Oh no, in 97/98 Del Piero was definitely better than Zidane. He was also pumped so full of PEDs he was growing horns
Ronaldo vs Ronaldo
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Del Piero, Henry and Nedved were far more consistent than Zidane.
Sure, he played great in Euro 2000, but that's the only event where he played well in most matches.
In other events, he just had the odd match where he played great and was average or went missing in the rest. Same for his club career.
Most people overrate him cause he was very elegant, but elegance doesn't translate into effectiveness.
It doesn't tell the whole story, but it does tell at least half of it.
Last edited:
Yeah Zidane is massively overrated or grossly degraded by people.
36 pages to compare one apple with one pear!
I grew up watching r9 and batistuta. I watched CR too. I can compare CR with Batistuta. They both scored headers long shoots etc. And if you put Batistuta in CR's Madrid he would score 50 goals a season. He played in fiorentina which was harder and serie a at that time was hardest league in the world. Anyway comparing R9 with CR is not right. R9 was way better player. He was making shows, but i have never seen CR making shows except his bicycle kick. And when he doesnt score he is an average player. R9 was making show, he didnt need to score to be one of the best. CR without goals is just an average player. Not even top 10 player today. And not top 50 in history without goals. He depends on goals. And if he depends o goals why we dont compare him with Muller, Batistuta and Van Basten? Instead we compare him with Pele Maradona Messi and R9 which is wrong.
Ballon dors he won was because his team won CL, like Lewendowski. He won Ballon dors like Lewandowski, not like R9 or Zidane. He won them because his team won UCL. Anyways i think R9 is very very underrated here and needs more respect
Ballon dors he won was because his team won CL, like Lewendowski. He won Ballon dors like Lewandowski, not like R9 or Zidane. He won them because his team won UCL. Anyways i think R9 is very very underrated here and needs more respect
This is total bullshite.
1. Batistuta was my favourite player back in 90s too, but he never scored more than 30 goals a season, let alone 50. You are just imagining things in your weird mind. He has 354 career goals vs Ronaldo 770. Outside of Serie A, he only managed in his best season 19 goals in Argentina league and 26 goals in Qatar league, he scored 54 international goals for Argentina vs Ronaldo 102. Yeh Argentina and Qatar is harder league my arse.
2. Ronaldo was a beast when he was 22 to 29, even without considering insane amount of goals he had scored , he was basically everywhere in pitch, running, dribbling, doing tricks, starting attack moves, and leading his team in every attack, scoring spectacular goals, he was electrifying and unstoppable. To call that average suggest you are only a 13 year old without any prior knowledge of football. Also, he first won PL player of year without scoring many goals, yeh call that average you clueless prick.
3. He won Ballon D’ors because he scored 50 goals a season and winning CL as best player of the competition, not just because his team won CL. Also, are you suggesting Lewandowski not worthy to win Ballin D’or last season at all? How weird, as majority would agree he was worthy winner of any players awards from last year.
4. You are basically comparing R9 at his very short peak when he was 19-22 with Ronaldo in his 30’s. Yes Ronaldo in his 30’s was only a great goalscorer but he wasn’t really a brilliant player in terms of performance, but R9 in his 30s is a totally shite player who couldn’t perform, nor could he score any goals at top level. Why not just compare Ronaldo at 23-29 with R9 in his 30’s, just for a change? It will be fun, because it’s like comparing GOAT with a pub player.
Last edited:
It's Cristiano and it isn't particularly close. The Brazilian at his absolute peak was a player that was certainly worthy of any debate and even post injury, he was a top player of course. However, the issue is that there will always be the sense of 'what if...?'. The 'what if' is a scary proposition, but unfortunately in this sort of debate you are dealing with what was. A certain tangibility. The imagined will always glorify and heighten the 'what was' in Ronaldo de Lima's case. Don't get me wrong, what he actually achieved was staggering. He was the best player in the world and had a career that betters 99% of players. Maybe even 99.9% of players. However, with Cristiano (and Messi) you are talking about that 1%, or 0.1% of footballers who due to their luck with injuries, ultra professionalism, or whatever other reason, sustained a level of brilliance that was beyond what Ronaldo de Lima was permitted to give. All in my opinion of course.
1. Batistuta scored 54 goals in 77 games. Ronaldo scored 102 goals in 177 games. That is 100 games more. If we take per game ratio its 0.7 per game for batigol and 0.6 per game for CR. And considering CR mostly scores vs andorra luxemburg, batigols numbers are more impressive
2. How he was building attacks and dictating? Except running and doing useless tricks which resulted with nothing he mostly scored goals. He did somethings, but it was not in the level of top 10 player. At that time we had robben ribery modric isco iniesta xavi silva hazard di maria neymar ozil messi. CR was not better than them if we remove goals. So he belongs to top 20
3. Lewandowski also scores 50 goals, wins UCL and ballon dor. Same with CR. So you should compare CR with lewandoswski. Lewandowski deserves it for a reason. Because he won UCL and scored 50 goals. Nothing more. Same with CR
4. Im comparing both players at their peak. R9 was the best thing i have ever seen. You can say R9 was way better player, but CR had better career. This is the correct way to put it
Batistuta had a better international goal scoring ratio than what Ronaldo had. Cant compare the two different eras of club football as the game is completely different these days. More dominant sides and tactical advancements. Batistuta was a better scorer than Lewa for example. Put him in this Bayern sides and it would look ridiculous.
Cristiano averaged 3.1 dribbles a game in his most dynamic season(first Madrid season) this past decade. Outside of the 06/07 season he's never been one to wow crowds with amazing footwork, dribbling or passing. His greatness is centred a lot on his goal scoring. Not as much as Batistuta but he's nothing like Ronaldo in terms of the aesthetics of the game. During the past decade he averaged 1.8 dribbles, hardly dynamic and exciting especially since hes never been much of a passer.
I'm a big fan of Ronaldo - the Brazilian one. R9 was my boyhood hero and I admit I am bias towards him since nostalgia can cloud people's judgement. Me included. Especially those we idolise while we were growing up during our formative years. We would tend to be more fond of them. That is understandable. However, bias aside, I have to concede that CR7 has become the better player than R9. The latter always had more mystique about him since his legacy is surrounded with 'What if...' had his career was not hampered by his knee injury. He was born with as much natural footballing talent as Messi, and perhaps Maradona (wasn't old enough to have watch him regularly), had.
The Brazilian Ronaldo was indeed phenomenal. Certainly one of the top 3 best dribbler I've seen in my lifetime (alongside Messi and Ronaldinho). That being said, I don't think Cristiano Ronaldo had received as much recognition for his dribbling prowess as he deservingly should. CR7 was an amazingly skilled dribbler too, and I'd place him in my second tier of best dribbler in my lifetime (alongside Figo, Henry, Iniesta, Giggs and Hazard. Fyi not even Robben made this tier). Reading the posts in this thread however, it seems that many have forgotten just how incredible a dribbler the Portuguese Ronaldo was in his younger years.
The season when Ronaldo won his first PFA and FWA POTY, he very often made defenders lose their balance and dropped them on their arses with his sharp twists, turns and swivels. His sudden acceleration from unusual angles made him highly unpredictable and hence, hard to stop. He frequently skipped past multiple defenders on a mazy run, while they chase his shadows and had to resort to blatant fouling to stop him. Unfortunately, I am not allowed to post link/media on the Caf yet (sigh
) If you search "Cristiano Ronaldo 2007 Unstoppable: Dribbling Skills, Goals, Playmaking" on YouTube, that should be more than enough evidence of this.
He had 23 goals and 22 assists that season, and was truly mesmerising to watch. Very creative, full of flair and a potent goal scorer. Then in 2014/15, Ronaldo made 23 assists (and 61 goals). While R9 had never had more than 13 assists (1996/97) in a season. I have seen some shocking claims about how CR7 is a tap-in merchant and "nothing player" without goals. That is completely absurd and couldn't be any further than the truth. We should know that it requires a huge amount of skill to constantly have the beating of top defenders. R9 was even better than CR7 in this regard, but let's be fair and not downplay CR7 too much just to suit a narrative.
I have seen comparisons being made with CR7 to Batistuta and Lewandowski. Batistuta is also one of my boyhood hero during my formative years. He was an immense striker, and so is Lewandowski. Lewandowski is a more limited player than Batistuta and Ronaldo. Both Ronaldo and Batistuta possess a rocket of a shot. They have scored long range screamers/curlers, are fantastic in the air and brilliant finishers with superb anticipation/instincts. Lewandowski can rival them in terms of finishing and anticipation/instincts, but not with regards to being a considerable threat from distance and in the air too. That being said, Batistuta had never scored 30 goals a season in his career. Ronaldo has two seasons with 60 or more goals, six seasons with 50 or more goals, nine seasons with 40 or more goals and twelve seasons with 30 or more goals. Ronaldo also has the natural athleticism and flair over Batigol.
Lewandowski has played in the Bundesliga for the majority of his career. Ronaldo played in and dominated the Premier League when it was at its' strongest. He then moved to Spain and dominated La Liga during when it became the strongest league in the world too. Despite playing in a weaker league, Lewandowski couldn't match Ronaldo's productivity. He had not scored the vast plethora of goals that Ronaldo had. He had not match Ronaldo's longevity and consistency at the highest level. I struggle to put Lewandowski and Ronaldo on the same level when the former gets beaten in all aspects that I can possibly think of in the game. Peak Ronaldo was on a completely different stratosphere. In terms of peak ability, CR7 was a better creator and finisher of goals than R9. R9 was more unstoppable in his prime. It depends on what you are looking for. R9 probably to win you a game. While CR7 to build your team around. Career-wise, I don't think there is room for any debate.
The Brazilian Ronaldo was indeed phenomenal. Certainly one of the top 3 best dribbler I've seen in my lifetime (alongside Messi and Ronaldinho). That being said, I don't think Cristiano Ronaldo had received as much recognition for his dribbling prowess as he deservingly should. CR7 was an amazingly skilled dribbler too, and I'd place him in my second tier of best dribbler in my lifetime (alongside Figo, Henry, Iniesta, Giggs and Hazard. Fyi not even Robben made this tier). Reading the posts in this thread however, it seems that many have forgotten just how incredible a dribbler the Portuguese Ronaldo was in his younger years.
The season when Ronaldo won his first PFA and FWA POTY, he very often made defenders lose their balance and dropped them on their arses with his sharp twists, turns and swivels. His sudden acceleration from unusual angles made him highly unpredictable and hence, hard to stop. He frequently skipped past multiple defenders on a mazy run, while they chase his shadows and had to resort to blatant fouling to stop him. Unfortunately, I am not allowed to post link/media on the Caf yet (sigh
) If you search "Cristiano Ronaldo 2007 Unstoppable: Dribbling Skills, Goals, Playmaking" on YouTube, that should be more than enough evidence of this.He had 23 goals and 22 assists that season, and was truly mesmerising to watch. Very creative, full of flair and a potent goal scorer. Then in 2014/15, Ronaldo made 23 assists (and 61 goals). While R9 had never had more than 13 assists (1996/97) in a season. I have seen some shocking claims about how CR7 is a tap-in merchant and "nothing player" without goals. That is completely absurd and couldn't be any further than the truth. We should know that it requires a huge amount of skill to constantly have the beating of top defenders. R9 was even better than CR7 in this regard, but let's be fair and not downplay CR7 too much just to suit a narrative.
I have seen comparisons being made with CR7 to Batistuta and Lewandowski. Batistuta is also one of my boyhood hero during my formative years. He was an immense striker, and so is Lewandowski. Lewandowski is a more limited player than Batistuta and Ronaldo. Both Ronaldo and Batistuta possess a rocket of a shot. They have scored long range screamers/curlers, are fantastic in the air and brilliant finishers with superb anticipation/instincts. Lewandowski can rival them in terms of finishing and anticipation/instincts, but not with regards to being a considerable threat from distance and in the air too. That being said, Batistuta had never scored 30 goals a season in his career. Ronaldo has two seasons with 60 or more goals, six seasons with 50 or more goals, nine seasons with 40 or more goals and twelve seasons with 30 or more goals. Ronaldo also has the natural athleticism and flair over Batigol.
Lewandowski has played in the Bundesliga for the majority of his career. Ronaldo played in and dominated the Premier League when it was at its' strongest. He then moved to Spain and dominated La Liga during when it became the strongest league in the world too. Despite playing in a weaker league, Lewandowski couldn't match Ronaldo's productivity. He had not scored the vast plethora of goals that Ronaldo had. He had not match Ronaldo's longevity and consistency at the highest level. I struggle to put Lewandowski and Ronaldo on the same level when the former gets beaten in all aspects that I can possibly think of in the game. Peak Ronaldo was on a completely different stratosphere. In terms of peak ability, CR7 was a better creator and finisher of goals than R9. R9 was more unstoppable in his prime. It depends on what you are looking for. R9 probably to win you a game. While CR7 to build your team around. Career-wise, I don't think there is room for any debate.
Last edited:
kamran84, RooneyLegend - great posts.
Everyone who has seen both play from the beginning of their career will tell you R9 is the better player prime vs prime.
Unfortunately, there are many on this forum who didn't see a prime R9 live, only in youtube videos, so they think CR7 is better.
RedRonaldo
CR7 is no GOAT. Like the man said, take away his goals and he's average.
Everyone who has seen both play from the beginning of their career will tell you R9 is the better player prime vs prime.
Unfortunately, there are many on this forum who didn't see a prime R9 live, only in youtube videos, so they think CR7 is better.
RedRonaldo
CR7 is no GOAT. Like the man said, take away his goals and he's average.
Last edited:
I would agree with this part. Unfortunately his prime is very short lived. So it goes down to a case of what if..?
You also need to remember this is a United forum and many would obviously show support to CR7, so there will always be an element of bias here.
That being said I have to conclude that CR7 will win overall based on his stats and longevity. In my opinion though a prime R9 is the superior player, shame we only saw brief glimpses and hence why it's hard to call a judgement.
You people are that naive to compare stats from the 90s Serie A with stats from the 10's La Liga ?!??
It was a million times harder to score back then. Not to mention that the Inter and Fiorentina teams R9 and Batistuta played for were a million times weaker then the Real Madrid team CR7 has played for.
Most of us agree that in a way CR7 has had a better career, but that does not make him better prime vs prime.
Personally i dont think it makes sense to beat CR7 main attribute has become scoring goals when that's his role in the team.
That's only 1 chapter of his career though. He was far more than that before he became a poacher. I agree that he's different than Messi, Maradonna, Cryuff and Pelé in the sense that they all had the perfect attributes of a Nr. 10 whilst being prolific goalscorers, while Ronaldo has more been, tricky winger, wing-forward and then poacher. His overall skillset has still been more complete than Müller though.
1. Yeh 102 goals less than 54 goals, because of goals per game ratio? So someone who scored 1 goals in 1 games has the best goal per game ratio then, hence the best goalscorer too? You are out of your mind. Also, Ronaldo played alot of games as midfield winger in his earlier years, and wing forward for majority of games, Batistuta was a pure striker, you are comparing goals per game ration of a striker with a winger. Argentina back at those time is a far much stronger attacking team than Portugal too, who is known more for their defensive strength during their peak. Point being, Ronaldo has scored far far more goals than Batistuta. In terms of goalscoring, its not even fit for a comparison.
2. You need to watch back those games in his earlier years (late Man Utd years, early-mid Real Madrid years), Ronaldo was the centre of attack and was a physical beast back then in top performances level. He was always involved a lot during the games and was unstoppable, and sometimes playing like a one man army. You are simply describing Ronaldo either in his 30s (pure goalscorer), or early Man Utd years (trick-pony), which are not his peak years.
3. Lewandowski is only doing it for 1-2 seasons, Ronaldo has been doing it for 10-12 seasons. Thats the difference. If Lewandowski keep doing it for another 10 seasons, we will have a comparison.
4. At their peak, R9 (96-99) is a slightly better player in terms of performances level than Ronaldo (07-13), but Ronaldo peak seasons (ie 60+ goals 20+ assist) are having greater impact than R9 (ie 47 goals).
Last edited:
Wasn't that peak season under Jose iirc ? Jose took the dribbling away and made him a killer that year.
Yeh without goals in 06-07, at the very least he still won best player in PL and finish runners up in Ballon D’or (which he should win anyway, if not Kaka winning CL). Yeh take away R9 dribbling in his short peak he was a nothing player too.
Well, despite this tougher Serie A claim which is always used to shield their weaker stats, they didn’t really score many goals elsewhere.
For example, Batistuta only scored 13 goals in 43 European games. R9 only scored 36 goals in 73 European games. Meanwhile Ronaldo has 134 goals in 176 CL games alone, that’s 10 times more than Batistuta, and 4 times more than R9. Try explain that with whatever twisted excuse you could come up with.
Plain truth is, in terms of goalscoring, they are simply not as impressive as you guys would have imagined anyway, despite this “Serie A being million times tougher” claim.
I’ll give you another examples. Crespo used to be top goal scorer in Serie A back in late 90s to early 2000s (same era as Batistuta and R9), in his best Serie A seasons he scored around 28 goals (similar as Batistuta and R9). Yet he only managed 12-13 goals in his best season in PL during early mid 2000s, when he was still at his peak age. Well, try explain that again, with your twisted mind.
Millions times better? Go to bed son. Serie A was toughest league back in 80s (Maradona era), but not quite so in late 90s to early 2000s (R9 and Batistuta era).
Last edited:
Man, you can't beat Red Ronaldo's devotion to his God.
Well I’d have defend Messi the same way too if someone claim Ronaldinho or R9 is better than him.
No chance. You have surpassed @Cal? now as the ultimate Ronaldo fan here.Well I’d have defend Messi the same way too if someone claim Ronaldinho or R9 is better than him.
I watched both play from the beginning of their career, and saw both live on more than one occasion (admittedly R9 live only twice and he did score a hat trick vs United in one of them...).
I disagree that R9 is the better player because:
1.) CR7 is/was a top 3 player for way over a decade, R9 was what, 4-5 years?
2.) CR7 achieved a lot more (individual and team honours)
3.) CR7 has played every attacking role (winger, inside forward, centre forward) to a world class standard, R9 didn't do this. Conversely, what could R9 do that CR7 couldn't?
Believe it or not, I am Messi fan too.
Good question. I can think up of one though - massive gain to his body weight.
The answer is Ronaldo, the Cristiano one. Nazario would have had a case if his prime lasted 12 years instead of 4. At the end of the day Cristiano beats him on every merit except the World Cup.
CR7 has had the far better career. R9's knees were shot. It's unfortunate but we will never see how good a career he could have had.
I like batigol. Cool looking jesus like Argentinian hard man in nintendo purple fiorentina jersey. Oh and the 2000 PeS goals galore from halfway line.
But better or equal than ronaldo7?
You must be smoking something grand
1. Score a goal in the knockout rounds of the World Cup
2. Win a World Cup
3. Win a World Cup golden ball
4. Win a World Cup golden boot
5. Top score at a continental major international tournament
6. Be the best player at a continental major international tournament
7. Dribble effectively without falling over every 5 minutes
etc etc
1-6, umm OK but couldn't you use most of those to describe Muller, or James Rodriguez, or even Giroud?! We aren't calling Griezmann or Coman the best to ever do it because they play for France during their golden era.
Also, goal 'in the knockout stages' is weird because it implies Ronaldo has stage fright.
7. CR7 as a world class winger (06-) was a joy to behold, don't know what you're referring to.
Football Debating 101: Class is in session!
Sometimes you may encounter debates over 2 players that are by common consensus GOAT candidates.
Often, one of the legends will have achieved something (a team/individual trophy or a certain record) that the other has not. This is not necessarily an issue that decides the debate, but is a factor in the discussion.
A common tactic that disingenuous debaters use is to try to defend the legend who is lacking the accolade in question by pointing to a non-legendary player who possesses this same accolade.
They will then say something like; “Oh, oh, so crap player X is obviously better than legendary player Y, right, because they’ve won a World Cup/World Cup golden boot/Copa America/tiddlywinks prize and legendary player Y hasn’t. Right?! Right?!”
Such an argument is known as a ‘logical fallacy.’ The bad faith debater knows that Titus Bramble having the same accolade as GOAT player Y is totally irrelevant to the debate on which of the two legendary players is better. But they are upset about their guy lacking the accolade, so they will try to minimise the achievement, rather than just accepting their guy’s failings in that area and focusing on the great things that he has achieved as their basis for debate.....
PS: This style of argument is often used to defend Lionel Messi’s international career, but it is often wheeled out to explain away Cristiano Ronaldo’s poor World Cup record as well.......
At 58m18 - Ruud on what R9 was like in training. Great insight.
R9 and CR7 are both probably to 5 , what order you place them in is just purely based on preference and most likely which player you are most familiar with.
Let the obsession with defining the GOAT go, I promise you will be happier people!
Let the obsession with defining the GOAT go, I promise you will be happier people!
Very good insight there from Ruud and I full on believe him, Ronaldos technique was something else and it was the main reason why he was still so good after he lost his pace from his early career years. But I'll never forget the R9 playing for Barcelona, man this guy was unreal if he could have kept up that level of physical performances, combined with his technical ability, for the majority of his career I think I would rate him slightly higher than Messi and I already rate Messi a good deal above CR7. Unreal player at his prime and I agree he would have probably won 6 or 7 Balon D'Ors if he had kept that level for a decade or so.
The reason Champions League goalscoring records are getting demolished all over the place now is because there is a bigger gulf between the elite clubs and the rest. In the 1990s, it was a far more even playing field. A club like Fiorentina weren't good enough to qualify for the Champions League for most of Batistuta's career. He had to make do with the occasional run in the Cup Winners Cup and the UEFA Cup And then when they eventually did make the Champions League, they were dumped into tough groups with better sides like Manchester United, Arsenal, Valencia, Barcelona and Real Madrid. As shown by points, goalscoring and revenue totals across Europe, there was a healthier spread of quality. It's unfathomable now that a striker of Batistuta's quality spends all his best years at a club like Fiorentina (they were relegated during his time there too). Hence why exceptional goalscorers did not routinely rack up 40-50 goals a season. For example, in the middle of Batistuta's career in Italy, Milan won the title scoring 36 goals all season. You simply cannot compare outputs from two such vastly different eras as like for like.
Without getting into the head-to-head comparison with Cristiano Ronaldo, in Batistuta's case rarely has a striker made so much with so little service. What made Batistuta special was that in the attacking third, if he caught a glimpse of goal, he was seriously dangerous. If you look at the quality of goals he scored in Europe - and the calibre of the opposition he faced - you can see that he often had to pull something special out of the hat to get anywhere near the scoresheet.
And, sorry to get all fact-check on your arse, but Crespo actually has a better goals-to-minutes ratio in the Premier League than he does in Serie A. His 141 minutes per goal in the Premier League places him in the top 10 of all strikers the league has seen, up until relatively recently. The reason he did not always start was down to Chelsea's 4-5-1 / 4-3-3 tactics that required a physical Drogba-esque target man to lead the line. But either way, his goal return was impressive for the time he spent on the park.
141 minutes per goal is not really “million times” better than his stats in Serie A though. In truth he only managed 12-13 goals a season, which is very poor return for any top striker in PL. I am not saying Serie A is weak, but the gap isn’t as big as some would have imagined during late 90s to early 2000s. In mid 80s there a bigger gap, in mid late 90s to early 2000, it’s more or less even out with other top leagues.
I’ll give you another example, Vialli best seasons in Serie A and Italy is 33, 23, 22 throughout late 80s and early mid 90s respectively, his best season in PL and England is 19,11,10 during mid late 90s. Sure you could argue he was no longer in his peak during his time in England. But still, the difference isn’t really shown in both examples I’ve given here.
Another example, Asprilla best season was 16 goals in Italy during early mid 90s, he best season in England only score 9 goals in mid 90s too.
So so many examples here, how do you explain them all? How many more excuses you could come up with to defend such claim, which just isn’t true in reality?
And of course you could name a lot of other excuses why they didn’t score many goals outside Serie A too, but plain truth is, all of them failed to score as many! Don’t forget I am merely replying to someone who claimed Serie A is million times tougher during that period of time, and Batistuta could have easily score 50 goals outside of Serie A etc. which is clearly not the case here. It’s only from their pure fantasy and imagination that those 20-30 goals strikers in Serie A could score 50 goals elsewhere. Truth is, they all failed, every single one of them failed to justify such claim.
Last edited:
I mean if it’s so easy for Ronaldo and Messi to get the numbers they get these days then why is it only those two that achieve them? Outside of Haaland who is threatening to, no one comes close to those two at their peak