Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance

[Steve Bruce]

OK, I'll be kind then.

Let's take away Ronaldo's first 150 appearances, back when he was at Sporting and United, so he and Messi have both played 804 games. Even then he'd have 76 fewer assists than Messi - let's provide a little context once more; Raul managed 75 assists in 550 La Liga games.

EDIT: I also just did the same for goals and Messi still has 5 more than Ronaldo in as many games. So even including young, substituted and injury prone Messi's appearances, he was scoring more than a 150 game in Ronaldo so that excuse is out the window.

To answer your question, Messi has 36 assists more than Ronaldo when they were both in La Liga (Messi 309 games; Ronaldo 292). That's a definitive gap.

Stats are definitely a good part of an argument, but football is a lot more than stats, or else we would have some americanized system when buying players.

For a start, Messi had players like Iniesta and Xavi behind him along with a multitude of amazing players the best in the world in their positions. Ronaldo while he had some fantastic players around him, they where not the same level.

Messi also had a great coach in Guardiola who built the team around him. Real swap and change their coaches more often than I have hot dinners (and I'm a fat feck)

I know Messi Fan boys hate this part of the argument, internationally, Messi has underachieved and to be honest didn't hit the heights of Ronaldo (who has been in an inferior side than Messi for most part of their careers) or a lot of great players of the past.

In the Champions League Ronaldo has got all the goalscoring records.

Another thing with Ronaldo is he has done it in 3 top leagues. Messi has never had the ambition to leave the comforts of Barca.

The difference between the two is paper thin. I think if I where to pick one I would go with Ronaldo, but I have no problems with people thinking Messi is the better of the 2 and I think it's mighty close.

In the end I'm just happy to have witnessed 2 players who can go down as 2 of the best ever play at once. Stats are great but they aren't hte be all and end all. That's why when people talk about hte numbers of these two and they make the argument that they are the best ever, I say to myself what would maradona have done with todays rules where tackling like the old days just doesn't exist. I htink he could easily double his stats.

 

[Prometheus]

To answer your question, Messi has 36 assists more than Ronaldo when they were both in La Liga (Messi 309 games; Ronaldo 292). That's a definitive gap.

You've been trying to explain the reason this gap doesn't reflect in the supposed difference in creativity, and went on to suggest that, for example, Messi's teammates have been misfiring and missing his chances - and posted a video to support this.

Are you now, somehow, convinced that 36 assists in 17 more games across 9 seasons in the same league is enough to reflect this supposed light-years gap? And across the same time Ronaldo has more CL assists! You spent a lot of time trying to explain why why there isn't a gap reflecting the creativity gap - and now you find it sufficient all of a sudden?!

Since you're insisting on projections for some reason, let's do that for those 9 years. Do the calculations yourself. By normalising for appearances Messi ends up with a combined total of 25 more assists across the 9 seasons in la liga and the CL! Yes, just 25!

At this stage, I needn't even say anything. I'm gonna let you chew on that!

 

[MalcolmTucker]

You've been trying to explain the reason this gap doesn't reflect in the supposed difference in creativity, and went on to suggest that, for example, Messi's teammates have been misfiring and missing his chances - and posted a video to support this.

Are you now, somehow, convinced that 36 assists in 17 more games across 9 seasons in the same league is enough to reflect this supposed light-years gap? And across the same time Ronaldo has more CL assists!

Since you're insisting on hypotheticals, let's do this those 9 years. Do the calculations yourself. By normalising for appearances Messi ends up with a total of 25 more assists across the 9 seasons in the la liga and the CL! Yes, just 25!

At this stage, I needn't even say anything. I'm gonna let you chew on that!

Paul Scholes has 55 assists in his whole career in the PL. 25 assists is a two season difference for Ronaldo. It's a really strange level of smugness you're adopting for a statistic that heavily favours Messi, one for which I don't even think quantifies just how much more creative Messi obviously is. Anyway, it's been fun but it's bedtime for me. Goodnight!

 

[mdvmia]

Stats are definitely a good part of an argument, but football is a lot more than stats, or else we would have some americanized system when buying players.

For a start, Messi had players like Iniesta and Xavi behind him along with a multitude of amazing players the best in the world in their positions. Ronaldo while he had some fantastic players around him, they where not the same level.

Messi also had a great coach in Guardiola who built the team around him. Real swap and change their coaches more often than I have hot dinners (and I'm a fat feck)

I know Messi Fan boys hate this part of the argument, internationally, Messi has underachieved and to be honest didn't hit the heights of Ronaldo (who has been in an inferior side than Messi for most part of their careers) or a lot of great players of the past.

In the Champions League Ronaldo has got all the goalscoring records.

Another thing with Ronaldo is he has done it in 3 top leagues. Messi has never had the ambition to leave the comforts of Barca.

The difference between the two is paper thin. I think if I where to pick one I would go with Ronaldo, but I have no problems with people thinking Messi is the better of the 2 and I think it's mighty close.

In the end I'm just happy to have witnessed 2 players who can go down as 2 of the best ever play at once. Stats are great but they aren't hte be all and end all. That's why when people talk about hte numbers of these two and they make the argument that they are the best ever, I say to myself what would maradona have done with todays rules where tackling like the old days just doesn't exist. I htink he could easily double his stats.

This keeps getting repeated on here, so can someone explain how Ronaldo has outperformed Messi individually at the international level?

Messi helped bring Argentina to a World Cup final, won best player at the 2014 WC, has more knockout goals at major international tournaments and more at the World Cup, and has generally performed better at Copa Americas and WCs than Ronaldo has at Euros.

The only reasons why Ronaldo's international career is perceived higher are that Portugal beat France with him on the sideline and he's never had the expectation that anything less than singlehandedly winning the WC is a failure

 

[Pocho]

Here’s an interesting assist stat.

In all El Clásicos, Messi has 14 assists. Ronaldo has 1.

This is in addition to scoring more, both in actual numbers and goals per game.

But Cristiano can jump a lot higher.

 

[Rito]

Ramos and Bale winning the CL by showing up in the finals

Better than being bailed out by referees.

 

[mdvmia]

Better than being bailed out by referees.

Is this the time when you and Cal bring up every decision that went in Barcelona's favor but ignore all the decisions that went against them and that Ronaldo has benefited from?

 

[Daysleeper]

Better than being bailed out by referees.

Yeah those offside goals Madrid scored against Atletico and Bayern were rough

 

[Daysleeper]

Here’s an interesting assist stat.

In all El Clásicos, Messi has 14 assists. Ronaldo has 1.

This is in addition to scoring more, both in actual numbers and goals per game.

I had to double check that holy cow

 

[Cal?]

To answer your question, Messi has 36 assists more than Ronaldo when they were both in La Liga (Messi 309 games; Ronaldo 292). That's a definitive gap.

Paul Scholes has 55 assists in his whole career in the PL. 25 assists is a two season difference for Ronaldo. It's a really strange level of smugness you're adopting for a statistic that heavily favours Messi, one for which I don't even think quantifies just how much more creative Messi obviously is. Anyway, it's been fun but it's bedtime for me. Goodnight!

Based on your stats, 292 over 9 years is over 30 a season, how did 25 become 2 seasons?

Also, Messi has played with better strikers throughout his career, if anyone's assists stats are being affected by team mates screwing up chances, it's far more likely that Ronaldo is the one affected.

 

[mdvmia]

When did it become accepted to use assists as a measure of playmaking and creativity?

Iniesta only had 3 assists in La Liga in 2010/2011 during his prime. Here's a list of some midfielders with more that season: Chris Brunt (10), Joey Barton (9), Sebastian Larsson (7), Jermaine Pennant (7)

Because Ronaldo plays closer to goal, he's more likely to get an assist for his role in a move whereas Messi will more often be the one playing the pass that leads to the assist.

In the run to the 2015 Champions League alone, just look at his role in both goals scored away to City, both scored at Bayern, and the first two in the final. Yet, he didn't register an assist for any of those. Also look at his performance against Tottenham at Wembley this season where he didn't get an assist either but was heavily involved in all four goals and played countless key passes.

 

[MalcolmTucker]

Based on your stats, 292 over 9 years is over 30 a season, how did 25 become 2 seasons?

Also, Messi has played with better strikers throughout his career, if anyone's assists stats are being affected by team mates screwing up chances, it's far more likely that Ronaldo is the one affected.

His 25 assists stats included La Liga and CL, the 292 is just from La Liga. Aren't you always complaining about 'the Messi brigade' blaming team mates, yet here you are using the same excuse.

When did it become accepted to use assists as a measure of playmaking and creativity?

Iniesta only had 3 assists in La Liga in 2010/2011 during his prime. Here's a list of some midfielders with more that season: Chris Brunt (10), Joey Barton (9), Sebastian Larsson (7), Jermaine Pennant (7)

Because Ronaldo plays closer to goal, he's more likely to get an assist for his role in a move whereas Messi will more often be the one playing the pass that leads to the assist.

In the run to the 2015 Champions League alone, just look at his role in both goals scored away to City, both scored at Bayern, and the first two in the final. Yet, he didn't register an assist for any of those. Also look at his performance against Tottenham at Wembley this season where he didn't get an assist either but was heavily involved in all four goals and played countless key passes.

Agreed.



Here's a video from just the 2017 season which shows how many clear chances Messi created that didn't end up as assists. This isn't to blame Messi's team mates for missing the chances, but more to highlight the variety and quality of Messi's playmaking that can't be quantified by the assist stat.

 

[Cal?]

His 25 assists stats included La Liga and CL, the 292 is just from La Liga. Aren't you always complaining about 'the Messi brigade' blaming team mates, yet here you are using the same excuse.
.

If anything 25 out of a bigger figure than 292 makes it an even smaller percentage and further away from 2 seasons.

All your videos for Messi’s team mates missing chances is exactly blaming team mates, I just pointing out the simple logic that Ronaldo’s team mates are just as likely to have missed plenty of chances he created.

Unless you’re somehow going to claim Ronaldo’s team mates at Real are better finishers.

 

[Hemant]

Ramos and Bale winning the CL by showing up in the finals

Yeah correct . Saurez and Neymar doing the same in 2015 ?

Did Messi dribble , create and finishe all goals Barca scored by himself in winning all the trophies ? Grow up dude

 

[wub1234]

By now, everyone knows that Messi is better, apart from a few sad Ronaldo fanboys who can't face reality. Everyone objective already knows that Messi is better. That's why, as I've said previously, there are countless journalists, pundits, footballers, coaches, and ex-players, who have said that Messi is the greatest ever, whereas I can find only about three people who have said this about Ronaldo, and one of them was him! Another was Donald Trump!

Do you know why that is? It's because anyone who relies on their professional credibility is never going to say Ronaldo is better than Messi because they would lose all credibility. Even someone like Rio Ferdinand, who doesn't want to alienate Ronaldo because he played with him, will never say “Ronaldo is better than Messi” because he knows he would look ridiculous if he said this.

In particular, the argument about what team won what is the height of idiocy, claiming that because someone won a trophy in a team game and someone else didn't then they're a better player. In that case, Thierry Henry was better for Barcelona than Arsenal because he won the Champions League with Barcelona, whereas he didn't win it with Arsenal. It's just an utter nonsense argument that would only ever be brought up by the desperate.

You can sit here from now until the end of time typing this nonsense on an Internet forum, but it's already decided by people with credibility and objectivity that Messi is the best player of his generation, and increasingly he's being acknowledged as the best player ever. He now really belongs in the pantheon of great sportsmen, alongside Roger Federer, Michael Schumacher, Tiger Woods, Muhammad Ali, Ronnie O' Sullivan...who are icons of their sport.

Ronaldo is nowhere near in that company. No-one who has to give a professional opinion on the game would ever suggest that he's the best player ever, whereas Messi is now almost universally regarded as being one of the greatest players ever. That's all there is to it. It doesn't matter who won what, whether or not Chile are better than Portugal's opposition, and whether or not Messi was only good because of Xavi and Ineista!

It doesn't matter how many thousands of posts you rack up on here, saying Ronaldo did this, that, and the other, and claiming teams don't want players like Messi. It won't change the fact that Messi is already, rightly, regarded as better than Ronaldo, and will go down as, at worst, one of the three best players ever, and it looks increasingly likely that he will be lauded by most as the greatest ever.

If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I've already posted a list of players, pundits and journalists who consider Messi the greatest footballer ever. Not merely better than Ronaldo, better than everyone. It's not even a strong minority any more, it's becoming the majority of observers.

No-one is going to say that about Ronaldo, other than Ronaldo himself!

That may be painful for people who bizarrely want to believe that a prolific goalscorer (although not as prolific as Messi), and much more limited footballer called Cristiano Ronaldo is the best player ever, but it doesn't stop you from claiming this is the case. You will just have to accept that people with credibility don't agree with you, and their opinion will count for far more.

 

[Rito]

By now, everyone knows that Messi is better, apart from a few sad Ronaldo fanboys who can't face reality. Everyone objective already knows that Messi is better. That's why, as I've said previously, there are countless journalists, pundits, footballers, coaches, and ex-players, who have said that Messi is the greatest ever, whereas I can find only about three people who have said this about Ronaldo, and one of them was him! Another was Donald Trump!

Do you know why that is? It's because anyone who relies on their professional credibility is never going to say Ronaldo is better than Messi because they would lose all credibility. Even someone like Rio Ferdinand, who doesn't want to alienate Ronaldo because he played with him, will never say “Ronaldo is better than Messi” because he knows he would look ridiculous if he said this.

In particular, the argument about what team won what is the height of idiocy, claiming that because someone won a trophy in a team game and someone else didn't then they're a better player. In that case, Thierry Henry was better for Barcelona than Arsenal because he won the Champions League with Barcelona, whereas he didn't win it with Arsenal. It's just an utter nonsense argument that would only ever be brought up by the desperate.

You can sit here from now until the end of time typing this nonsense on an Internet forum, but it's already decided by people with credibility and objectivity that Messi is the best player of his generation, and increasingly he's being acknowledged as the best player ever. He now really belongs in the pantheon of great sportsmen, alongside Roger Federer, Michael Schumacher, Tiger Woods, Muhammad Ali, Ronnie O' Sullivan...who are icons of their sport.

Ronaldo is nowhere near in that company. No-one who has to give a professional opinion on the game would ever suggest that he's the best player ever, whereas Messi is now almost universally regarded as being one of the greatest players ever. That's all there is to it. It doesn't matter who won what, whether or not Chile are better than Portugal's opposition, and whether or not Messi was only good because of Xavi and Ineista!

It doesn't matter how many thousands of posts you rack up on here, saying Ronaldo did this, that, and the other, and claiming teams don't want players like Messi. It won't change the fact that Messi is already, rightly, regarded as better than Ronaldo, and will go down as, at worst, one of the three best players ever, and it looks increasingly likely that he will be lauded by most as the greatest ever.

If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I've already posted a list of players, pundits and journalists who consider Messi the greatest footballer ever. Not merely better than Ronaldo, better than everyone. It's not even a strong minority any more, it's becoming the majority of observers.

No-one is going to say that about Ronaldo, other than Ronaldo himself!

That may be painful for people who bizarrely want to believe that a prolific goalscorer (although not as prolific as Messi), and much more limited footballer called Cristiano Ronaldo is the best player ever, but it doesn't stop you from claiming this is the case. You will just have to accept that people with credibility don't agree with you, and their opinion will count for far more.

 

[Cal?]

By now, everyone knows that Messi is better, apart from a few sad Ronaldo fanboys who can't face reality. Everyone objective already knows that Messi is better. That's why, as I've said previously, there are countless journalists, pundits, footballers, coaches, and ex-players, who have said that Messi is the greatest ever, whereas I can find only about three people who have said this about Ronaldo, and one of them was him! Another was Donald Trump!

Do you know why that is? It's because anyone who relies on their professional credibility is never going to say Ronaldo is better than Messi because they would lose all credibility. Even someone like Rio Ferdinand, who doesn't want to alienate Ronaldo because he played with him, will never say “Ronaldo is better than Messi” because he knows he would look ridiculous if he said this.

In particular, the argument about what team won what is the height of idiocy, claiming that because someone won a trophy in a team game and someone else didn't then they're a better player. In that case, Thierry Henry was better for Barcelona than Arsenal because he won the Champions League with Barcelona, whereas he didn't win it with Arsenal. It's just an utter nonsense argument that would only ever be brought up by the desperate.

You can sit here from now until the end of time typing this nonsense on an Internet forum, but it's already decided by people with credibility and objectivity that Messi is the best player of his generation, and increasingly he's being acknowledged as the best player ever. He now really belongs in the pantheon of great sportsmen, alongside Roger Federer, Michael Schumacher, Tiger Woods, Muhammad Ali, Ronnie O' Sullivan...who are icons of their sport.

Ronaldo is nowhere near in that company. No-one who has to give a professional opinion on the game would ever suggest that he's the best player ever, whereas Messi is now almost universally regarded as being one of the greatest players ever. That's all there is to it. It doesn't matter who won what, whether or not Chile are better than Portugal's opposition, and whether or not Messi was only good because of Xavi and Ineista!

It doesn't matter how many thousands of posts you rack up on here, saying Ronaldo did this, that, and the other, and claiming teams don't want players like Messi. It won't change the fact that Messi is already, rightly, regarded as better than Ronaldo, and will go down as, at worst, one of the three best players ever, and it looks increasingly likely that he will be lauded by most as the greatest ever.

If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I've already posted a list of players, pundits and journalists who consider Messi the greatest footballer ever. Not merely better than Ronaldo, better than everyone. It's not even a strong minority any more, it's becoming the majority of observers.

No-one is going to say that about Ronaldo, other than Ronaldo himself!

That may be painful for people who bizarrely want to believe that a prolific goalscorer (although not as prolific as Messi), and much more limited footballer called Cristiano Ronaldo is the best player ever, but it doesn't stop you from claiming this is the case. You will just have to accept that people with credibility don't agree with you, and their opinion will count for far more.

the likes of Ruud Gullit has no professional creditibility.

 

[Schneckerl]

Imagine creating sock accounts to spam smilies.

 

[Gehrman]

The rest kind of makes sense, but how is dribbling an aspect of creativity?

Because an attacking player who dribbles past opponents is far more likely to create chances and space for team mates to attack. That's why I would say that Nani was more creative than Valencia, because he could beat players and create goal scoring chances.

 

[Steve Bruce]

This keeps getting repeated on here, so can someone explain how Ronaldo has outperformed Messi individually at the international level?

Messi helped bring Argentina to a World Cup final, won best player at the 2014 WC, has more knockout goals at major international tournaments and more at the World Cup, and has generally performed better at Copa Americas and WCs than Ronaldo has at Euros.

The only reasons why Ronaldo's international career is perceived higher are that Portugal beat France with him on the sideline and he's never had the expectation that anything less than singlehandedly winning the WC is a failure

Anyone that watched the WC 2014 knows that Messi shouldn't have won best player, he wasn't actually that good IMO.

Ronaldo belongs to an inferior country in footballing terms and has won a major trophy. Messi should have a better record in international football when you compare who Messi lines up with compared to what Ronaldo has had to line up with.

Incidentally to suit your own argument you omitted the fact that Ronaldo has scored more international goals than Messi, he has also scored more Champions League goals than Messi and he has also got the record for the most knock out round goals in the champions league.

As I said earlier, Stats are great to form part of your argument, but if that's the basis of your full argument then at least include all the stats, rather than cherry pick those that suit yourself.

I personally prefer to watch football with my eyes and see for myself who I think who's best etc. After all iniesta going by stats isn't nearly at the level than what he actually was when you watched him.

 

[Steve Bruce]

By now, everyone knows that Messi is better, apart from a few sad Ronaldo fanboys who can't face reality. Everyone objective already knows that Messi is better. That's why, as I've said previously, there are countless journalists, pundits, footballers, coaches, and ex-players, who have said that Messi is the greatest ever, whereas I can find only about three people who have said this about Ronaldo, and one of them was him! Another was Donald Trump!

Do you know why that is? It's because anyone who relies on their professional credibility is never going to say Ronaldo is better than Messi because they would lose all credibility. Even someone like Rio Ferdinand, who doesn't want to alienate Ronaldo because he played with him, will never say “Ronaldo is better than Messi” because he knows he would look ridiculous if he said this.

In particular, the argument about what team won what is the height of idiocy, claiming that because someone won a trophy in a team game and someone else didn't then they're a better player. In that case, Thierry Henry was better for Barcelona than Arsenal because he won the Champions League with Barcelona, whereas he didn't win it with Arsenal. It's just an utter nonsense argument that would only ever be brought up by the desperate.

You can sit here from now until the end of time typing this nonsense on an Internet forum, but it's already decided by people with credibility and objectivity that Messi is the best player of his generation, and increasingly he's being acknowledged as the best player ever. He now really belongs in the pantheon of great sportsmen, alongside Roger Federer, Michael Schumacher, Tiger Woods, Muhammad Ali, Ronnie O' Sullivan...who are icons of their sport.

Ronaldo is nowhere near in that company. No-one who has to give a professional opinion on the game would ever suggest that he's the best player ever, whereas Messi is now almost universally regarded as being one of the greatest players ever. That's all there is to it. It doesn't matter who won what, whether or not Chile are better than Portugal's opposition, and whether or not Messi was only good because of Xavi and Ineista!

It doesn't matter how many thousands of posts you rack up on here, saying Ronaldo did this, that, and the other, and claiming teams don't want players like Messi. It won't change the fact that Messi is already, rightly, regarded as better than Ronaldo, and will go down as, at worst, one of the three best players ever, and it looks increasingly likely that he will be lauded by most as the greatest ever.

If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I've already posted a list of players, pundits and journalists who consider Messi the greatest footballer ever. Not merely better than Ronaldo, better than everyone. It's not even a strong minority any more, it's becoming the majority of observers.

No-one is going to say that about Ronaldo, other than Ronaldo himself!

That may be painful for people who bizarrely want to believe that a prolific goalscorer (although not as prolific as Messi), and much more limited footballer called Cristiano Ronaldo is the best player ever, but it doesn't stop you from claiming this is the case. You will just have to accept that people with credibility don't agree with you, and their opinion will count for far more.

I'm definitely not a Ronaldo fanboy, while a lot of United fans likes to sing his name, I personally see him as disloyal and his performances in his last season when compared to the season before it was obvious he wasn't putting it all in. But I still think he is a better player than Messi, although I don't see it as being anything more than paper thin. I just think with Ronaldo proving it at every stage whether it's international, English football, Spanish football, Italian football or European Football. Messi on the other hand was a disappointment internationally and hasn't left the comfort of Barcelona to prove himself in other football cultures.

But I stopped reading after the bolded bit, because with an opening line like that, the rest of your post is meaningless. If you have an opinion fine, but to dismiss others opinions because it's different to yours is just a moronic way to be.

 

[Saffron]

Anyone that watched the WC 2014 knows that Messi shouldn't have won best player, he wasn't actually that good IMO.

Ronaldo belongs to an inferior country in footballing terms and has won a major trophy. Messi should have a better record in international football when you compare who Messi lines up with compared to what Ronaldo has had to line up with.

Incidentally to suit your own argument you omitted the fact that Ronaldo has scored more international goals than Messi, he has also scored more Champions League goals than Messi and he has also got the record for the most knock out round goals in the champions league.

As I said earlier, Stats are great to form part of your argument, but if that's the basis of your full argument then at least include all the stats, rather than cherry pick those that suit yourself.

I personally prefer to watch football with my eyes and see for myself who I think who's best etc. After all iniesta going by stats isn't nearly at the level than what he actually was when you watched him.

This is such revisionism. Portugal were always considered one of the better national teams in Europe and had about the same level of prestige as Spain before Spain won 3 major trophies in a row. Good but underachieving.

Figo, Deco, Rui Costa just to name a few.

The year before Ronaldo made his debut, Portugal were ranked top 5 in the world. That’s more than enough to reasonably challenge for Euro titles without having to attribute it to Ronaldo.

In Euro 2000 they very nearly made the final, only losing to a golden goal penalty against eventual winners France in the semis. After having crushed the group of death containing Germany, England and Romania winning all 3 games.

 

[Canagel]

This chart is fascinating. How quickly the two of them surged to the top. Btw never realized how dominant Henry was in the early to mid 2000's.

 

[Bole Top]

Can't believe we are seriously discussing if there's a gap in creativity between the two. Almost like discussing with flat earthers.

I had doubts before, but now I'm dead certain that some of posters don't even watch the games, rather just check the scores on their phones after the games are finished. to even debate who's more creative and better playmaker of the two is just... there are no words for that. I can actually understand discussions about trophies, tactics, teamates and the rest, but for this you would have to be seriously deluded or just blind. the difference isn't as big as like we're comparing RvP and Dirk Kuyt, but it's still pretty obvious that it's actually incredible that there some are willing to argue about that.

like there is no doubt about who's better at heading and penalties between the two, there is no doubt about is more creative and better passer. now, one may think the difference is big and someone else may think the difference isn't as big, that's for them to decide. but it's just there and it's clear to everyone who watched even only 10 or 15 games of both.

 

[Saffron]

I had doubts before, but now I'm dead certain that some of posters don't even watch the games, rather just check the scores on their phones after the games are finished. to even debate who's more creative and better playmaker of the two is just... there are no words for that. I can actually understand discussions about trophies, tactics, teamates and the rest, but for this you would have to be seriously deluded or just blind. the difference isn't as big as like we're comparing RvP and Dirk Kuyt, but it's still pretty obvious that it's actually incredible that there some are willing to argue about that.

like there is no doubt about who's better at heading and penalties between the two, there is no doubt about is more creative and better passer. now, one may think the difference is big and someone else may think the difference isn't as big, that's for them to decide. but it's just there and it's clear to everyone who watched even only 10 or 15 games of both.

They have to make ridiculous claims like that to even begin arguing that Ronaldo is better. Because if they concede the point that Messi is (obviously) the better passer and playmaker in addition to having a better goal ratio, then the debate is settled already.

It is simply impossible to argue that Ronaldo is better than a goal scoring Maradona. So they don’t even try.

 

[Sylar]

This is such revisionism. Portugal were always considered one of the better national teams in Europe and had about the same level of prestige as Spain before Spain won 3 major trophies in a row. Good but underachieving.

Figo, Deco, Rui Costa just to name a few.

The year before Ronaldo made his debut, Portugal were ranked top 5 in the world. That’s more than enough to reasonably challenge for Euro titles without having to attribute it to Ronaldo.

In Euro 2000 they very nearly made the final, only losing to a golden goal penalty against eventual winners France in the semis. After having crushed the group of death containing Germany, England and Romania winning all 3 games.

Whilst I have no stake in either Ronaldo or Messi (just enjoy watching them both), havent Argentina always been considered a better footballing nation in terms of players, and such compared to Portugal.

Portugal really should have won Euro2004, however Argentina really should have won more international trophies in recent years.

 

[Saffron]

Whilst I have no stake in either Ronaldo or Messi (just enjoy watching them both), havent Argentina always been considered a better footballing nation in terms of players, and such compared to Portugal.

Yeah, but Argentina doesn’t compete in the Euros. Portugal has always been one of the bigger football nations in Europe, so it’s not that wild that Ronaldo managed to ”win” 1 in 4 attempts.

I really wouldn’t put that much stock in winning a Euro from the sidelines, just as I wouldn’t if Messi won 1 Copa.

Greece won a Euro. And no one cares about the players that did it. Rightfully so.

 

[He'sRaldo]

Yeah, but Argentina doesn’t compete in the Euros. Portugal has always been one of the bigger football nations in Europe, so it’s not that wild that Ronaldo managed to ”win” 1 in 4 attempts.

I really wouldn’t put that much stock in winning a Euro from the sidelines, just as I wouldn’t if Messi won 1 Copa.

Greece won a Euro. And no one cares about the players that did it. Rightfully so.

Portugal's Euros was it's first ever international trophy IRIC. That's a big deal for the Portugese at least. No need to downplay that.

 

[Daysleeper]

Yeah correct . Saurez and Neymar doing the same in 2015 ?

Did Messi dribble , create and finishe all goals Barca scored by himself in winning all the trophies ? Grow up dude

The second goal that broke the game open was because of Messi’s run that allowed Suarez to finish the chance.

Which is far more than anything we can say for Ronaldo in 2014, 2016 and 2018 CL final

 

[Camara]

Portugal was in general basically crap before the so called "Golden Generation" (e.g. Figo, Rui Costa and co).
Before the debut of this generation in Euro 1996 we participated in a grand total of 3 tournament finals: WC 1966, Euro 1984 and WC 1986.

Portugal then blended in new generations and has been a solid team to the present, Ronaldo has played in this strong period of Portugal through his career.
Portugal wasn't, however, a favourite during Ronaldo's career except for maybe Euro 2004, and the Euros have generally a lot of competition from major, favourite, nations such as Germany, Spain, France and Italy (less so recently).

 

[Saffron]

Portugal's Euros was it's first ever international trophy IRIC. That's a big deal for the Portugese at least. No need to downplay that.

Good for them. Portugal has the baby and after the baby is born – beautiful baby, full of health, thank God.

But Portugal getting the baby without Ronaldo in the delivery room doesn’t really say anything about who is better between him and Messi.

 

[Ishdalar]

This is such revisionism. Portugal were always considered one of the better national teams in Europe and had about the same level of prestige as Spain before Spain won 3 major trophies in a row. Good but underachieving.

Figo, Deco, Rui Costa just to name a few.

The year before Ronaldo made his debut, Portugal were ranked top 5 in the world. That’s more than enough to reasonably challenge for Euro titles without having to attribute it to Ronaldo.

In Euro 2000 they very nearly made the final, only losing to a golden goal penalty against eventual winners France in the semis. After having crushed the group of death containing Germany, England and Romania winning all 3 games.

I think it's not black or white, Portugal has had great teams, but eras of low level too.

A bit like Belgium, sometimes they're bad, sometimes good, other times, like present time, they're absurdly stacked. The weird thing about Portugal is that they managed to win the Euro with a generation of players on the decline after some tournaments were they had better a squad.

The 2004 team was probably a top 3 team in the world name by name, and they had the luxury of relying on the backbone of a great club that just conquered Europe (Carvalho, Maniche, Costinha, Deco, Valente, Ferreira). In perspective, it's like if Spain bottled the 2010WC in the Santiago Bernabeu, but won the 2022WC with veterans like Ramos, Silva and Mata plus a mix of not that great players (Ceballos, Denis Suarez, Hakimi) and with an overtime goal in the final scored by Jesé

 

[Ishdalar]

Portugal was in general basically crap before the so called "Golden Generation" (e.g. Figo, Rui Costa and co).
Before the debut of this generation in Euro 1996 we participated in a grand total of 3 tournament finals: WC 1966, Euro 1984 and WC 1986.

Portugal then blended in new generations and has been a solid team to the present, Ronaldo has played in this strong period of Portugal through his career.
Portugal wasn't, however, a favourite during Ronaldo's career except for maybe Euro 2004, and the Euros have generally a lot of competition from major, favourite, nations such as Germany, Spain, France and Italy (less so recently).

Well, not crap crap, more like bottlers (the 98 qualifier for example) or yeah, sometimes a little crappy.

But it was another era where it was harder to join tournaments, less spots available, there's no shame in finishing right behind Van Basten in the 92 QF, or behind Italy in the 88 QF.

92 for example was just 8 teams, 1 spot to the host, and fight for the other 7 spots against pool one teams in the groups (Netherlands, England, Spain, Italy, Yugoslavia, West Germany and Romania). It was basically get lucky getting Romania (not a weak team in that era) or Yugoslavia (banned, Denmark took their spot) or beat some of the other juggernauts.

We went from 8 teams pre-96, to 16 and now 24 since 16' and with the "best third team" change, Portugal's path starts in a group with Albania, Denmark, Serbia and Armenia, where 2 teams directly qualify and another goes to the play-off, then a group of Iceland, Hungary and Austria.

That would be impossible for the Portuguese team 20 years ago. Denmark had to go through Sweden, France, England, Netherlands and Germany on that run. Greece through Portugal (twice), Spain, Russia, France and Czech Republic, the level of the competition has taken a huge dip by adding more teams, past performances can't be directly related to present ones.

 

[Prometheus]

I think we've pretty much established that any hyperboles are based on a feel/subjective eye test. The I know what I see attitude is all good, but people should really quit presenting these views as if they were grounded in reason if they are going to run to subjectivity/eye-test when those views are questioned. You can't have it both ways!

 

[Saffron]

I think it's not black or white, Portugal has had great teams, but eras of low level too.

A bit like Belgium, sometimes they're bad, sometimes good, other times, like present time, they're absurdly stacked. The weird thing about Portugal is that they managed to win the Euro with a generation of players on the decline after some tournaments were they had better a squad.

The 2004 team was probably a top 3 team in the world name by name, and they had the luxury of relying on the backbone of a great club that just conquered Europe (Carvalho, Maniche, Costinha, Deco, Valente, Ferreira). In perspective, it's like if Spain bottled the 2010WC in the Santiago Bernabeu, but won the 2022WC with veterans like Ramos, Silva and Mata plus a mix of not that great players (Ceballos, Denis Suarez, Hakimi) and with an overtime goal in the final scored by Jesé

I guess you’re right. Part of me still thinks @Peyroteo hoped for his country to lose the 2016 final 5-0 so he could say ”look what happens without Ronaldo”

 

[Zehner]

[

I think we've pretty much established that any hyperboles are based on a feel/subjective eye test. The I know what I see attitude is all good, but people should really quit presenting these views as if they were grounded in reason if they are going to run to subjectivity/eye-test when those views are questioned. You can't have it both ways!

See, I already gave you additional metrics that would paint a clearer picture if you don't trust your eye test (which is understandable given it resulted in you having Cristiano's avbility anything but miles behind Messi). You chose to ignore them.

Your comparison with flat earthers trusting their eyes instead of science is also incredibly.. let's say lazy. Those guys are refusing to believe scientifically proven theories. You, however, are citing a stat that is losely correlated to creativity at best and not a profound metric to measure it by any means. If you want to quantify creativity on the football pitch, first provide a metric that is capable of measuring it precisely (which is already an impossible task IMO, but feel free to prove me wrong).

 

[SteveW]

There can be no arguments about this season surely since Ronnie doesnt have the CL to redeem the season?

 

[Prometheus]

[


See, I already gave you additional metrics that would paint a clearer picture if you don't trust your eye test (which is understandable given it resulted in you having Cristiano's avbility anything but miles behind Messi). You chose to ignore them.

Your comparison with flat earthers trusting their eyes instead of science is also incredibly.. let's say lazy. Those guys are refusing to believe scientifically proven theories. You, however, are citing a stat that is losely correlated to creativity at best and not a profound metric to measure it by any means. If you want to quantify creativity on the football pitch, first provide a metric that is capable of measuring it precisely (which is already an impossible task IMO, but feel free to prove me wrong).

That's rich because it's you who came up with flat-earthers analogy. I just pointed out that their system is more in line with your eye-test. You didn't provide anything that provides a clearer pictures - you just named other types of metrics whose utility in measuring creativity is very dubious. You didn't state how they collectively measure this quality better or indeed how they helped you come to these hyperbolic conclusions. In fact, you stated that the eye-test is the best way to evaluate creativity!

 

[Hemant]

The second goal that broke the game open was because of Messi’s run that allowed Suarez to finish the chance.

Which is far more than anything we can say for Ronaldo in 2014, 2016 and 2018 CL final

Point was Messi didn’t win anything on his own and neither did ronaldo.
If you are going to discount the trophies because his team mates scored/
helped then it’s applicable for Messi too.

 

[Zehner]

That's rich because it's you who came up with flat-earthers analogy. I just pointed out that their system is more in line with your eye-test. You didn't provide anything that provides a clearer pictures - you just named other types of metrics whose utility in measuring creativity is very dubious. You didn't state how they collectively measure this quality better or indeed how they helped you come to these hyperbolic conclusions. In fact, you stated that the eye-test is the best way to evaluate creativity!

It is. Just ask yoursekf the question what makes a pass creative? There are countless dimensions to judge on. Difficulty, overplayed opponents, effectivity and so forth. Far too many to quantify it, so what you are left with is qualitative analysis aka "the eye test".

Yet I still provided you with quite a few metrics that are better suited to measure creativity. Key passes, packing rate, chances created and so forth are all better indicators of what you are trying to quantify. You, however, still stick to your assist stats. Not only that, you don't even accept that even in examining the very metric you chose because you knew it would make Cristiano look better you ignore that there's a more than significant difference.

So yeah, maybe you are right, this isn't strictly flat earther behaviour since there's no scientific proof that Messi's more creative. However, it is as obvious as it could possible get and even the stats you cite yourself claim the same. This is at least reminiscent.