MJJ
New Member
You perfectly sum up the argument for all those pro Cristiano. You dont need STATS to determine who the better player is. There are numerous players with better stats than Maradonna, Lampard had better stats than Iniesta. Judging great players and their place in the pantheon requires you to look further, to their influence and control over a football match. Cruyff, Pele, Maradonna, Di Stefano were influencial footballers all over the pitch. Take away their goals and they were still the best players on the pitch. Cristiano has never had anywhere close to the same kind of command of the game as those other greats, all his fans talk about is his goals, like he's Gerd Muller. Why dont you eulogise his playmaking, his passing, his intelligence, his technique? Granted Cristianos all round game was very elite towards the end of United and the beginning of Real, but Leo' all round gane has been at a godly level for 10 years. There's a huge difference, both historically, and especially now between the all round games of the two.
Furthermore, one thing that the likes of Cal, Peyroteo fail to explain is why Leo is held in the highest of regard by the greatest managers and players. Why has Leo for a long time been compared to Pele and Diego, and Cristiano less so? Why do Rooney and Scholes say Messi is better? Leo has been claimed as the best ever by many football managers and players. For Cristiano, not even close. He can score to his heart's content, but he will never "play" better than Leo, and ultimately, that is and will be tge difference between the two.
And yet Ronaldo will end up with the better career.