indeedMessi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance
- Thread starter Rado_N
- Start date
- Status
indeedThis. Winning with the national team is a once in a lifetime opportunity. And the manner Cristiano won the Euro, avoiding the top top teams in the knockout stages through sheer luck while being shit in the group stage takes away the glow of the win. Basically his last Ballon D'Or was won on the basis of CL and Euro Cup. Both of which he did not face the best sides
I am going to take your word for it regarding Portugal Euro qualification campaign as I did not follow that. But the other poster is saying Cristiano has been saving Portugal while going on about how Messi hasn't done much for his NT. That is false. Messi has done a lot for the national team but obviously he had to bring in the retirement talk
Helder Postiga and Almeida are not even first names on the Portugal side. I am sure they play other players there. And even if they play, they do not flatter to deceive like the herd of superstars that are, Higuain, Aguero, Di Maria etc.
we don't know how Portugal would do without Ronaldo tbf. there would be lots of "maybe" and "probably" in that debate. we do know, however, that they were good enough to beat France on their ground without him. it's a fact.
Couldnt blame them, he has been excellent for them and is one of their greatest and best players ever, so ofcourse you will have a little bias towards him. Just like how United fans think Martial is a future ballon d'Or winner, whilst their are so many more better talents out there.
I'm not dismissing his achievements. He's a wonderful footballer and a great of the game. But I have rarely seen anyone genuinely put him up there with the absolute greatest. It's only the "this generation's best are the best" lot who only focus on numbers and exclude context who do so. And I can see why the majority don't put him up there. He's a special forward, but doesn't take the piss as an overall footballer like someone who is the greatest should. The absolute greatest footballer should leave your jaw dropped with their genius and be capable of other wordly passing , scoring, ball control etc consitently. Ronaldo is a level below that IMO.
There's no counter. It was a shocking poor tournament in general where Ronaldo had about one good game or something, and spent the rest of the time being average. In fact didn't he nearly cost them in the group stage by missing a bazillion chances? An average team scraped their way to the trophy and Ronaldo didn't even play the final. I'd cherish the memory if I was him and a supporter of the Portuguese national team because it's a great moment for them. But Ronaldo's own efforts were not very impressive.
Portugal were obviously not as good before he arrived (as in the generation immediately before him) than after he came on the scene. Immediate Euro final, WC semi final, 2012 Euro semi final, and 2016 win. Not bad a for a country that missed qualifying for 3 consecutive WCs and a couple of Euros in the 80s/90s.
The other thing that's for certain is pineapple is fantastic on pizza.
Agreed.
I've seen them all from the 60's onwards. I've said it on these pages before. Ronaldo is the best European footballer I have ever seen. Better than Beckenbauer, Cruyff, Platini, Zidane - the lot. He is top 5 all time IMLTHO. He is a true great at club level, he is a true great at international level and has longevity to boot. Forget "this generations best of the best" Ronaldo is up there with them all from any generation.
Then again European footballers tend not to be the best. Most consider Messi, Maradona, Pele and Stefano to be a step ahead of all them, including Ronaldo.
And I meant this generation's best are the best ever people. The ones who only focus on numbers and hence claim Messi and Ronaldo must be in a league of their own.
Anyway, as fantastic as Ronaldo is, I don't think dominates games properly in every facet the way I read about Maradona doing or watch Messi doing.
True. Ronaldo would fit better in a 'best strikers of all time' list, where he would be probably top 3, precisely because he relies so much of service.
Fair enough, but I only count 4 there. Top 5 all time that I've seen. From my own personal POV I would swap out Di Stefano with Luis Ronaldo because I was too young to make any sort of judgment on him. Even though he played into the 60s he was way past his best by the time I started watching football.
Why would you count penalties to big up Ronaldo's? For what its worth, Argentina would be nowhere without Messi either. Just watch them, he is their only form of danger in midfield and attack, all these other big names arent doing it for them either. How you say he bottled finals, why dont you see he got them to 3 finals in a row, 1 WC, 2 Copa America, it's just the way you want to look at it. He was their best player every single time but it's small margins in final, unfortunately for him they all were lost. Yet you manage to give all credit to Ronaldo who was far from the best player in the Euro's, didnt play the final but won the cup. It's a really weird way of looking at things. Just like CL where he was bang average, scored the winning pen and he is GOAT, it doesnt make any sense.
They used to call Ronald Reagan "the Teflon President" because no matter what he did nothing ever seemed to stick to him. When GHWB took over, no matter what he did he seemed to be the one that took the blame whether it was his fault or not "the Velcro President." I sometimes look at Ronaldo and Messi like that. No matter what Messi does he's an icon. No matter what Ronaldo does he can't ever seem to get any credit. Kind of ironic in a way since Ronaldo was named after Reagan . They are both fantastic footballers and as in all my years watching the game I've never seen a rivalry like it at the level they both play at. Both top 5 all time for me.
. They are both fantastic footballers and as in all my years watching the game I've never seen a rivalry like it at the level they both play at. Both top 5 all time for me.
Last edited:
http://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/the-case-for-messi-and-c-ronaldo-as-best-ever.2016490/
http://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/messi-vs-ronaldo.2008262/
http://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/messi-vs-ronaldo.2008380/
http://www.xtratime.org/forum/506-playground-football/210732-messi-vs-cristiano-ronaldo-20.html
http://www.xtratime.org/forum/156-world-football/301561-whos-better-footballer-messi-c-ronaldo.html
http://www.xtratime.org/forum/156-world-football/250172-ronaldo-vs-messi-17.html
http://www.hltv.org/forum/1207461-messi-vs-ronaldo-2016-edition
http://forums.liverpoolfc.com/threads/303958-Messi-v-Ronaldo
http://www.totalfootballforums.com/forums/topic/77534-messi-vs-ronaldo/
http://footyroom.com/forum/discussi...ristiano-ronaldo-vs-lionel-messi-43776?page=1
etc.
This is why you're the best mod.
Come now... Portugal was 3rd behind Hungary and Iceland both in terms of points and goal difference and with no wins. If I was a Portuguese fan, I'd have said it was a very bad group stage. That was underwhelming and I am being generous here. No disrespect to Iceland, Hungary or Austria but Portugal should have blown defeated them and won all 3 games. And Portugal avoided Germany, Spain, Italy, England etc. in the knockout stages. If that is not lucky I do not know what is.
Of course, will Cristiano be regarded as having had the better international career than Messi? Most definitely, yes. Is it well deserved when both are compared? I would say no. And I definitely do not think shouting instructions from the sidelines and keeping the teammates in check is being a leader. If that is the criteria of a leader, Messi will never be a leader. Basically shoving aside and branding the quiet ones that get on with the job, as not being fit to be a leader.
I do not watch Postiga and Almeida for Portugal. But if there one entity, that personifies a bottler, that is Gonzalo Gerardo 'El Pipita' Higuain. He is so much disliked by people because of bottling it in high-octane moments. And you'd think people are too harsh and have lost their minds. But, they haven't. All the vitriol he gets is justified. As for Aguero and Di Maria they are anonymous for Argentina but World XI material for their clubs
For what it's worth, he did score 3 goals in the tournament. However, 2 of them came in the group stage vs Hungary and 1 in the semifinal against Wales. Not a stellar set of opponents. But generally, I don't think I have ever seen a team win a tournament as Portugal did. And I think the probability of seeing another one is very very slim
If Maradona dominated that much, why he did win the league only twice out of 10 seasons in Europe, and never won the European main competition?
Not saying that he wasn't great, just that people tend to exaggerate what Maradona and Pele and the other 'oldies' did.
The best now being the best is that obvious that I don't know how it is even a subject of debate. World is bigger, more people play football than ever, better coaching for kids, far better infrastructure, better tactics to play players at their strengths, better medical attention and diet results in the end with better players. It is obvious.
Thanks mate!
No worries mate!
Because the gap between the so-called big clubs and the rest wasn't nearly as big in those days as it is now.
I'd say less people play football today, at least in the western world. Kids don't participate as much in sport in general nowadays imo.
Because surprise surprise, football is a team sport. And logically based on overall quality and not mere statistics Maradona is considered from all relevant quarters to be a clear tier above Ronaldo. The latter clearly lacks something that always sees him enter debates of whether he is the best of his generation rather than better than Pele and Maradona. It's because his all round game isn't as ridiculously good.
Also, people also exaggerate today's players as they are so much more accessible and hence hyped, not to mention the existence of 'super teams'. Messi and Ronaldo absolutely do benefit from that. So it works both ways.
And the "today is better, world is bigger" bit is just pointless. Players are judged relative to the resources available to them and times in which they exist. Had Maradona and Pele been part of this generation, they would have access to all those advantages and also use them to their advantage.
Yet there were players who won far more than him. Don't get me wrong, I have only love for Maradona, but I find a bit stupid the way how people big up the oldies and put them in an another level to the greats of today.
I doubt that is the case. Didn't FIFA's study some time ago found that there were 270m players in the world, which is more than ever?
I wasn't doing that though, I just pointed out the significant difference between the club game of today and of previous generations.
I haven't read that before so I can't say one way or the other. Mine was more of general point, I just don't see kids participating in sport as much as they used to. There's so many other distractions for them these days.
The only reason why Ronaldo isn't the best of his generation is because of Messi.
And Maradona is rated higher than Ronaldo, because unlike with Ronaldo, people didn't watch Maradona each match and analyze everything he did (shock horror, he had bad games too), with a lot of people growing up while Maradona played. For kids, Ronaldo and Messi are the best players of all time, for people a bit older is Maradona, for those even older there are Pele or Di Stefano, for the dead people there is the local guy who played before the second world war. The first idol is all that matters, and for most people who now give the opinions, it is Maradona all along. 30 years from now, it will be Messi and Ronaldo, with people being cynical about Maradona, laughing at Pele and not knowing that football existed before the second world war.
Super teams existed always. Di Stefano won it 5 times in the fifties, Milano won European Cup 4 times during the time Maradona played. Also, he could have been part of a 'super-team' but he chose to spend his career at Napoli. Nothing wrong with that, but there is also nothing wrong with criticizing him that he won just 2 league titles and no European Cup during his career. It was a choice he made, unlike say George Best who had no shot of international success cause he was born in a wrong country.
It is pointless because it is a tautology. It is like saying sky is blue. But yet some people somehow claim that old guys who didn't even train, played without coaches and with a shoe are better than players of today.
That Milan team was limited to 3 foreign players (MvB, Rijkaard and Gullit). It's like if Barca would've been allowed to play only Messi, Suarez and Neymar - they'd still be amazing, but they won't be just as good, as it's hard to accommodate your stars if your hands are tied. Today it's almost fantasy football - you can buy any player in the world if you have the money (as the top clubs do).
They were superteams, but their stars didn't benefit from it like Messi or Ronaldo do from theirs (especially Cristiano)
While this is true, teams also didn't compete against teams as strong as Real or Barca of today? By superteams, I mean superteams relative to their opponents. Sure, Real today is likely better than any team back then, but for Real to win La Liga, it has to defeat Barcelona who are also better than any other team back then.
So, while Messi and Ronaldo (no idea why you put the 'especially' part for the former, in fact, he has shown that he can do with other teams too unlike Messi) benefit from their superteams, they also have to go against other superteams.
That's all true, but what I don't get about these discussions is that some don't accept or realise that for a lot of, or perhaps most, people it's ability and talent on top of that necessary base level of achievements that trumps all and not statistics. Maradona was slightly before my time but from all that I've seen of him it's plainly obvious that he was a superior player to Ronaldo.
It was much easier to win the European Cup in those days; harder to get into, but easier to win.
I've long had the impression that Maradona preferred being the larger fish in the smaller pond. Would his personality have suited being in a so-called super team?
I hate this word. It gets thrown like something bad, like it is just something in the paper but isn't of much importance. And not only that is wrong, but the way word 'statistics' is used has nothing to do with what 'statistics' mean. Anyway...
On the top level - contrary to some people beliefs - football is about winning. Having Cristiano Ronaldo in your team, gives that team a higher chance of winning than having Maradona IMO. While people say that 'nah, he isn't even that good, he just scores 60 goals per season', scoring all those goals is an incredibly difficult thing to do. Even more difficult than dribbling 3 players and then losing the ball or making a Hollywood pass which results in a corner. Scoring over 50 goals for one season is so difficult that (counting only players who play in the top 5 leagues) in the last 30 years or so, has been done only 11 times. On those 11 times, Ronaldo has done it 6 times, Messi 4, and Luis Suarez once. So, Cristiano Ronaldo has managed to score over 50 goals per season more times than the rest of footballing players combined in the last 30 years. But yes, it is just statistics. He cannot even compare with Maradona because unlike him, Ronaldo scored goals and won matches instead of making great passes and dribbles but also winning less matches.
First point. I agree with you. But I also think that getting in being (far) more difficult means that in the end winning it is as difficult as now.
Second point, again it might be well true. But why he should get a pass for this? Ronaldo and Messi have shown (year after year) that they can play, lead and win in big teams. If Maradona's personality wasn't a good match for that, then why he shouldn't be criticized for it?!
If we're talking about knock-out tournaments - then yes.
If we're talking about the league - in the 80's in Serie A there were teams (aside from the favorites) like Hellas Verona with Elkjaer and Breigel; Roma with Conti and Falcao; Udinese with Zico; Fiorentina with Socrates; Sampdoria with Souness and Mancini - et cetera et cetera. If you're not overly familiar with those names - all of them were world-class stars, Zico was even considered Platini's equal (ahead of Maradona at the time) as the best player in the world... Imagine if every Osasuna or Celta had, say, prime Zlatan or Hazard in their ranks
I am familiar with all of these names (actually, I also know that Platini was mentioned as Maradona's equal during most of their careers) and I agree with you. I would also say that winning La Liga nowadays is probably even more difficult than winning Serie A back then. Not because Celta is better than Sampdoria, but because Real and Barca are so good that they barely drop points. Both of these clubs passed over 100 points in the non distant past, while also reaching UCL semis. Sure, beating a random team in La Liga is more easier than beating a random team in Serie A back then, but to be champion you need to have more points than Barcelona if you are Real (and vice versa). That is incredibly difficult IMO, and makes La Liga as difficult to be won as Serie A back then.
Just look at Real, all those superplayers but they have won more times UCL than La Liga since Cristiano went there. It is a testament how a difficult league (to be won) is.
Someone will say that's all Ronaldo's fault.If any I think Ronaldo would be great for a team like Argentina, imagine him upfront instead of the likes of Higuaín or Agüero scoring all the key goals. I think he would be a massive upgrade for them.
Ronaldo would be un upgrade on nearly everyone! He almost never fails to live up to the expectations. With service, you just know he will get you goals.
- Status