R9 a pure goalscorer 
That would apply better to someone like Ruud or Gerd Müller.
That would apply better to someone like Ruud or Gerd Müller.
Ronaldo vs Ronaldo
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
2002 Brazil team being a super team is hilarious. They were one game away from not qualifying without Ronaldo @RedRonaldo
@RedRonaldoYour whole analisis is useless if you have in mind that Bosman ruling came into effect in 1996 and it basically destroyed the Dutch league.
Between Ronaldo's first season at PSV and the firts season of your analisis (Machlas 97/98) Ajax lost Seedorf, Reiziger, Davids, Kanu, Finidi, Overmars, Kluivert, Musampa, Bogarde, Wooter and even Rijkaard. That's more than half a squad able to reach 2 UCL Finals in a row, they didn't just lose some of the best players in the world (and for free like Davids or Reiziger), they found themselves unable to attract players 2 or 3 tiers below the ones they lost against teams in the Premier League, La Liga or Serie A, and it only got worse by the time Kezman was the "star" of the league.
All your arguments fall like a house of cards after Bosman came into play, the Dutch league was a powerhouse up to 1996, which is easy to argue looking at how many EC/UCL finals and titles Ajax, PSV and Feyenoord reached before every club in Europe could fill his roster with Dutch players.
And the fact that you either ignore the context, or competely disregard it to compare Ronaldo's performances in the Dutch league with Machlas or Kezman just points out how you're not really interested in keeping an honest debate.
Just on the first touch point, it is much more difficult to showcase a great first touch up front than it is in midfield.
I’ve played in midfield and whenever I’ve been used as a striker it’s a different ball game, the ball gets fired into you at different heights, speed and you’ve always got defenders on your back applying pressure on the touch. R9s first touch absolutely holds its own against most players at an all time level .. Iniesta would not be able to demonstrate the same level of touch if played as a CF. The same accusation could not be levelled at a Cruyff for example who could feature at CF or Messi whose proven himself as a false 9 but would still struggle if asked to be a target man.
The only thing he has any legitimacy about is that R9s general possession play and orchestrating as you point out was below other GOATs but it was still in a different league to C.Ronaldo as proven with his link up play with Romario, Rivaldo and Raul. His through balls and vision was better but I agree that I wouldn’t place it in the highest category in all time stakes.
But to say he lacked talent is so absurd it is unreal. He was a wonderkid and his skills were Neymaresque and Ronaldinho level albeit done at a much faster pace and done when running at people in a CF position (much harder to do than 1 v 1 on wing).
He’s not a kick and run merchant... yes he was an athlete but he also possessed sublime otherworldly skills.
Ps I’m still undecided as to which Ronaldo is better but talent wise - one winner for me.
Good analysis of striker's first touch and midfielder's first touch, but I am struggling to find why you told me that
Obviously Ronaldo wasn't a typical cherry picker striker, and had much more in his locker, than just being a goal scorer, but he never developed into a complete attacking/creating machine like other all time great, well obviously he didn't need to. And maybe if he didn't had those horrible injuries and actually cared about his health and career, he might have developed much more.
Tbh to ryadmahrez, he never said, R9 wasn't talented, but I can understand where is your anger coming from, because in other posts, he is calling R9 mere goal scorer.
[
Put Ronaldo in CR7 Madrid or Messi's Barca and he will score more than them. Put them in that Seria A...i doubt that they would score more than him. Especially CR7.
R9 - all day everyday.
Cristiano has enjoyed the better career but at their very peak, R9 was ridiculously scary.
Not even Messi or Cristiano won their first ballon d'Or at the tender age of 20. Fat Ronaldo did.
He's the best #9 in the history of the game.
Cristiano has enjoyed the better career but at their very peak, R9 was ridiculously scary.
Not even Messi or Cristiano won their first ballon d'Or at the tender age of 20. Fat Ronaldo did.
He's the best #9 in the history of the game.
Just from his international career alone
I'd probably say that from 17 to 21 he wast best young player of all time(I dunno maybe Pelé was). From 22 and onwards both Messi and CR7 were/are better.
Last edited:
How can you be so sure about that, he will score more goals than them?
He would score more than 91 goals in a year? And this is based on what?
And why wouldn't Cristiano score more than him, when the likes of Pippo Ingazhi, Oliver Bierhoff were top scoring the charts. It isn't like Cristiano doesn't know where the goal is.
I just don't this, in order to big up one player, the other has to be put down.
R9 was something else before injuries. before him, I didn't think it was possible to experience fear just by watching someone play against your team. I mean, it's just a fecking football after all. only Kaka in those two matches vs Milan and Messi made me feel similar since.
R9 without hesitation
Cristiano Ronaldo is an incredible scorer but also incredible durability, it's really strange how he can play so much games at the highest level and not get injured. And how he hasn't physically declined at all. As a result Cristiano Ronaldo is coming for appearance records as well as goal records. He's now played 170 games for Portugal and over 1,000 games between everything and he's still only 35. By comparison, Ronaldo missed entire years at his peak where Cristiano barely missed even a month in some of his peak years. It's not always fair. As a result, Cristiano has already played more than 300 more career matches than Ronaldo, and many more than that at the highest level.
If we take his international record for example, you'll see Cristiano has 40 more goals than Ronaldo. But Cristiano's strike rate is 0.57 at international level vs 0.63 for Ronaldo, who had tougher average match. Ronaldo has a record of 15 goals in 19 games at the World Cup at a strike rate of 0.79. Cristiano has only 7 in 17 at a strike rate of 0.41. And then if you look further you'll see that Ronaldo has two goals in a World Cup final, two goals in World Cup semi-finals, 7 in total in the knockout stages vs 0 for Cristiano.
Cristiano has the most goals at the Euros with 9 goals. But it's done playing the most games of any player ever at 21 games, at a similar strike rate to his World Cup one at 0.42. If you look at Ronaldo in Copa America, he scores 10 goals in only 12 games in his first two Copa Americas. Then sadly he never plays in it again after the age of 22 and leaves with two Copa America trophies, a goal rate of 0.83 in those tournaments.
Just imagine the damage that peak Brazilian Ronaldo would have done if he played 170 games for Brazil, he played 21 Copa America games, if he played 174 Champions League games, not 40 games.
That's Cristiano's credit for keeping himself in shape also of course as well as good luck. So if you are picking a player for 5 seasons then it has to be Cristiano Ronaldo. But if you are picking a player for one tournament, then peak Ronaldo is a very legitimate selection over Cristiano.
If we take his international record for example, you'll see Cristiano has 40 more goals than Ronaldo. But Cristiano's strike rate is 0.57 at international level vs 0.63 for Ronaldo, who had tougher average match. Ronaldo has a record of 15 goals in 19 games at the World Cup at a strike rate of 0.79. Cristiano has only 7 in 17 at a strike rate of 0.41. And then if you look further you'll see that Ronaldo has two goals in a World Cup final, two goals in World Cup semi-finals, 7 in total in the knockout stages vs 0 for Cristiano.
Cristiano has the most goals at the Euros with 9 goals. But it's done playing the most games of any player ever at 21 games, at a similar strike rate to his World Cup one at 0.42. If you look at Ronaldo in Copa America, he scores 10 goals in only 12 games in his first two Copa Americas. Then sadly he never plays in it again after the age of 22 and leaves with two Copa America trophies, a goal rate of 0.83 in those tournaments.
Just imagine the damage that peak Brazilian Ronaldo would have done if he played 170 games for Brazil, he played 21 Copa America games, if he played 174 Champions League games, not 40 games.
That's Cristiano's credit for keeping himself in shape also of course as well as good luck. So if you are picking a player for 5 seasons then it has to be Cristiano Ronaldo. But if you are picking a player for one tournament, then peak Ronaldo is a very legitimate selection over Cristiano.
On regular basis, he didn't. Especially after he left to Spain.CR7 wasn't leaving defenders for dead? and you said you watched him?
When was when he dribbled a player last time? 10 years ago?
If he would be used as a poacher then yes. He has incredible finishing and nose for a goal. But he is not that, right? He plays with the ball in his feet and trying to create a chance for himself. With that style, i am not sure that he would survived Italy back then.
Just an opinion.
Maybe Iniesta wasnt the best example, but I stand by that Iniesta had a higher football iq and more genius like quality. Obviously far more creative, when to turn, which side to turn, when to pass. He was brilliant. As an overall player R9 was more talented, due to his immense physical qualities. But iq wise Iniesta was better.
It's the other way round. People claim it were their best years because they played in their best teams during those times. Look at Messi last season. Unreal performances, incredible plays, set up so many chances but people were still talking about him having one of his worst seasons simply because the goals weren't there. And why did he score less? Because the team was worse. Ronaldo for Juventus is IMO in a better form than during his last Madrid years. He was still outscored by Quagliarella, a player in the Bierhoff mould, because Juventus were bad at creating chances for him.
Thing is, the team plays a huge role and both Messi and CR7 were blessed with great collectives for the majority of their time. Collectives which were on average better than the best team R9 played in, at least during his peak.
That Inter team you're constantly referring to scored 62 goals in 98. 62! Ronaldo's best Madrid teams scored almost twice as much. Even his Juventus team last year finished with 76 goals. Cristiano still "only" scored 19 from open play. And Juventus won 8 titles in a row, this would be completely unimaginable in the 90s' Serie A.
No matter how you put it man, you're comparing apples and oranges.
R9 was top drawer playmaker and passer? I think you are the one who doesnt know what he is talking about.
Oh come on. I love Iniesta but R9 had a better technique and was more inventive in his dribbling on top of being a physical monster.
It's a bit weird comparing Iniesta to R9. R9's dribbling had more flair and he had insane pace and strength to boot. No insult to iniesta who's one of the best midfielders ever.
I see two problems with the 'higher peak' discussion. (i) CR7 has so many iterations of himself that different people aren't choose the same one to compare with R9, and (ii) R9's highlights are being extrapolated over his entire career.
To solve those problems, I think the better questions would be: R9's best season vs CR7's best season? Or R9's best tournament vs CR7's best tournament? And if the discussion is about individual brilliance, another good question would be CR7's most individually brilliant season vs R9's?
To solve those problems, I think the better questions would be: R9's best season vs CR7's best season? Or R9's best tournament vs CR7's best tournament? And if the discussion is about individual brilliance, another good question would be CR7's most individually brilliant season vs R9's?
Jeez, you'd think he compared him to Emile Heskey, not Andrés fecking Iniesta.
Sorry, kind of forgot I quoted you, too. Anyway, I think the answer generally applies to your posts, too, since you also have a habit of comparing their goal stats without enough emphasis on context for my liking.
I find that a bit random to be honest. I mean, who decides which disciplines are featured in this list? And which weight do you assign to which? Wouldn't that also be dependent on the play style, the team etc.?
I also don't agree with some of you numbers. If 10 is the maximum, then the best dribbler in history should score 10. You're going by 0.5 steps, so the tier below that should be a 9.5, the score you gave Cristiano. However, even if peak Cristiano was a world class dribbler, I can immediately think of multiple players which are clearly worse dribblers than R9/Messi/Maradona/etc. but also clearly better than Cristiano. For example Neymar, Robben, Ronaldinho, Zico or Cruyff. And I also think there are players between them and Cristiano, like Hazard, Iniesta or Ribery which would put Cristiano at an 8.5.
But I think judging a player's abilities on a scale from 1 to 10 is the wrong way to look at it. Ronaldo was above anyone else on the pitch. You saw him play and wondered "how on earth do you defend this?" A player who prevailed through sheer skill and physical superiority. The reactions of the French players in the video posted by enigma summed it up perfectly. In this generation, Messi is the only one who leaves a similar impression out of the current generation, IMO. Cristiano came closest during his late United and early Madrid years, but never got to this level. He has enough other ways to hurt opponents but they don't really rely on individual brillance.
Now you'll probably say "well, in the end it is about the impact. Beauty doesn't matter" and you're right. A solo goal counts just as much as a tap in or header. However, for me the determining question is how a player would perform in another player's shoes. If you made prime R9 the target player in those well drilled Madrid or Barca sides, basically granting him the same privileges Messi and CR7 enjoyed, and systematically bring him into situations in which he is practically undefendable, sky's the limit.
No disrespect to Iniesta, but comparing Iniesta to R9 is disrespectful to R9.
For me, the way to think about R9 is that he had the ability to become the GOAT, but injuries but him short. The torching of defenders, the trophies but the absolute majesty of his play put him at the Pele/Messi level, but it was too brief a period of time.
CR7 put up insane numbers and collected gobs of honors and looked phenomenal in doing it, but had a much longer stay at the elite level and in the end we have to give it CR7.
I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with the argument CR7 had (has, of course) a more machine like quality to his play than R9, who was elegant in his pure dominance. It’s still CR7 for me, but if one were consigned to a deserted island for the rest of his life and given the choice of highlights of their respective careers, as a neutral you’d really want to go with R9. But as a United supporter I’d go with CR7. Seeing the boy come on against Bolton is still an incredible memory.
For me, the way to think about R9 is that he had the ability to become the GOAT, but injuries but him short. The torching of defenders, the trophies but the absolute majesty of his play put him at the Pele/Messi level, but it was too brief a period of time.
CR7 put up insane numbers and collected gobs of honors and looked phenomenal in doing it, but had a much longer stay at the elite level and in the end we have to give it CR7.
I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with the argument CR7 had (has, of course) a more machine like quality to his play than R9, who was elegant in his pure dominance. It’s still CR7 for me, but if one were consigned to a deserted island for the rest of his life and given the choice of highlights of their respective careers, as a neutral you’d really want to go with R9. But as a United supporter I’d go with CR7. Seeing the boy come on against Bolton is still an incredible memory.
It’s disrespectful to R9 which should say everything you need to know about his greatness considering I absolutely love Iniesta.
CR easy.
People seem to forget that football is a team sport, it's not street ball. It's almost as if people judge talent as simply first touch, dribbling, technique and balance. CR7 has all those skills but to a lesser degree than some of the other GOATS, his key highlights, accelaration, anticipation, off the ball movement, strength, stamina and shooting ability are described as hard work. These are also skills, skills in which he is better than any other GOAT at. For me it's like looking at Giannis Antetokounmpo and diminishing his ability to drive to the basket because he trained to get his body to the speed and power that he currently has. It makes no sense.
R9 isn't close to CR7. He would never have had the consistency or matchwinning ability CR7 has had for as long as he has had. Acting like it's simple to do is an insult to the amount of time and energy he has spent keeping himself fit, fast and strong enough to perform at the level he has performed at over the years. Athleticism is something that should be celebrated more in football, and CR7 is the best athlete the sport has ever had. Nostalgia when it comes to R9 is blinding, I think it's the same reason people have also said Van Basten is the best striker they have seen. People keep looking at what could have been achieved and acting like that was actually occured. The truth about this is, R9 from 1999 to 2002 would have had to surpass what he did in 1997 to even be considered anywhere near Messi, CR7 or Pele; I highly doubt he would have been able to attain that level of performance or that level of consistency. He could also have been like Rooney, with a bright start, who played at a high level, but never reached the level that was expected. Ronaldinho is proof that it takes determination to get to and stay at that top level and in the entirety of the modern sport, only Messi, CR7 and Pele have been able to do that.Maradona also falls in the myth category for me, " if he only kept himself in shape and off drugs, imagine what he could have achieved", he didn't. It takes effort to keep yourself fit, it takes character to keep yourself at a top club capable of competing for European honors.
R9 isn't close to CR7. He would never have had the consistency or matchwinning ability CR7 has had for as long as he has had. Acting like it's simple to do is an insult to the amount of time and energy he has spent keeping himself fit, fast and strong enough to perform at the level he has performed at over the years. Athleticism is something that should be celebrated more in football, and CR7 is the best athlete the sport has ever had. Nostalgia when it comes to R9 is blinding, I think it's the same reason people have also said Van Basten is the best striker they have seen. People keep looking at what could have been achieved and acting like that was actually occured. The truth about this is, R9 from 1999 to 2002 would have had to surpass what he did in 1997 to even be considered anywhere near Messi, CR7 or Pele; I highly doubt he would have been able to attain that level of performance or that level of consistency. He could also have been like Rooney, with a bright start, who played at a high level, but never reached the level that was expected. Ronaldinho is proof that it takes determination to get to and stay at that top level and in the entirety of the modern sport, only Messi, CR7 and Pele have been able to do that.Maradona also falls in the myth category for me, " if he only kept himself in shape and off drugs, imagine what he could have achieved", he didn't. It takes effort to keep yourself fit, it takes character to keep yourself at a top club capable of competing for European honors.
Obsession with stats kill threads like these. A question, if Var continues as it is and makes defending increasingly difficult inflates goal totals, and has multiple players scoring at Messi and Ronaldo levels, will that context be important when discussing individual players?
Of course it would have to be, context matters but the most ardent fans of Messi and Ronaldo have always resisted the idea that their goal totals are inflated by the state of the modern game.
Stats are such a dull way to compare players, football is not basketball.
Of course it would have to be, context matters but the most ardent fans of Messi and Ronaldo have always resisted the idea that their goal totals are inflated by the state of the modern game.
Stats are such a dull way to compare players, football is not basketball.
Messi and CR7's stats have consistently dwarfed their immediate competitors.
If across the board goal tallies increase due to VAR and yet no one is as far ahead of their peers as Messi and CR7 were, that statistical context will definitely be taken into account.
Several people have asked how Bierhoff managed to outscore Ronaldo in Serie A that season. It's quite an easy question to answer when you see how Inter played at the time. Here is a typical example of a Ronaldo game in Italy, against Milan.
How many times do Inter put him a position where he has a goalscoring opportunity? How many times do Inter get up and support him when he gets the ball with his back to goal and 3-4 defenders around him? Or when he picks up the ball at the touchline alone with multiple defenders around him? He touches the ball once in the opposition penalty box in the whole game. That was his goal. The vast majority of the time he receives the ball in the middle third of the pitch with limited support and is vastly outnumbered by Milan players. He still creates from such positions and Inter's second is after a spin and lay-off in his own half, but he really worked in isolation and off meagre scraps. Those overloading opportunities that modern attacks enjoy were beyond the reach of most club sides of that time and certainly not how teams operated in Serie A. And often when he did skip past one, the next challenge was a wipe out because you could generally get away with that and it was better to concede a free-kick than to allow him to run with the ball. This is simply a completely different environment to what attackers in stacked elite club sides face today.
Yet despite all of that Ronaldo was still Inter's main goal threat. In 1997/98 he scored 34 goals while the next top scorer netted 7. Ronaldo was both Inter's number 9 and their number 10. He was their creator and goalscorer. But unlike the other greats who had a similar dual role - Messi, Pele, Cruyff - he didn't benefit from playing for a stacked club side who had multiple threats and routinely dominated their opposition. And he was unique amongst that lot in regularly facing many of the great defenders of all time - he humiliates Maldini and Desailly in this game, and would do the same to Nesta, Thuram, Cannavaro and others during his time in Italy. The fact he was still able to produce such attacking brilliance is why he remains so revered today.
Ronaldo 9 quality player but where Ronaldo 7 outdoes him for me is consistency. I'll be very surprised to not see Ronaldo / Messi not mentioned as the best forward players in the history of the game because irrespective of the argument for talent, they have placed themselves at the very top due to consistency alone.
[/QUOTE]
It's nice and cute to consider what it takes to stay at that level and whether he'd have been able to sustain it, but that we'll never know because his peak was sadly cut short by injuries. It's not like if you work hard you won get injured. The man was as fit as a fiddle. He was truly an amazing athlete that was just unfortunate.
What I do know is Cristiano and Messi failed to impose their will on the international stage. Without the lopsided European competition at clubs that hoarded talent for a decade or so they've struggled to be dominant. That means a lot to me.
Let's put it like this. Almost every year in the past 10 years the top scorer in the CL was Messi or Ronaldo. Yet neither have top scored at an international tournament. That let's me know it's more about era than them.
Now if you look at it from an at ability standpoint all these players aren't incredibly blessed. Differently so in some ways. That's how I compare them instead of sitting around looking at records achieved at a time where some teams could barely touch the ball in the matches. Something that never happened in the past.
Ronaldo was nothing like Rooney. Ronaldo from 96 - 99 was the best player in the world by a considerable margin. He didn't have to improve to reach anything, he was already there. That player, was as good as anyone to have played the sport.
It's nice and cute to consider what it takes to stay at that level and whether he'd have been able to sustain it, but that we'll never know because his peak was sadly cut short by injuries. It's not like if you work hard you won get injured. The man was as fit as a fiddle. He was truly an amazing athlete that was just unfortunate.
What I do know is Cristiano and Messi failed to impose their will on the international stage. Without the lopsided European competition at clubs that hoarded talent for a decade or so they've struggled to be dominant. That means a lot to me.
Let's put it like this. Almost every year in the past 10 years the top scorer in the CL was Messi or Ronaldo. Yet neither have top scored at an international tournament. That let's me know it's more about era than them.
Now if you look at it from an at ability standpoint all these players aren't incredibly blessed. Differently so in some ways. That's how I compare them instead of sitting around looking at records achieved at a time where some teams could barely touch the ball in the matches. Something that never happened in the past.
Question is, is there a player who has been top of every competition they ever played in? CL, League, International, etc. I'd say most players I can think of had a deficiency in one competition or the other.
Ronaldo was nothing like Rooney. Ronaldo from 96 - 99 was the best player in the world by a considerable margin. He didn't have to improve to reach anything, he was already there. That player, was as good as anyone to have played the sport.
It's nice and cute to consider what it takes to stay at that level and whether he'd have been able to sustain it, but that we'll never know because his peak was sadly cut short by injuries. It's not like if you work hard you won get injured. The man was as fit as a fiddle. He was truly an amazing athlete that was just unfortunate.
What I do know is Cristiano and Messi failed to impose their will on the international stage. Without the lopsided European competition at clubs that hoarded talent for a decade or so they've struggled to be dominant. That means a lot to me.
Let's put it like this. Almost every year in the past 10 years the top scorer in the CL was Messi or Ronaldo. Yet neither have top scored at an international tournament. That let's me know it's more about era than them.
Now if you look at it from an at ability standpoint all these players aren't incredibly blessed. Differently so in some ways. That's how I compare them instead of sitting around looking at records achieved at a time where some teams could barely touch the ball in the matches. Something that never happened in the past.
[/QUOTE]
You mean the same way Ronaldo failed (in comparison to Messi and Ronaldo) in cl?
It's nice and cute to consider what it takes to stay at that level and whether he'd have been able to sustain it, but that we'll never know because his peak was sadly cut short by injuries. It's not like if you work hard you won get injured. The man was as fit as a fiddle. He was truly an amazing athlete that was just unfortunate.
What I do know is Cristiano and Messi failed to impose their will on the international stage. Without the lopsided European competition at clubs that hoarded talent for a decade or so they've struggled to be dominant. That means a lot to me.
Let's put it like this. Almost every year in the past 10 years the top scorer in the CL was Messi or Ronaldo. Yet neither have top scored at an international tournament. That let's me know it's more about era than them.
Now if you look at it from an at ability standpoint all these players aren't incredibly blessed. Differently so in some ways. That's how I compare them instead of sitting around looking at records achieved at a time where some teams could barely touch the ball in the matches. Something that never happened in the past.
[/QUOTE]
You mean the same way Ronaldo failed (in comparison to Messi and Ronaldo) in cl?
Pele, hence he's the most accomplished footballer ever.
Ronaldo was nothing like Rooney. Ronaldo from 96 - 99 was the best player in the world by a considerable margin. He didn't have to improve to reach anything, he was already there. That player, was as good as anyone to have played the sport.
It's nice and cute to consider what it takes to stay at that level and whether he'd have been able to sustain it, but that we'll never know because his peak was sadly cut short by injuries. It's not like if you work hard you won get injured. The man was as fit as a fiddle. He was truly an amazing athlete that was just unfortunate.
What I do know is Cristiano and Messi failed to impose their will on the international stage. Without the lopsided European competition at clubs that hoarded talent for a decade or so they've struggled to be dominant. That means a lot to me.
Let's put it like this. Almost every year in the past 10 years the top scorer in the CL was Messi or Ronaldo. Yet neither have top scored at an international tournament. That let's me know it's more about era than them.
Now if you look at it from an at ability standpoint all these players aren't incredibly blessed. Differently so in some ways. That's how I compare them instead of sitting around looking at records achieved at a time where some teams could barely touch the ball in the matches. Something that never happened in the past.
[/QUOTE]
It has nothing to do with deficiency, at least for CR7. If you swap R9 and CR7, both would have the exact national team records they currently have. Remember CR7 will probably beat the international goal scoring record held by Ali Daei. Portugal are not Brazil, they have never had the level of quality that Brazil has had. CR7 can at least say that he has won a euros. R9's teams were favourites for every international tournament he played in. He had the likes of Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Cafu, Roberto Carolos, Dida, Adriano, Kaka etc on his teams. You can sign for a club, you can't pick your country. Argentina is a different argument. Messi should have done more internationally. His teams had enough quality to win tournaments.
It's nice and cute to consider what it takes to stay at that level and whether he'd have been able to sustain it, but that we'll never know because his peak was sadly cut short by injuries. It's not like if you work hard you won get injured. The man was as fit as a fiddle. He was truly an amazing athlete that was just unfortunate.
What I do know is Cristiano and Messi failed to impose their will on the international stage. Without the lopsided European competition at clubs that hoarded talent for a decade or so they've struggled to be dominant. That means a lot to me.
Let's put it like this. Almost every year in the past 10 years the top scorer in the CL was Messi or Ronaldo. Yet neither have top scored at an international tournament. That let's me know it's more about era than them.
Now if you look at it from an at ability standpoint all these players aren't incredibly blessed. Differently so in some ways. That's how I compare them instead of sitting around looking at records achieved at a time where some teams could barely touch the ball in the matches. Something that never happened in the past.
[/QUOTE]
It has nothing to do with deficiency, at least for CR7. If you swap R9 and CR7, both would have the exact national team records they currently have. Remember CR7 will probably beat the international goal scoring record held by Ali Daei. Portugal are not Brazil, they have never had the level of quality that Brazil has had. CR7 can at least say that he has won a euros. R9's teams were favourites for every international tournament he played in. He had the likes of Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Cafu, Roberto Carolos, Dida, Adriano, Kaka etc on his teams. You can sign for a club, you can't pick your country. Argentina is a different argument. Messi should have done more internationally. His teams had enough quality to win tournaments.
Maradona (and @tjb above wrote him off as a myth??!!??). A truly exceptional talent, the epitomy of world class.
How did he fail? Before his injuries he only played in the competition once.
In 97/98 he won UEFA cup with Inter when the competition was a lot stronger. He scored 6, a goal shy of the top scorer and dominated a pretty good Lazio side in the final.
The year prior he won the CWC with Barca - again a pretty good competition, scoring again in the final and firing 5 in the competition.
Year prior 2nd most goals in UEFA cup(6) at the tender age of 19 and QF with PSV.
In his first attempt PSV were eliminated by Leverkusen in the first round, where he scored 3 in two games.
Up to his injury woes he had a great success in Europe - winning UEFA and CWC and being one of the best strikers in the previous competitions as a teenager for PSV.
Find it weird we're comparing a player who's been at the peak of football for 12 years to one who peaked for two years.
There's some serious disrespect for what Cristiano Ronaldo has done over this decade, as if it's something people do every day.
There's some serious disrespect for what Cristiano Ronaldo has done over this decade, as if it's something people do every day.
Its a top 5 of all time midfielder being compared to a top 5 of all time forward. I think its a weird comparison but its not by any means disrespectful. Iniesta was every bit as talented as R9 IMO, they just had different physical capabilities and different jobs on the pitch. Lets not forget that Iniesta would dribble past 2 or 3 players very often and he only had half the pace of R9.
In regards to this thread's debate, its important to consider that CR7 shared the spotlight with a GOAT contender. He could very easily have 2 or 3 more balon d'ors, league titles, CL etc had Messi not been born, he would by far have been the absolute most dominating player in history. R9 didnt share the spotlight with any player of that caliber or even close, which made him stand out more.