I don’t ever factor in wonder goals I’m simply responding to the original poster
Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance
- Thread starter Rado_N
- Start date
- Status
I don’t ever factor in wonder goals I’m simply responding to the original poster
Messi had a MUCH better CL this year than Ronaldo
Then you have to absolve Messi of blame don't you? If the managers have to create solutions for Messi vacating the right, it's the manager's fault in the end.
Now if Messi refuses to hold his position on the right(entirely possible), shouldn't the manager then come up with another solution bar this lunacy of the RCM covering Messi during defensive phases and leaving Busquets on an island.
I never said otherwise. Its a rarity for it too happen though because since this is Ronaldos competition he usually has a much better CL.
Brady is the most overrated sportsperson in history though, that's a terrible example. While I think Messi is better than Ronaldo, Ronaldo is far more talented in his respective sport than Brady is. Brady is a good player, blessed with the greatest coach of all-time.
I think that is just ridiculous. Brady is and has improved time and time again how incredible he is.
Obviously Ronaldo is more talented then Brady in his respective sport. My point was that talent alone is not what decided a GOAT it never was and it never will be.
ffs I swear this thread has Tom Brady mentioned every 4 pages 
Why people need to make analogies with tennis, basketball and NFL players is beyond me.
Why people need to make analogies with tennis, basketball and NFL players is beyond me.
Honestly, the big problem of all this discussion is that there is no balance: Messi is either a total a bottler or his team and Valverde are responsible for everything wrong. Both are wrong.
Wonder goals and skills are crucial in the reputation of a player. There are countless players who scored, had overall better stats and won more than Maradona, like Gerd Muller. Gerd Muller has Maradona trashed in stats and titles, yet no one sees him as superior to Maradona.
Also, what you say about Messi playing in a worse team can be said about virtually all fantastic players in history. Cruyff had an Ajax team that was ridiculously fantastic and played for him. Pelé had only fantastic players around him in Santos and Brazil. Di Stéfano in Real in the 50s. All these players played most, if not all, of their careers in all-time greats teams in the same level of Pep's Barcelona and they achieved almost all their greatest feats and titles playing in these teams.
Last edited:
Are you honestly saying that Messi playing for current City would only hit 80% form with this current Barca? Current City are a better functioning football team, they keep the ball better, they are more dominant. They are a better football team tgan Barca. They would give him the platform to focus on playing his game, not just trying to save his team all the time. Who was there ti help him create a goal against Liverpool? Who would help him di that at City? Berbardo, Silva, De Bruyne, Sterling.
Messi would destroy the PL in this City.
It's true that talent alone does not decide it. That said the idea that Ronaldo, as great as he is, may be the greatest football player who ever lived is really ridiculous.
He has done a sublime season but he shat in Anfield.
Cris would be the mockery of all if it had happened two years in a row(or 4).
With his head down just like last year. Unable to bring order,encourage or score a decisive goal.
The fault of course is for Valverde, as it was for Luis Enrique before.
Cris would be the mockery of all if it had happened two years in a row(or 4).
With his head down just like last year. Unable to bring order,encourage or score a decisive goal.
The fault of course is for Valverde, as it was for Luis Enrique before.
He was, by far, Barcelona's best player and played really well in a team that was a disaster.
He always plays well, but at these competitive level he has to show that different factor, and he didn´t , and is not the first time.
In these situations sometimes he disconnects himself from the team, he lacks leadership.
In many other aspects he is the best, but I think that his career could have been even brighter with more strength at these moments.
Sure, it's the managers fault for not solving the tactical puzzle. It's not an easy puzzle to solve though, you're seeing it all across Europe with managers struggling to field number 10s in the modern game in a balanced system that gets the best out of the team for the big matches.
Valverde didn't do that badly, if this team had bigger balls you'd probably be looking at two trebles in a row and instead of an incompetent coward he'd be a genius.
That's true to a certain extent.
Another significant issue here is that people seem to have invested these players with almost comic book qualities, resulting in a loss of nuance and context.
I never understand why people seriously count Messi winning 4 CL, when he was only a bit part player in the first one and didn’t feature in any of the knockout games at all. He did won 3 CL as key player, and has his name on 1 CL as bit part player.
Because he won four CLs, three as a key player and one as simple part of that team.
They finished a distant 2nd that season.
Juve won Serie A with more points in 17 than 15, as did Bayern.
Messi being good against a decent City doesn't nearly compare with Ronaldo destroying Bayern.
I would count it because he featured in the group stage, and then was instrumental in Barcelona's away victory at Stamford Bridge which was to an extent their greatest test during that year's CL campaign given they were eliminated previously by Chelsea. He got injured afterwards, it's hardly his fault...
And Ronaldo would win multiple world cups with Argentina.
You know what both are? Ridiculous fanboy hypothesis which will be never tested.
You're right that the puzzle isn't easy to solve, but it gets exponentially more difficult if you keep persisting with painfully slow and over the hill midfielders like Rakitić and Busquets. They are his go-to midfielders for the last two seasons and have rewarded him with shitshows in both legs, while Arthur who was actually fairly decent in the first leg and is the only mobile and press resistant midfielder was rewarded with a place on the bench. Unless there is some way to place the blame for team selection on Messi, Valverde will have to carry this one.
Yes, I just do not think that in this specific case he is one of the biggest responsibles for Barcelona's stumble. Both the coach and many other players were far worse and have became over-reliant on Messi, while, at the same time, Messi never was and never will be a leader. If things go really well, he destroys, if things go really bad, he does not know what to do and sometimes fall in despair and hopelessness. This is the only truly significant edge that CR7 has over him in my opinion. Everything else, like CR7'se clearly superior stats in KO UCL stage, is a consequence. This shows also in how CR7 has far better stats in team's losses. He scored the only Real goal in the 4-1 defeat against Borussia in 2013, for example.
Ernesto Valverde is an average coach and there is far more proof of that than just Barcelona's UCL eliminations.
But Messi also destroyed Bayern.
In the same way that people count Pelé as having won three World Cups when Pelé actually got injured in the second Brazil game in the 1962 World Cup and did not play in the 4 remaining Brazil games of that World Cup, in which Garrincha became the star.
I can understand George Weah not winning a World Cup. Or even Ronaldo.
Nobody will care about league titles in the future. You need to do something in the World Cup.
Nobody will care about league titles in the future. You need to do something in the World Cup.
Argentina were missing their second best attacker (Di Maria) had an injured Aguero and weren’t even favorited against a stacked German team.
Ronaldo can win a euro but you can’t understand why he can’t win a word cup?
World Cups mean a lot but in the modern age where club football gets more coverage than ever I’d argue world cups aren’t the end all be all since they happen so infrequently.
Why can't Messi win a Copa?
Also, I would argue if you are coming from nations like Italy, Brazil, Argentina, Germany, etc. who have either won it in the past or progressed to latter stages, performance in the world cup is indeed an important metric to be considered a true GOAT.
Mind you, we are talking about the best ever, not some top 30-50 players of all time
My Ronaldo comment was sarcastic, he had a very very easy euro path
That Argentina team is a mess, look at how much worse they are when Messi doesn’t play. It’s a frustrating generation for sure
Why does no one care about league titles? Who set's this criteria? Being consistenly good every season to win the league with your team says a lot more about your ability than infrequent cup competions. For sure the WC is the crown jewel, but I don't consider Mario Götze one of the best ever because he won a World Cup nor Pogba or Griezmann.
I think it's a ridiculous criteria. Vice versa you could say that R9 was non-entity as a club player since he won so little.
Measuring a player by club and national team tophies obviously goes some way, but really the way to measure a player is to consistently watch them and see how good they are. Ryan Giggs is one of my favourite ever players, but I don't think he's the best PL player of all time despite being the most decorated.
I think Alan Shearer is one of the best PL strikers of all time despite only winning 1 PL title.
Yeh that exactly why I don't understand it. You can say John Greening winning 1 CL for us too, as bit part player, I bet he would claim that one proudly as his win even though he didn't feature much in the tournament. But Messi, in my opinion, is too big for that.
Trophies are such a short minded argument. I mean, honestly, if it's about titles neither Messi nor Cristiano have a claim on the throne. We'd probably be talking about players like Di Stefano, Beckenbauer, Xavi or Iniesta, then. These are just the ones that instantly came to my mind, I don't even know which player has the best overall trophy cabinet as a key player. If titles won would be the ultimate measuring stick, surely people would know by instant which player has most of them to his belt.
What exactly defines "these situations"? To me it seems like they only count if he's on the losing side. Let's imagine for a second Barca didn't go out against Rome last season but "accomplished" an unspectacular 1-1 with a Messi assist. What would you reply to me if I'd consider that game "a big match"? It's the same in this season. He played brillantly in the second leg against United, the second leg against Lyon and the first leg against Liverpool. Why aren't those matches "these situations"? His masterclass performances are the only reason that Barca didn't feck up much earlier. Truth is, Barcelona went out the second Messi didn't bail them out singlehandedly but "only" had a good performance.
I understand the leadership part, but that's not really a footballing trait for me. You need leaders in your team but your best player doesn't have to be the leader simultaneously. Exemplarily, it would've been a ridiculous decision to make Ronaldinho the captain of Rijkaard's Barca team because he responsibility and leadership were never his strengthes, he's an unstable genius. Does that make him a worse football player? Why do people expect a great player to be a great leader in the first place?
He beat Bayern, what Ronaldo did in 2017 was destroying.
In your opinion, someone might think just the opposite.
The team is in the mould of the manager. Look at Liverpool. That's entirely Klopp's team. You can see his impact all over it.
Generally the only people who cling on to the World Cup are Brazilians because it's the only argument they have for Pele. You have it the wrong way round. As time goes on the WC will become less of a factor and people will focus more on CL.
The Champions League and even European domestic football has surpassed the World Cup in terms of quality. It's the pinnacle of football now. Teams are going out and spending hundreds of millions on the very best players available, they're training every day, the advancements in sports science that the clubs are all in on etc. It's just a different ball game to a tournament that comes around every 4 years, only lasts a couple of weeks and whether or not great players win the thing is entirely dependent on something as uncontrollable as where their mother happened to give birth to them. Look at some of the crappy teams you can face in the World Cup if the draw falls nicely for you. England almost reached the final last year after facing Panama, Tunisia, Sweden, Colombia and Croatia. Would having seen off such footballing giants suddenly put Kane into the running for one of the greatest strikers of all time?
The World Cup is still the most prestigious but it isn't in any way the best, most challenging or a serious determining factor in how good a player or his legacy is/was.
P.S, I exclude Belgium from the teams England faced as it was a nothing game and they actually wanted to lose!
That would be an opinion, albeit and idiotic one
Not any less valid nor idiotic than your own, which you present as some sort of a verifiable fact which it simply is not.
- Status