway is not to control the tempo but to accelerate the action, creating chances for his teammates and making the final pass in the final third.

Is Maradona considered a midfielder or a forward?
 
And no, they are not completely different players, at least in recent years. Actually, the late Ronaldo (the one who won three and possibly even more CLs with RM) has a similar style: Making runs, scoring ruthlessly, moving brillantly in the box and having a good link up play if he gets in these situations. The only difference is probably that he is more lethal from outside the box, better at heading (due to his height advantage) and has a higher top speed while Müller's movement in the box probably even edges Cristiano's. Your argument is that Ronaldo contributes to the game by making runs and his brillant positioning, thereby creating danger and making it easy for his team mates to create chances for him. Well, you can't deny that you can make the exact same argument for Müller.

Yes... and I do. But just because that's the case and they both thrive in that aspect of the game doesn't mean I have to rate them the same way because there is a lot more to football. You keep calling me an hypocrite for it which makes no sense at all.

Their strengths might be similar but they played completely differently, now or before. Ronaldo is much more mobile and has a lot more freedom on the pitch to appear on the center, left or right. You also keep mentioning these past few years have been Ronaldo's legacy defining years... 5 years ago even Benfica fans were putting above Eusebio. His legacy has been written a long time ago. Last few years are the cherry on top.

People tell you Messi has more impact on games and therefore they rate him higher although he scored less goals in big CL games in recent years. You argue that Ronaldo contributes in less fancy but still extremely efficient ways. Precisely, you say he does that through his excellent runs, instinct and brillant finishing which turns average crosses into great chances. I think with all due respect to Ronaldo's off the ball game, this takes it way too far, but fair enough, you can see it that way. However, I believe if you are consistent you would then have to rate Gerd Müller over Beckenbauer/Cruyff, Henry/van Nistelrooy over Zidane, Eto'o over Ronaldinho, Milito over Sneijder and so on in my opinion. Because all of these players made brillant runs and had genius finishing/instinct, too, and would thus create much more goal impact than all those playmaking greats.

No for fecks sake. I have no idea how I can explain it any better than I already have. You just keep failing to get it when it's pretty simple.

Ronaldo and Muller's movement creates plenty of chances, not just for themselves but for their teammates too. However they both also create chances through their passing, crossing, etc. Just because I rate one player who creates more through his movement over another player who creates more through his passing DOES NOT MEAN I have to rate every player who creates more through his movement than every player who creates more through his passing since there is a lot more of other factors to rate how good a player is.

I have no idea how I can explain it better than this, I've told you the same thing about 10 different times and you keep ignoring it. I can't be bothered anymore.
 
Yes... and I do. But just because that's the case and they both thrive in that aspect of the game doesn't mean I have to rate them the same way because there is a lot more to football. You keep calling me an hypocrite for it which makes no sense at all.

Their strengths might be similar but they played completely differently, now or before. Ronaldo is much more mobile and has a lot more freedom on the pitch to appear on the center, left or right. You also keep mentioning these past few years have been Ronaldo's legacy defining years... 5 years ago even Benfica fans were putting above Eusebio. His legacy has been written a long time ago. Last few years are the cherry on top.

He won three of his four Ballon D'Ors (possibly four of his five in a few months time) throughout this period, of course they are his legacy defining years. I mean, you yourself changed your opinion based on his recent achievements so how shouldn't they?


No for fecks sake. I have no idea how I can explain it any better than I already have. You just keep failing to get it when it's pretty simple.

Ronaldo and Muller's movement creates plenty of chances, not just for themselves but for their teammates too. However they both also create chances through their passing, crossing, etc. Just because I rate one player who creates more through his movement over another player who creates more through his passing DOES NOT MEAN I have to rate every player who creates more through his movement than every player who creates more through his passing since there is a lot more of other factors to rate how good a player is.

I have no idea how I can explain it better than this, I've told you the same thing about 10 different times and you keep ignoring it. I can't be bothered anymore.

No, I don't ignore it. It is my opinion that you are simply being wrong in this matter and are making cheap excuses. In terms of dribbling, passing, playmaking and all that stuff Messi beats Ronaldo by lightyears. Even during Ronaldo's prime it wasn't even close. You claim the latter makes up for it through his chance creation by off the ball movement. However, the gap that Ronaldo would have to overcome this way is gigantic which implies that you pay extreme importance to this aspect of the game. But you only do it in case of Ronaldo. If you would pay the same importance to off the ball movement when comparing exemplarily Zidane and Henry, there would be no way whatsoever to place the former over the latter. Why? Because the playmaking and contribution gap between Zidane and Henry is smaller while the difference in their off the ball movement is greater than that between Cristiano and Messi. So yes, you are inconsequent in my eyes and the most likely explanation for it is that you want Cristiano to come out on top.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.