The reason I rate Maradona higher in peak and legacy category, is mostly down to his '86 WC achievement, which is unprecedent and no one ever come close matching. And this is also follow up by his 86-87 season, which he won his first Serie A too, scoring 17 goals in traditional playmaker role. Sure the numbers were nowhere near to Ronaldo and Messi, but they are playing different roles in different era, and if judging in context, Maradona in 86 and to an extent from 86 to 87, was the very definition of the highest peak of any footballer.
Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance
- Thread starter Rado_N
- Start date
- Status
The reason I rate Maradona higher in peak and legacy category, is mostly down to his '86 WC achievement, which is unprecedent and no one ever come close matching. And this is also follow up by his 86-87 season, which he won his first Serie A too, scoring 17 goals in traditional playmaker role. Sure the numbers were nowhere near to Ronaldo and Messi, but they are playing different roles in different era, and if judging in context, Maradona in 86 and to an extent from 86 to 87, was the very definition of the highest peak of any footballer.
The 1st point is harsh, but I don't think Ronaldo having questionable decision making before is a stretch.
His decision making has improved a LOT in the past 2-3 seasons.
His decision making hasn't improved at all, he has simply changed his area of influence to a smaller area where he takes less risks and has a more set position.
It defies all logic to say Ronaldo had very questionable decision making in his prime when he got 50+ goals and assists for several years in a row. What the hell would he have achieved if he had good decision making??
I think it has.
The change in position has helped, but he himself is the one taking less and less pot shots. This is why I think this current Ronaldo is probably the best one. His positional change has allowed him to mask his less greater strengths and truly maximize his strengths.
Now I don't think he had very questionable decision making, that is incredibly harsh. But it's not as good as it is now imo.
There were people on here who noted his increased selflessness.
That has to do with his declining qualities. His free kicks turned to shite over time and his touch and reactions have worsened. This is because he can generate less power, and is losing a bit of mental sharpness and co-ordination with age. So he has to defer to other people more often because he's not as capable as before.
I can absolutely not consider this the best Ronaldo because he has genuinely looked crap for large parts of a season for Real Madrid in the last 2 seasons. In the last 2 he has needed a settling in period to get to his normal level. A Prime Ronaldo didn't need that, while also being faster, stronger and more involved in the game.
Iran may beat Portugal and I'll switch to Messi camp
It does have to with his declining qualities, but it's allowed him to maximize what he's best at. Scoring goals. Notably in the biggest games.
I'm aware of his prior seasons having more goals, but I believe 2016-2017 Ronaldo is Ronaldo's best season.
He was involved more in games and was physically in his peak form back in 2010-2012, but I don't think his overall impact on the game was any better, if better at all.
CR7 been doing it since United days. What a player..
Ronaldo became GOAT because he carried Real in CL, carried Portugal in Euros... Amazing.
You hear all the praise for Pele and Maradona, but what great achievements they got when playing for clubs? Not even close to Ronaldo.
The only player that can surpass Ronaldo is Messi, but time is running out for him.
I consider Ronaldo's peak to be somewhere in the Mourinho and Ancelotti era. Looking at his chance creation and assists, he was at his best under those two managers getting 15-20 assists a season and creating significantly more chances. He also scored more goals in those periods as well.
Looking at his best games, I'd say Atletico 2012 and Sweden 2013 would make most people's lists. You'll probably get in an El Classico vs Pep's Barca in there as well. A lot of Ronaldo's recent performances have been him waiting to pounce and scoring out of nowhere, but earlier in his career he would take control of the game by himself.
I would also say that the Madrid team he plays for now is better than he had back then and he still scored and assisted more back then while also not playing as a striker.
I love lists like this, because you can see how Beckenbauer being the leader of Germany and Bayern makes people disregard Müller in consistency or achievements despite being the scoring monster he was, same thing for Xavi or Iniesta, who were football goods for a around a decade at Barcelona and Spain but still none of them aren't worth appearing at footballing/technique, consistency or achievements.
Guess a lot of players won 3 UCL titles, 2 Euros and a World Cup in a span of 6 years.
Have you read or heard something about what a clownfest was the libertadores in the 60's? Brazilian teams were declining to participate because changes in the format, to keep form for the national league or to prepare the world cup.
And still, with all those problems he managed to win 2 libertadores, who the hell cares about club level in the 60's when you have 12 goals and 10 assists in 14 World Cup matches, winning three titles?. You guys don't seem to get how ridiculously out of this world Pele's career was to compare with any other player in the history of the sport.
Why is voting closed?
How many times he has taken the 5th penalty in the tiebreaker and scored.. i remembered two, one against Athletico and one against England ( where he kissed the ball before). How is that not able to handle pressure?
That doesn't explain why it's closed.
This is a great time to have it open. Close it when the WC ends.
It's closed on purpose so it's a tie.
Technically not sure if 1962 counts for Pele since he got injured in the second game of the tournament.
He was good though still.
I am not arguing he cant handle pressur.
Thanks, didn't know that.
Hope that "he was good" was an ironic way or measuring Pelé
So have you changed your mind and accepted that ronaldo is better than messi now ishdalar? Since he did pretty much all that you asked him to.
Yeah, apparently had an absolute stormer in the opener against Mexico then got injured I believe against Czechoslovakia in the next game an didn't participate further.Thanks, didn't know that.
Hope that "he was good" was an ironic way or measuring Pelé
Gosh, Real winning 3 UCL titles in a row was out of reach even in my worst nightmare
.But I'm a stubborn man, when I say "engine winning a final" I don't mean coming from nowhere to score of two crosses, or a potential EC final he gets to play and destroy (could've pretty well score vs France had he the chances of playing the 90 minutes).
I think I'm consequent in my comparison between the two, my main gripe to not consider Ronaldo better than Messi (beyond playing for Real Madrid, not Barça
) is that I put more importance in a player involved in more stages of the game, not just scoring. That's why I keep saying (and entering in fights I'll never win here) that I consider 2007/2014 Ronaldo a superior player to his 2016/18 version, despite scoring or winning less in the past.Also why I write those walls of text and enter those absurd discussions with Peyroteo, he might score 3 goals on 4 shots, "I don't care" about that, if we talk about how he won the game on his own then yeah, 100% on that, but if we talk about a "great display", I differ, great displays for me are more than 50 touches in a game and good effiency.
And maybe I like Leo more because I understand football the same way he does, what he says here, 19:11, is exactly something that could've come from my mouth, minus the Argentine accent
Leo: I'm the first one to know when I play good or bad.
Majul: What's playing good, an average of 1 or 2 goals per game?.
Leo: Nah, it's not about that, feeling good in the pitch, being involved, get a lot of touches, great decissions, don't get the ball taken away... it doesn't revolve around goals, "I scored twice, I was great", sometimes I've scored goals and played awful (indeed, I've seen it
) but that's not it, even if at the end the goals seem to cover everything else.Dunno... if feels easier to explain if we talked as "football players", when you play a game and score a bunch of course you're going to gloat on that, that's how the sport works. But I enjoy more being in contact with the ball more time, and feel more joy giving an assist than actually scoring a goal. I've played both positions (amateur level,obviously) and I always felt it was easier to be the striker and reap the fruits of what 10 players have seeded before you, than playing in the midfield and get things done for the team. Scoring 5 goals? feels great, but not as good as bossing an entire midfield with 8 guys involved in the battle, even if you don't score.
Gosh, Real winning 3 UCL titles in a row was out of reach even in my worst nightmare
But I'm a stubborn man, when I say "engine winning a final" I don't mean coming from nowhere to score of two crosses, or a potential EC final he gets to play and destroy (could've pretty well score vs France had he the chances of playing the 90 minutes).
I think I'm consequent in my comparison between the two, my main gripe to not consider Ronaldo better than Messi (beyond playing for Real Madrid, not Barça
Also why I write those walls of text and enter those absurd discussions with Peyroteo, he might score 3 goals on 4 shots, "I don't care" about that, if we talk about how he won the game on his own then yeah, 100% on that, but if we talk about a "great display", I differ, great displays for me are more than 50 touches in a game and good effiency.
And maybe I like Leo more because I understand football the same way he does, what he says here, 19:11, is exactly something that could've come from my mouth, minus the Argentine accent
Leo: I'm the first one to know when I play good or bad.
Majul: What's playing good, an average of 1 or 2 goals per game?.
Leo: Nah, it's not about that, feeling good in the pitch, being involved, get a lot of touches, great decissions, don't get the ball taken away... it doesn't revolve around goals, "I scored twice, I was great", sometimes I've scored goals and played awful (indeed, I've seen it
Dunno... if feels easier to explain if we talked as "football players", when you play a game and score a bunch of course you're going to gloat on that, that's how the sport works. But I enjoy more being in contact with the ball more time, and feel more joy giving an assist than actually scoring a goal. I've played both positions (amateur level,obviously) and I always felt it was easier to be the striker and reap the fruits of what 10 players have seeded before you, than playing in the midfield and get things done for the team. Scoring 5 goals? feels great, but not as good as bossing an entire midfield with 8 guys involved in the battle, even if you don't score.
He pretty much got them to win one CL on his own though, his 2017 CL run is legendary. Specially considering the teams he did it again.
I don't get the emphasis on the CL, at the expense of La Liga.
La Liga is the best league in the world, and has been for a long time. It's had arguably the two top teams in the world, over much of the last decade, with Munich popping up here and there occasionally.
Messi and Barcelona have dominated La Liga, in 35 head to head games, Barcelona have won 16, RM 10, and 9 draws. In La Liga, Barcelona 10 wins, 4 draws, RM 4 wins.
The CL is more prestigious, but it is harder to win? Especially at the expense of being so battered for titles domestically?
If the weight of the argument is on Ronaldo winning the CL, it's missing a pretty big part of the whole story. Both are important, I could be blind too and say, Messi has dominated La Liga to a level Ronaldo has never and at this point almost certainly will never. However this ignores huge nuances and differences in the circumstances. Differences in their positions, differences in their team mates.
For my part, when I'm not just trying to wind up blind Ronaldo fanboys, I think Messi is slightly the better overall player. It has nothing to do with individual accomplishments that rest on an entire team. It's what they do within the framework of playing inside of a team. The problem is, it's not and never has been an apples to apples comparison. They do different things, their results are similar, but where they are starting from is different. Ronaldo has evolved from being a winger, to a pure out and out striker. Ronaldo relies on his team to provide for him, and his presence and stature in turns creates space and opportunity for his team to give him opportunities to score. Messi on the other hand, is the creator for his team, his teams rely on him to create chances, or to take them himself.
This is in part why you can explain Portugal winning the 2016 Euros. Ronaldo carries them to the final, but leaves the final early and they still win. Why? Does this mean Ronaldo wasn't needed all along? No, to me it means, Portugal is less reliant on Ronaldo to create their chances. Conversely, Argentina has on paper a better team, but they really do not perform as a better team. Why? The team is completely reliant, whether it needs to be or not, on Messi. For Argentina, EVERYTHING goes through Messi, to an almost painful extent. For Portugal, things CAN go through Ronaldo but they don't always go through him. Argentina defers everything to Messi so heavily, that if he has an off day, or a team bullies him, or he is shut down by 4 people collapsing on him, they still keep feeding him the ball expecting him to weave through the other team and hit an inch perfect pass or score a wonder strike. Argentina, is in a word, predictable. Portugal is not. I think Argentina would probably be a better team without Messi, seems like a crazy thing to say, but so long as that mentality remains in the Argentina camp, they are going to struggle to deal with teams that focus on shutting down Messi. The same thing cannot be said about Portugal. You can't just sit on Ronaldo the way you can with Messi, because the majority of the attacks from Argentina are coming through Messi, whereas the majority of the attacks for Portugal are coming TO Ronaldo. By sitting on Ronaldo, you weaken the rest of the defense, and give time and space to other players. By sitting on Messi, you deny the primary creative outlet, and since Argentina tend to be so deferential to Messi if Messi doesn't go, Argentina doesn't go. Argentina may be the better team, but they don't play intelligently when Messi is on the pitch. This difference between the two, isn't so much about the players, as it is the roles they play and how their teams adapt around them.
At the end, for me, this is really why I think Messi is slightly better. Messi can do everything Ronaldo can do, almost as well as Ronaldo. Ronaldo can't do everything Messi can do. Basically, Messi might be 9's and 9.5's across the board, and Ronaldo might have a 10 in a category Messi is a 9.5, but Ronaldo is also an 8 in a couple of categories Messi is a 9 or a 9.5. I ultimately don't weigh the CL or La Liga significantly higher than each other. One is more prestigious, one is probably harder to win. One team has dominated one, one team has dominated the other.
Their careers are not over. Anyone who is seriously saying one is clearly better than the other, no debate, should not be taken seriously. There is debate. They are very close. The book is still open.
La Liga is the best league in the world, and has been for a long time. It's had arguably the two top teams in the world, over much of the last decade, with Munich popping up here and there occasionally.
Messi and Barcelona have dominated La Liga, in 35 head to head games, Barcelona have won 16, RM 10, and 9 draws. In La Liga, Barcelona 10 wins, 4 draws, RM 4 wins.
The CL is more prestigious, but it is harder to win? Especially at the expense of being so battered for titles domestically?
If the weight of the argument is on Ronaldo winning the CL, it's missing a pretty big part of the whole story. Both are important, I could be blind too and say, Messi has dominated La Liga to a level Ronaldo has never and at this point almost certainly will never. However this ignores huge nuances and differences in the circumstances. Differences in their positions, differences in their team mates.
For my part, when I'm not just trying to wind up blind Ronaldo fanboys, I think Messi is slightly the better overall player. It has nothing to do with individual accomplishments that rest on an entire team. It's what they do within the framework of playing inside of a team. The problem is, it's not and never has been an apples to apples comparison. They do different things, their results are similar, but where they are starting from is different. Ronaldo has evolved from being a winger, to a pure out and out striker. Ronaldo relies on his team to provide for him, and his presence and stature in turns creates space and opportunity for his team to give him opportunities to score. Messi on the other hand, is the creator for his team, his teams rely on him to create chances, or to take them himself.
This is in part why you can explain Portugal winning the 2016 Euros. Ronaldo carries them to the final, but leaves the final early and they still win. Why? Does this mean Ronaldo wasn't needed all along? No, to me it means, Portugal is less reliant on Ronaldo to create their chances. Conversely, Argentina has on paper a better team, but they really do not perform as a better team. Why? The team is completely reliant, whether it needs to be or not, on Messi. For Argentina, EVERYTHING goes through Messi, to an almost painful extent. For Portugal, things CAN go through Ronaldo but they don't always go through him. Argentina defers everything to Messi so heavily, that if he has an off day, or a team bullies him, or he is shut down by 4 people collapsing on him, they still keep feeding him the ball expecting him to weave through the other team and hit an inch perfect pass or score a wonder strike. Argentina, is in a word, predictable. Portugal is not. I think Argentina would probably be a better team without Messi, seems like a crazy thing to say, but so long as that mentality remains in the Argentina camp, they are going to struggle to deal with teams that focus on shutting down Messi. The same thing cannot be said about Portugal. You can't just sit on Ronaldo the way you can with Messi, because the majority of the attacks from Argentina are coming through Messi, whereas the majority of the attacks for Portugal are coming TO Ronaldo. By sitting on Ronaldo, you weaken the rest of the defense, and give time and space to other players. By sitting on Messi, you deny the primary creative outlet, and since Argentina tend to be so deferential to Messi if Messi doesn't go, Argentina doesn't go. Argentina may be the better team, but they don't play intelligently when Messi is on the pitch. This difference between the two, isn't so much about the players, as it is the roles they play and how their teams adapt around them.
At the end, for me, this is really why I think Messi is slightly better. Messi can do everything Ronaldo can do, almost as well as Ronaldo. Ronaldo can't do everything Messi can do. Basically, Messi might be 9's and 9.5's across the board, and Ronaldo might have a 10 in a category Messi is a 9.5, but Ronaldo is also an 8 in a couple of categories Messi is a 9 or a 9.5. I ultimately don't weigh the CL or La Liga significantly higher than each other. One is more prestigious, one is probably harder to win. One team has dominated one, one team has dominated the other.
Their careers are not over. Anyone who is seriously saying one is clearly better than the other, no debate, should not be taken seriously. There is debate. They are very close. The book is still open.
Well that's exactly the argument where I'm in the antipodes of Ronaldo fans.
It goes in the same line of thought I just expressed, and I accept there's a reason no other player has done something similar to that feat, probably no one was able, so not trying to diminish what he did (a unique feat), but there's a lot of job behind the spotlight that allows Ronaldo to score 9 goals with just one touch inside the area in the 4 biggest games at club level, and I'm just saying that, no more, no less, no double entendres, I think it's a fair point especially if it's someone like me (with the ideas I just expressed about football) saying it, I understand other people might think different, but that's when we start arguing between different opinions, I respect it, but I don't have to share it.
For me it's like Ronaldo has been three players in his career, first he was a hugely improved Figo, then he changed into a better Adriano Leite, and now he's also an improved Hugo Sanchez. That alone talks volumes of how much talent that man has to play football and improve the style of three world class players in just 10 seasons, and his drive to always find his best version depending on the moment of his career and what his team/body demand of him.
But when I hear the current arguments and the praise, it's like we're still watching the Adriano Leite version, but scoring with the absurd efficiency of Hugo Sanchez... I'm sorry, Ronaldo is the current best at what he's doing, probably the best ever at that, but he's not at the level he was (regarding the whole skillset a player can have) when he alone could destroy any team, 40 meters away from the goal with 4 defenders on the way.
And I can't be more honest saying what I really think, Hugo was a freak player, one of the best pieces you could use to round up a world class team, but he never was considered at the same level as Maradona, not in their era or later, the current distance between Ronaldo and Messi is not as big in footballing terms as Hugo vs Diego, but I just believe that 2012 Ronaldo was closer to Messi in 2012 (probably Leo's peak) than in 2018, one of them has taken a step forward and became less involved in the game, the other did the exact opposite thing, of course that's going to show in stats.
“Saw the “ronaldo would score more for Burnley” than Messi, makes sense. Messi would get teams parking the bus against Burnley and would have 3 on him. Ronaldo as a poacher would still find space. Teams wouldn’t change set up
Saw the “ronaldo would score more for Burnley” than Messi, makes sense. Messi would get teams parking the bus against Burnley and would have 3 on him. Ronaldo as a poacher would still find space. Teams wouldn’t change set up
It’s different responsibilities, but from midfield with three on him, he is expected the same amount from a goal scoring perspective as a world class poacher. That’s the the biggest praise Messi could get. Imagine Zidane scoring 50 in a season.“
Saw the “ronaldo would score more for Burnley” than Messi, makes sense. Messi would get teams parking the bus against Burnley and would have 3 on him. Ronaldo as a poacher would still find space. Teams wouldn’t change set up
It’s different responsibilities, but from midfield with three on him, he is expected the same amount from a goal scoring perspective as a world class poacher. That’s the the biggest praise Messi could get. Imagine Zidane scoring 50 in a season.“
That Ronnie is comfortably performing better than Messi now, can be evidenced from the posting trends.Long walls of text justifying Messi's greatness( undoubtedly of course), videos of past performance, articles written by "Sergio Xaviesta" are getting frequent now. 4-5 years ago, it was mostly "Come back when Ronaldo has 4", or "Let him first score 91 goals in an year" type of nonchalant responses that messi loyalists resorted to.
Having said that, today is a golden opportunity for Messi to shut up his critics. I really do hope Argentina field a proper starting 11 today.
Having said that, today is a golden opportunity for Messi to shut up his critics. I really do hope Argentina field a proper starting 11 today.
Strictly speaking Messi was never in midfield 3, not in the similar fashion as Zindane anyway. It’s true he plays deep a lot to create a move, in similar sense younger Ronaldo likes to play in the wing, or in same way Rooney likes to play deep a lot from forward position. But he also runs into poacher position a lot of times during the match (in Barca), usually from one-two play or from Barca attack move. In fact, to everyone surprise, there are stats showing the total no. of poacher goals he scored are similar to Ronaldo.
Last edited:
I always marvel how this myth that Messi operates in midfield persists....
There isn't a forward player out there that regularly receives the ball deeper than Messi - he's not a midfielder as he has no defensive tactical instruction but he's not a typical forward either. When he receives the ball he often has 4-5 players ahead of him.
It is crazy. You might think that he plays in Pirlo's position if you read some of the posts.
I mean, he plays somewhere between No. 9 and No. 10 position, and occasionally drops deep during different stages of play. At the same time, I don't remember a player who offers less defensively than Messi, and pretty much every midfielder has to play a part in defending.
He is really creative and his passing is sublime, but he isn't and has never been a midfielder. And I don't think that he will ever be, there is a lot missing from his game to be a top midfielder.
He is a false 9. False 9's have always dropped deep ala natural 10s. Yet even that still does not make them midfielders in any shape of form
He mainly does that because of 2 reasons
1: His size means he struggles up tight against big centre backs. When they're closer his advantage of agility/balance is negated as they can hold him, it's also much easier to tackle him when he's standing still with back to goal.
2: His main weapon is his speed/agility/balance, so being able to get a run up on defenders is vital. He usually carries the ball from deep then plays a 1-2 and takes the ball while running at speed. His ability to change direction so easily makes it very difficult for a static defender to stop him.
3: When he drops deep it either means the opposition midfield get outnumbered, or a defender has to come out of position, leaving a gap for another wide player to run into. It's tricky for defenders as they usually don't like coming forward, especially in a 1v1 against Messi.
Yeah would agree with this.
Speaking of picking the ball up from deep and running with it, this popped up in my youtube feed yesterday.
That's how you do it
he just glides past players, so great to watch.If either Roony or Messi wins the world cup then it will seal the deal who is aheeem ''greater''. I also do belive Ronny is more obsessed and hungry to succed now then Messi. The fact that Argentina or Messi is not doing so well, deep inside will drive him further.
Yeah would agree with this.
Speaking of picking the ball up from deep and running with it, this popped up in my youtube feed yesterday.
That's how you do it
Cruyff and Best are probably the greatest players to watch in the history of the game. A real joy!
Wayne Roony?
He never will be a real midfielder, the most he could be is a playmaker ala Riquelme.
Even that is too much to ask, and by doing so, he essentially gives his best part of his game, aka scoring a shitload of goals.
I think that Riquelme had a better understanding of the pitch, his passing was even better, he had more tactical discipline and at least he tried to defend (Messi doesn't). Messi of course is a way better dribbler, and that counts a lot for an attacking midfielder. Anyway, Messi can become a lite/worse version of Riquelme and sacrifice his almost unparalleled goalscoring abilities, but there is no point on doing so. He is at best as a 9.5, terrorizing defenses by scoring 40-50 goals per season (I don't think that he is able anymore to score 50+ goals per season, but no active player is), while also making 20+ assists per season and creating some good chances by dropping deep.
- Status