If there's no beauty in Ronaldo then you should just stop watching football, because anyone bar Messi is boring
Playmaking is widely considered as one of the most beautiful aspects of football because it involves mastery of one of the core components of football - passing - and a cerebral nature on some level, and this is widely recognised as the aspect that Ronaldo falls down on, so I would say that's a definite exaggeration. Some people may love playmaking, dribbling and very little else, and the elegance and poise of someone like Silva, Hazard or Messi is the one thing they desire in a football match. If that's the case then Ronaldo won't be that enjoyable to watch. It'd be a bit strange because that's only one aspect of football but then there are some people who seem to only enjoy watching certain players or certain teams and have no time for football outside of that so it's not
that strange when you look at the wider context.
Regardless, there are so many things that Ronaldo does exceptionally well outside of playmaking - which is undoubtedly a weakness - and goalscoring - which is obviously his core strength - that often get lost in these debates because people get sucked into debating in extremes and talking in hyperbole just to get their point across, simply because the same points have been said over and over and over again that the only way to make your point heard and have some semblance of a "discussion" is by sensationalising things. Which is one of the main reasons threads like these are absolutely awful.
I say that as someone who has been involved in all sides of the "debate" since the beginning too. When we reached the CL final I was adamant Ronaldo was the better, more complete player than Messi, then from 2009 up until around the beginning of last season I was in no doubt whatsoever that Messi was a level above, and then it looked like Ronaldo had a chance of surpassing Messi over the course of their careers through sheer will, determination and staying power while Messi looked physically and mentally drained for a long period of time...and now I'm back to thinking Messi's more or less untouchable. No doubt in that time I've spoken in hyperbole and discussed in extremes on a regular basis - it's just the nature of the debate at this stage. It does make for pretty rubbish discussion though.
For example some people come into the debate simply to say Ronaldo and Messi are the greatest ever, there's no argument to be had, modern football trumps all and that's all there is to it. The point in itself isn't that contentious but it's the underlying attitude and framing of the point that sort of sums up the debate. If your stance is that modern football is better than older football and the exceptional players of this era are therefore better than the exceptional players of previous eras, then why not simply describe them as the best players in the world (which ? It can only be because saying they're the best in the world isn't sensational enough, because it doesn't add anything else to the table.
Anyway, back to talking about Ronaldo rather than the Ronaldo and Messi debate itself...could anyone really argue against Ronaldo being exceptional at the following?
- Athleticism (strength, speed, leap)
- Technique (first touch, striking, heading)
- Intelligence (positioning, timing)
- Mental strength
- Flair
You can't judge a player on his component parts and ultimately it's about how he ties them together and utilises them that defines him as a player, but anyone with that level of quality and that repertoire of skills is exceptional by any measure. Yes a lot of these qualities are tailored towards scoring goals and his scarce involvement last week was one of many against quality opposition and underlines the somewhat more limited playing style he's chosen to utilise but that doesn't change the fact his arsenal of skills is practically unmatched in the modern game and a lot of those skills are comparable to the greatest players to play the game. Ultimately his inability to dictate the play in the final third means he isn't quite at the same level as the great attackers to play the game because no matter where they played they all possessed that essential skill, so I'm largely in agreement with the people who argue against Ronaldo in that context. I just think it's exaggerated and overblown and ends up leading to people either ignoring or missing some truly exceptional qualities that Ronaldo possesses.
The main thing I think that gets forgotten is Ronaldo's first touch. It's pretty much perfect. Definitely the best I've ever seen at United and quite possibly the best we've ever had at United. Ronaldo can be somewhat mechanical but a great first touch is one of the most beautiful things in football and Ronaldo definitely excels in that area.
Even when you just look at goals alone...to bunch it all together as just a load of tap-ins is ludicrous. He scores some genuinely outrageous goals from range that involve a mastery of a really difficult technique, but even if you just look at his goals from close range, is it really fair to bunch this goal in with a 2-yard tap-in?
Not for me. That's exceptional skill that involves technique, athleticism, creativity and intelligence and you'll see very, very, very few goals like it...I don't think it's unreasonable to call it unique. It's unique, it's skilful and it's pleasing on the eye but in some bizarre way, just because it'a goal scored within the box, it's disregarded as being a boring old tap-in. That's the unfortunate result of debates like this.