Totally agree. I watched his whole career and he had bad games and periods of course, but he was one of the greatest players of all time. Any other opinion is asinine, frankly
Ronaldo vs Ronaldo
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Totally agree. I watched his whole career and he had bad games and periods of course, but he was one of the greatest players of all time. Any other opinion is asinine, frankly
Nobody said he didn't deserve any award he ever got. But he certainly didn't deserve the 1998 Ballon D'or and the 2006 Fifa Golden Ball.
Not to mention that he failed to win the league in his last 3 seasons with Juventus. Or that he only managed to win the league once with Real Madrid.
Zidane was a great player, for sure, but to put him in top 5s or top 10s in the history of football just reeks of revisionism based on idolized yet sparse highlights. Implying a player as inconsistent, ineffective, with relatively low end product and devoid of tactical finesse as Zidane is anywhere close to being a Top 10 player of all time is a crime to the history of football. In reality, he's barely top 20, if that.
Last edited:
With respect, I’m not sure you know what you’re talking about.
No offense taken. However, I know what I'm talking about, I've seen him play live.
Ok, fair enough. Name the 20 players you’ve seen that are better than Zidane
In no particular order:
1. Players that I've seen pretty much their entire career or a big part of it: Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Romario, Rivaldo, Baggio, M. Laudrup, Messi, CR7, Iniesta, Xavi, Neymar, Pirlo, Henry, Bergkamp, Totti, Del Piero, Kaka, Ibrahimovic, Suarez. Hell, I'd might even add players like Gascoigne and Cantona in there.
2. Players that I've haven't seen live or I have seen just a part of their career: Pele, Maradona, Zico, Platini, Van Basten, Best, Matthaus
It’s sad that you can’t appreciate his ability, but each to his own I guess.
Here are three GOAT lists selected randomly from the net, every one of them has Zidane in the top 10, many of them don’t feature a bunch of the people you’ve selected at all. It’s fun to be an iconoclast but at the end of the day, Occam’s razor suggests to me that you’re off the mark (what’s more likely: every single commentator and award committee and expert of note is wrong and Bogdannn is right, or vice versa?)
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.fourfourtwo.com/amp/gallery/50-greatest-footballers-all-time
https://www.footballparadise.com/experts-pick-the-greatest-player-of-all-time/
https://howtheyplay.com/team-sports/Top-10-Best-Football-Players-Of-All-Time
I’ve posted these and I’ve previously posted a list of his INDIVIDUAL accolades that dwarf all but a handful of the names you’ve listed. Please try and explain logically why Zidane has all these achievements and awards and appears in these lists as one of the ten greatest players of all time and most of the players you’ve listed don’t? Any appeals to ‘luck’ or ‘being on good teams’ will be rightly ridiculed.
It's not a lie he was inconsistent especially in his last few years. He had a ton of stinker matches.
Being the GOAT is not the same as being the BOAT.
Player A can be greater than player B, but at the same time he's not better.
As for your lists, I can give you countless that don't have Zidane in the top 10, and in some not even top 20.
My lists contained players that were better, meaning peak vs peak.
If we are talking about who's greater, the following players all surpass Zidane: Pele, Maradona, Cruyff, Ronaldo, CR7, Messi, Di Stefano, Platini, Beckenbauer, Romario, Xavi, Iniesta
If you can give ‘countless lists’ then post them. Who made these lists, fans with erratic impulses like you or people with actual knowledge of the game? Cos if it’s the latter, there’s no way Zidane is not top 20, and in most cases top 10 as I demonstrated.
Your post makes no sense at all and speaks to your own definitions of ‘best’ and ‘greatest’ rather that the actual definitions. ‘best’ and ‘greatest’ both mean ‘of the highest quality‘. Whatever word you use, there is no world where Paul Gascoigne was superior to Zinedine Zidane other than in your own head. Which is fine, just don’t claim that your strange outlier opinions are accepted fact.
Re the players that you’ve named here, I’d say only Pele, Maradona, Messi, DiSefano, and Cruyff were clearly better players. All the others are debatable or wrong.
Ronaldo played in the same team as Zidane and by that stage Zidane was better, though obviously prime Ronaldo would have possibly been viewed as the superior player. Beckenbauer is a debate: he changed the game re the libero innovation. CR7 has the weight of his incredible goalscoring so you could make an argument for him, but he has been relatively poor in major international competitions, especially the World Cup.
The ones that are clearly wrong: Zidane has consistently been voted above Platini as France’s greatest ever player (and indeed above Thierry Henry, whom you also hilariously tried to claim was better than Zidane, when they played together for France and Thierry himself would tell you who the better player was).
Romario is very underrated and a favourite of mine, but you can’t put a pure finisher (for all his skill and subtlety) above an orchestrator like Zidane.
Xavi and Iniesta are both great players and I’m a fan of their games. But they played most of their careers as a tandem and also with a player that was considered to be much better than them and the talisman of their team. That never happened to Zidane. He was the best player and talisman for every team he played for, France, Real Madrid and Juventus. He also stood out a bit more at international level than those two as the fulcrum of his team as opposed to a cog in the machine (and that’s taking nothing away from what Xavi and Iniesta achieved; we’re talking fine margins here)
That’s why he was bought by RM for a record transfer fee that stood for 8 years, the longest duration of that record since the 1940s. That’s why he won BDOs and FIFA WPOTYs and World Cup golden balls and those two didn’t.
I would select those players who on occasion could make the opposition almost give up.
R9
Messi
Ronaldinho
Zidane
Probably in order.
CR7 is obviously in the top 5 somewhere, but I've never seen him have that effect on anybody worth mentioning.
32 pages 
?, people debating who's better between Cristiano and fat Ronaldo. You lot just say you prefer fatty because 1. You're a messi fanboy, 2. You hate Cristiano. 3.Cristiano fecked your team so much . 4. Your team has never produced a better player, 5. You're jealous. 6.All of the above.
?, people debating who's better between Cristiano and fat Ronaldo. You lot just say you prefer fatty because 1. You're a messi fanboy, 2. You hate Cristiano. 3.Cristiano fecked your team so much . 4. Your team has never produced a better player, 5. You're jealous. 6.All of the above.32 pages
I prefer R9 even to Messi, now how do you explain that?
Prime R9 to me is levels above prime CR7. Cristiano was never such a force of nature steamrolling even the best defenders in the gamr, I'm sorry.
Yeah, they were a tandem, but Xavi and Iniesta also won much more than Zidane ever did, with or without Messi. Also, Zidane had "Hall of fame" players all around him too, i dont know what you are talking about, there's a reason why they were called "Los galácticos". You couldnt find a weak link on Zidane's teams.
The only difference is that those two played on Messi's era who is the most dominant player of all time, and they used their talent and skill to enhace Messi further while Zidane would share the offensive duty with Ronaldo, Figo, Henry and co.
The transfer fee record and Golden balls, again is a futile argument that doesnt say anything, only tells very superficially tells the story about how that year went. Modric has a Balon D or and a transfer fee higher than Xavi or Iniesta yet that doesnt make him better than them.
I would put Xavi and Iniesta at the same level of Zidane at the very least. If i start arguing about this to a deeper level i may even shift towards Xaviesta so lets just agree to disagree.
Ronaldo v Ronaldo is a simple argument to finish. The answer is Ronaldo, his on field ability better than the others. What he has done at tournaments is better than the other.
The first part of this statement is false. Xavi and Iniesta won one more international tournament than Zidane (without Messi). That’s not ‘much more’, especially when you consider that Zidane was the best player at the Euros in 2000 and the best player at the World Cup in 2006 (finalists), not to mention the match winner in the 1998 final. You can’t argue that either Xavi or Iniesta had the individual international influence that ZZ had, to do so would be disingenuous. Part of the reason France were so poor in their defence of the WC was because Zidane got injured.
I didn’t say that Zidane didn’t have great teammates, I said that he was always the best player and in the case of France he was the fulcrum and talisman. That’s not the case with Xavi and Andres.
First of all, Messi is not the most dominant player of all time, that title quite obviously belongs to Pele, but that’s a different matter. Secondly, you are focusing on Madrid because that helps your case, but unlike Xaviesta, ZZ didn’t spend the majority of his career at one superclub. He played for four teams of varying repute and was the best player in each team despite having very good teammates (Cannes excepted: he still helped them to their highest finish in the French league for over 70 years and a shock UEFA Cup berth).
If Modric was the best player in all of his club sides, had a Euros golden ball to go with his WC golden ball, had scored 2 or 3 goals past France in his World Cup final and a spectacular volley in one of the CL finals he played in, then he’d also be arguably better than Xavi and Iniesta. But none of those things are true, so I’m not even sure why you’re bringing him up.
I think Zidane was better but I’m a big fan of Xavi and Iniesta as well so it’s immaterial. Worth pointing out that Zidane is usually described as ‘one of the greatest players of all time’ whereas Xavi and Iniesta both get called ‘among the greatest midfielders’ of all time (e.g. on Wikipedia). Obviously not definitive, but make of that what you will. If you want to say they’re on a level, that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.
32 pages
YouTube comment right here
I don't think i'd go so far to say Zidane was always the best player at his clubs. There were various seasons where other players like Del Piero season before his bad injury, Davids, Figo, Raul and especially Ronaldo were better or on equal footing.
Not to disrespect any of those players because they’re all legends and they had periods when they came to the fore. Plus they all play different roles so it’s not an exact science in comparing, but I think overall, Zidane was the best player at each of his clubs. I’ve discussed Ronaldo already; the Cruzeiro/PSV/Barca/Inter version may well have been better than ZZ (and indeed was perhaps better than CR7, despite the protestations of many CR7 fans on this board). But the Real Madrid version, whilst still exceptional, was a greatly diminished footballer.
There were some weak links on those Zidane's teams, especially at the beginning of his third season at Real Madrid. He took part in squads that were worse coached, with players entering their decline (i.e. Figo, Roberto Carlos, Raul), without proper holding midfielders (Makelele leaving to join Chelsea, Guti and Beckham not apt to play in that position), with problems in the CB position and, last but not least, in a very anarchic context (players were treated as rock stars all over the world and spent too much time advertising the club in pre-seasons instead of training properly).
Last edited:
You can remove Figo and Raul from that list without any regrets. Zidane was easily the better footballerr every season they played together.
People who think Zidane isn't in the top 10 GOAT list really can't enjoy their football.
People who think CR7 is better than R9 haven't seen anything of R9.
People who think CR7 is better than R9 haven't seen anything of R9.
At age 17-22 (~5 years), the first Ronaldo is better
At age 23-36 (~14 years), the other Ronaldo is better
At age 23-36 (~14 years), the other Ronaldo is better
A lot of people are Brazilian fanboys. Maybe you are too? You did say you thought Thiago was the best midfielder in the world, in another thread. So seems plausible for you.
And prime Messi blows R9 out of the water. People forget how sick prime Messi was. Deadly as can be in front of the goal, the goat dribbler and immensely creative with constant through balls. He is levels above R9.
Agreed on both counts. I don’t have a problem with preferring CR7 but it’s clear some of the people advocating for him here never actually saw Ronaldo play in the mid-late 90s
As for Zidane, the guy was a true artist
To be honest, I find tribalism very weird if it gets so extreme that you prefer certain nationalities to a level that you can't judge players somewhat objectively. I like banter, supporting a club etc. as long as it's fun but even in this forum some posters are very suspect to me.
I prefer R9 because he was one hell of a footballer and absolutely unique in his skill set. There's no second player who was as unstoppable as R9, at least not based on the footage I have seen and I've watched hours and hours of historic highlights. Messi, Maradona and Pele come very close and when I watch them at their best I find it very hard to decide but R9 was just unbelievable.
I'm a huge, huge fan of Messi as documented by many of my posts regarding him but his dribbling isn't on R9 levels. R9 could do most of the things Messi can do but also had ridiculous strength and top speed going for him. Messi outperforms him as a passer of the ball and he played in a team that utilized his skill set to a higher degree but individually, R9's peak was unique to me.
Thiago is a different topic and I believe we should discuss this in the respective thread, not here.
Saying Messi’s dribbling isn’t on R9 level? Doesnt make you seem very subjective though. Messi at his best is regarded the best dribbler there ever was by most I would say.
R9 was a great dribbler, especially at open space, because of his incredible explosiveness that seemed to be endlessly. Thats why in open space R9 was perpaps better. Even though prime Messi had incredible speed himself.
But ultimately overall Messi blows him away. R9 his close control wasn’t as tight as that of a Messi, not close. Messi was/is obviously levels above him in tight spaces. R9 could occasionally dribble multiple people at his absolute best, but never as consistently as Messi in his prime. He just couldn’t. I’ve seen nobody who could. Messi was a threat to dribble the whole team at every possession every week.
I would go as far that you could make a dribbling compilation of one season of Messi (prime)and it would be more impressive than a compilation of R9’s dribbling over his whole career. Same with the passing of Messi and R9, one season of Messi’s passing is more impressive than R9 whole career. No strenght and speed makes up for that imo.
I love R9 but he's not a better dribbler than Messi. Find me 3 of Ronaldo's best ever games and I'll find you 15 from Messi where he exhibits better dribbling ability. R9 was fearless and capable of some amazing stuff but Messi was taking out 4 or 5 players regularly, even if you only compare them as teenagers.
Prime cr9 scored 42 goals as a winger?
I'd call it just being wrong, but each to their own I guess.
Messi was a far better dribbler and finisher than R9 ever was.
As for these supposedly steamrolling the "best defenders" in the game, how come all that brought him very few trophies? Let's not forget Barca won La Liga the season after he left, so try to pretend he played in some weak side that didn't stand a chance.
Defenders in the 90s being better than defenders in the 00/10s, that's a debate for another time.
Personal preference? He had a unique flair, but so does Messi and CR7, they just all shine in their own ways.
Yet the numbers don’t reflect this. If he steamrolled teams so much more than CR7, wouldn’t there be some metric of his productivity to demonstrate this? Instead, he was outscored by Bhieroff in one season at Inter.
I rate R9 very highly but I just can't see what made his peak so much better than CR7's or even better at all.
Huh? We talking about the same guy who destroyed the best standard of football ever played. Champions league.
The numbers do reflect this. He’d scored over 200 goals for club and country by the age of 23 and won the Ballon D’Or at age 21, still the youngest ever recipient. Then both his knees literally exploded and he was out of the game for almost 3 years.
Basically, no one has ever been that prolific at that age apart from Pele
Messi's dribbling was/is better for the exact reason he doesn't need power and pace. Dribbling is surely about how successful it is and I can't imagine R9 had anywhere near the success that Messi did. Hell there is compilations of Messi's goals where he beats multiple defenders that is 5-7 minutes long. They are just the goals.
Yes, Zidane was a greater genius compared to both Ronaldo's. Technique, class, intelligence, art. The latter isn't spoken about much but the asthetics have always been a fundamental aspect of the game. Those who combine it with outrageous numbers or achievements are, rightfully, acclaimed as greats.
There were other supremely talented players, masters of the the art of football, who perhaps had other priorities than being the best such as Totti, who never left Roma or Pirlo, Ronaldinho and so on.
If you want to compare who is the better player you will never find the answer because it's highly subjective. In the end it's like comparing musicians or writers or any other artist or performer: However you can perhaps come to a conclusion of who is the greater player by the number of big finals they have won. The teams they have carried and the magnitude of their deeds!
There were other supremely talented players, masters of the the art of football, who perhaps had other priorities than being the best such as Totti, who never left Roma or Pirlo, Ronaldinho and so on.
If you want to compare who is the better player you will never find the answer because it's highly subjective. In the end it's like comparing musicians or writers or any other artist or performer: However you can perhaps come to a conclusion of who is the greater player by the number of big finals they have won. The teams they have carried and the magnitude of their deeds!
Zidane is definitely comparable to L.Ronaldo and Ronaldinho, in terms of their peak and overall achievements. They are playing in different role and position, and they are totally different type of players so its hard to compare, but for me they are all among top 5 players since Maradona (Messi, two Ronaldo, Zidane, Ronaldinho).
For me, without comparing their career, they are all unique and very best in their own rights, under their specific role:
Messi: Dribbling, goalscoring, passing (best dribbler I've ever seen)
Ronaldo: Goalscoring, heading, pace/movement (best goalscorer I've ever seen)
Ronaldo: Pace/explosiveness. Dribbling, finishing (most explosive player I've ever seen)
Zidane: Technique, playmaking, passing (most elegant technique I've ever seen)
Ronaldinho: Tricks/flair, dribbling, playmaking (best tricks/flair I've ever seen)
Of course once we compare their career, there will be no comparison at all. There is two clearly far above the rest.
For me, without comparing their career, they are all unique and very best in their own rights, under their specific role:
Messi: Dribbling, goalscoring, passing (best dribbler I've ever seen)
Ronaldo: Goalscoring, heading, pace/movement (best goalscorer I've ever seen)
Ronaldo: Pace/explosiveness. Dribbling, finishing (most explosive player I've ever seen)
Zidane: Technique, playmaking, passing (most elegant technique I've ever seen)
Ronaldinho: Tricks/flair, dribbling, playmaking (best tricks/flair I've ever seen)
Of course once we compare their career, there will be no comparison at all. There is two clearly far above the rest.
Last edited:
Very fair post with good points. The only thing I’d slightly disagree with is the idea that Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo’s careers are far above the other 3. More total games and goals yes. More total trophy wins yes. But only at club level. Luis Ronaldo is a World Cup winner, a two time Copa America winner, a World Cup golden ball and golden boot winner, and a Copa America ‘best player’ and ‘most goals scored’ achiever
I think if you went to Messi or Cristiano and asked them if they wanted to swap career trophies with Ronaldo or Zidane, they’d have to think long and hard about it. Maybe I’m wrong, but it’s just my guess
I dont blame people if you prefer r9. It's flavor at the end of the day.
But do so without writting off cr7 and bigging off R9 as the best thing since sliced bread.
You're talking as if cr7 achivement are dime and dozens. What cr7 achieved in football trophy wise isnt likely to get emulated by anyone in near future.
R9 for all his flashes failed to win much apart from a measly several league win. And for his world cup he plays for a prime Brazil. He even failed to dominate serie a. Cr7 goes everywhere and conquer them all.