Michael Jackson was basically Ed Sheeran, you are just letting nostalgia cloud your vision buddy.I gave up once I saw how either by intention or ignorance how poorly Mr stats was using and interpreting stats.
What I've learned however is memory and experience equals nostalgia. Michael Jackson really wasn't a mega star and Jordan was a fraud.
Would Ronaldo have been so adored if he played football in this current era
- Thread starter Sir Erik ten Hag
- Start date
Ronaldo is clearly a different case. Not only was he the very best player in the world, unlike those you have mentioned, but he didn’t just peak and tail off. He had a career changing injury, the worst knee injury the doc had ever seen. It’s a unique case we are talking about.
And again, I have not once claimed he had a better career than anyone.
Players running more won't necessarily mean that another Maradona or Messi will appear anytime soon.
Messi and Maradona are way more than just running, they have magic dribbling, goat passing, and goat playmaking, goat vision...those are things you don't get by training hard, using modern medicine, eating very healthy, or abusing PEDs.
You are reducing football talent to running, having great stamina, and being more athletic.
Japan still hasn't developed a proper top talent to play in a top team after so many years of investment in the game, so as you can see it's not as easy as "just eat healthier and train hard"...cause natural talent is way more than just running more kms per game.
Last edited:
Didn't know this! Is it very high in athletics/sprinters, or is it one of the things they tend to lack? (ps. I'd imagine every elite level footballers have knee MRIs as part of the medical?)
Those are the kinda opponents that CR7 scored 90% of his goals at international level.
So it goes the same for everyone.
You care too much about what average people on social media think.
Average people do and say stupid shit all the time, and the average football fan is stupid as well.
It's possible to have a proper discussion about football without giving all the manchildren of football Twitter any importance, as if their dumb opinions/trolling set a precedent.
A geriatric past his peak Leo Messi just won the WC with one of the best individual tournaments of the last 50 years.
There is simply no excuse. Include his peak and why he has never taken any Euros by storm? 10 International tournaments and not a single player of the tournament award (Leo has 4). Shambolic return.
I'm convinced he's that SportingCP guy that hasn't been seen on here in ages just using a different account.
I mean "better" as R9's international career was better than his club career.I stopped reading when the OP said R9 had ‘arguably’ had a better international career than Zlatan. Who’s arguing against that
I saw him last week backing Palhinha again. He's not wrong, mind. Would have been an upgrade on this year's McT.
Oh yeh your right, I thought he was gone altogether!
Probably more-so.
There's plenty of people who thinks it's sacrilege to suggest he was more talented than CR7.
There's plenty of people who thinks it's sacrilege to suggest he was more talented than CR7.
That CR7 internet brigate PR per post payment must be very good, “better dribbler than R9”, “compared to Pele and Maradona”, “Better international career than R9”, “Barca/Argentina rigged the refs/fifa”
Time to put this another way
Lionel Messi Scored 47 goals in 2009/10
R9 Scored 47 goals in 1996/97
Messi 2009/10 scored 2 penalties
R9 1996/97 Scored 6 penalties
Messi 2009/10 scored 8 goals in the CL
R9 1996/97 Scored 6 goals in the UEFA CUP
Messi 2009/10 provided 17 assists in all comps
R9 1996/97 provided 12 assists in all comps
Messi 09/10 completed 5~ dribbles per 90 in la liga and around the same in the CL.
there simply no evidence R9 was ever this devastatingly consistent as a dribbler during even one season of his career
Messi 2009/10 Scored more impressive solo goals then R9 did in la liga 1996/97 and was obviously a vastly superior playmaker at the exact same time
If I am exaggerating someone can feel to correct me
Now I’m done comparing the two and with ALL these advantages I’ve listed for Messi ahead of R9
Bear the following in mind
Lionel Messis 2009/10 avg match rating in the league/champions league combined was
8.56
Cristiano Ronaldos 2009/10 avg match rating in in the league+CL combined was
8.50
That is a difference of 0.06 points
An insignificant difference made even more insignificant by the fact that Cristiano Ronaldo 2009/10 played against 90% of the exact same opponents as Messi in 2009/10
If you put R9 96/97 through one of these algorithms does he match Messi 09/10?
We know that cristiano did
Does R9 96/97 create more than Messi 09/10?
We know that cristiano Ronaldo did
Was R9 1996/97 more important to his team is terms of match winning performances?
We know that cristiano definitely was (if not more)
My case is simple
we have a perceived GOAT level talent in Lionel Messi putting up roughly the exact same statistics(47 goals each)at roughly the same age (22 vs 20) and playing in the same country(albeit different era) as R9
Objectively Cristiano matches this perceived GOAT talent in this one season
Taking the facts and what we know about Cristiano
I would like to know if anyone here genuinely thinks R9 96/97 going head to head with Messi 2009/10 does the same thing.
Or even better?
That is the way to finalise and answer this question
Lionel Messi Scored 47 goals in 2009/10
R9 Scored 47 goals in 1996/97
Messi 2009/10 scored 2 penalties
R9 1996/97 Scored 6 penalties
Messi 2009/10 scored 8 goals in the CL
R9 1996/97 Scored 6 goals in the UEFA CUP
Messi 2009/10 provided 17 assists in all comps
R9 1996/97 provided 12 assists in all comps
Messi 09/10 completed 5~ dribbles per 90 in la liga and around the same in the CL.
there simply no evidence R9 was ever this devastatingly consistent as a dribbler during even one season of his career
Messi 2009/10 Scored more impressive solo goals then R9 did in la liga 1996/97 and was obviously a vastly superior playmaker at the exact same time
If I am exaggerating someone can feel to correct me
Now I’m done comparing the two and with ALL these advantages I’ve listed for Messi ahead of R9
Bear the following in mind
Lionel Messis 2009/10 avg match rating in the league/champions league combined was
8.56
Cristiano Ronaldos 2009/10 avg match rating in in the league+CL combined was
8.50
That is a difference of 0.06 points
An insignificant difference made even more insignificant by the fact that Cristiano Ronaldo 2009/10 played against 90% of the exact same opponents as Messi in 2009/10
If you put R9 96/97 through one of these algorithms does he match Messi 09/10?
We know that cristiano did
Does R9 96/97 create more than Messi 09/10?
We know that cristiano Ronaldo did
Was R9 1996/97 more important to his team is terms of match winning performances?
We know that cristiano definitely was (if not more)
My case is simple
we have a perceived GOAT level talent in Lionel Messi putting up roughly the exact same statistics(47 goals each)at roughly the same age (22 vs 20) and playing in the same country(albeit different era) as R9
Objectively Cristiano matches this perceived GOAT talent in this one season
Taking the facts and what we know about Cristiano
I would like to know if anyone here genuinely thinks R9 96/97 going head to head with Messi 2009/10 does the same thing.
Or even better?
That is the way to finalise and answer this question
The formatting is as bad as the content. Is your return button jammed? It's enough to give Office Assistant an aneurysm.
where even am I.
In a universe where adulation is based on stats. For example if a defender executes 0.02 more tackles per game then people start ogling their spreadsheets and increase their adulation.
This thread is actually kind of enlightening. It’s fascinating to find out that there are lots of people that watch the same sport you do for completely different reasons.
It's not.
Last edited:
What I perceive is objective, unbiased and therefore correct. What others perceive by actually watching all of the involved players play live is subjective and incorrect.
I wonder if people who post things like this make a grin when they press "Post Reply" and think to themselves "There. That will teach them!"
I wonder if people who post things like this make a grin when they press "Post Reply" and think to themselves "There. That will teach them!"
Ok stat boys, do whatever you will with your stats and top goats and algorithms. I don't get it but if it brings you some happiness then great.
But know this: Ronaldo of the 9 is adored by old farts like me, largely because he burst onto the football stage with the power and ability to crush defenders and goalkeepers single-handedly. He was brilliantly talented but more than that he was something amazing to watch. He was not promising, precocious, learning the ropes or the future, he was the dominant now. Aged 19-20 he was the best, wherever he went, just give him the ball. I'd never seen it before, I have yet to see it again - And no amount of numbers or charts can convince me otherwise. Physically he was crushing but with a skill and nimbleness you could only dream of. Nostalgia sure, but pull up those youtube clips and that is still a 20 year old doing that to and against established teams. The footage hasn't been doctored.
If a teenager came along tomorrow and started doing what Ronaldo was doing back then, with that skill, power and style, then the world of football would be in awe. If they had the same temperament then he would surely be similarly adored.
Ronaldo is a story of dazzling ability, heartbreak, redemption and a giant heap of regret at what could have been. It all helps build this romantic narrative around his career. However it was the wonder at seeing him play early in his career that is largely responsible for the gushing adoration. He was alien.
So enjoy your stats and trophy counts and 'he had the better career' titles because Ronaldo was amazing and I will always adore that fat fecker.
But know this: Ronaldo of the 9 is adored by old farts like me, largely because he burst onto the football stage with the power and ability to crush defenders and goalkeepers single-handedly. He was brilliantly talented but more than that he was something amazing to watch. He was not promising, precocious, learning the ropes or the future, he was the dominant now. Aged 19-20 he was the best, wherever he went, just give him the ball. I'd never seen it before, I have yet to see it again - And no amount of numbers or charts can convince me otherwise. Physically he was crushing but with a skill and nimbleness you could only dream of. Nostalgia sure, but pull up those youtube clips and that is still a 20 year old doing that to and against established teams. The footage hasn't been doctored.
If a teenager came along tomorrow and started doing what Ronaldo was doing back then, with that skill, power and style, then the world of football would be in awe. If they had the same temperament then he would surely be similarly adored.
Ronaldo is a story of dazzling ability, heartbreak, redemption and a giant heap of regret at what could have been. It all helps build this romantic narrative around his career. However it was the wonder at seeing him play early in his career that is largely responsible for the gushing adoration. He was alien.
So enjoy your stats and trophy counts and 'he had the better career' titles because Ronaldo was amazing and I will always adore that fat fecker.
This is what they don’t seem to comprehend.
Because they are not football fans, they are Ronaldo, or Messi, or whoever fans and must present an argument for why their guy is the best. As if it matters, will steal an NBA phrase, box score watchers stealing all the joy from the experience.
If you watched Ronaldo you knew, he was not normal.
Messi and Cristiano fans have been so taken by the debate that they have become micro analysts in football. They don’t enjoy football, I’m sure of it. The guy in here had 3 times as many posts as anyone else and posted for 9 hours straight about the topic. It’s an obsession not a passion.
I can’t get into the mindset of anyone who judges football through stats alone. They have their place in the game but Imagine watching R9 or Ronaldinho and not being utterly dazzled and adoring them for it. It’s depressing to think that anyone could feel this way about the sport they love. That applies to any sport, not just football.
Yep. Especially in a thread that explicitly isn’t a GOAT debate. The fact that it’s about the feelings football can evoke is in the damn title.
Ronaldinho is a great example. The man got a standing ovation from the Bernabeu. You can reduce that down to ‘scored two goals’ if you want to, but by that point, why even watch games at all?
Just to add to the excellent few posts above, Ronaldo was like a gift to the world when he came along. He had people tuning in all over the globe simply to watch him and even though he may not have played for your team, you still wanted to see him do well because he was a phenom.
Opponents were terrified, teammates and managers were amazed. He simply had something that we hadn’t seen before and you couldn’t wait until his next match to see him do it again.
His stats, by the way, were pretty amazing back then, but it wasn’t all about that, it was the feeling he give you whether you were with him or against him. You can’t quantify that when it comes to judging a player’s career.
We were robbed of more due to his injuries, but he still did amazingly well and stood toe to toe with all the other top strikers of that era after his painstaking rehabilitation, which just goes to prove how good he really was pre injury.
Opponents were terrified, teammates and managers were amazed. He simply had something that we hadn’t seen before and you couldn’t wait until his next match to see him do it again.
His stats, by the way, were pretty amazing back then, but it wasn’t all about that, it was the feeling he give you whether you were with him or against him. You can’t quantify that when it comes to judging a player’s career.
We were robbed of more due to his injuries, but he still did amazingly well and stood toe to toe with all the other top strikers of that era after his painstaking rehabilitation, which just goes to prove how good he really was pre injury.
It's a good question. For example, Martial can do a lot of what Ronaldo can do, he can dribble, he can pass, he can finish. He's also often injured. But Martial isn't held that high in regard.
I think it's just a different era.
I think it's just a different era.
I'm hesitant to include both Di Stefano and Puskas, Football pre 60s was very prone to high scoring games, Averaging around 3.5GPG (Compared to the 2.5-2.8 GPG in Premier League/La Liga of the 00-10s), But i guess they fit the requirement. Cruyff didn't replicate the same output he did in Eredivisie when he played in Barcelona except 1973/74 season (Debut season). Liverpool Suarez is valid (Barcelona Suarez is a completely different player, More akin to a poacher than all rounder) but again, Only 1 season. Maradona in the Primera division had that kind of output which naturally dropped significantly when he moved to Europe so i'm not sure we're applying here the same standards i believe should be met in order to be classified as that type of player.
It is difficult to say definitively whether Ronaldo would have been as adored in the current era of football. There are certainly some factors that could work against him, such as his lack of domestic league success and his tendency to switch between rival clubs. However, there are also factors that could work in his favor. For example, his exceptional performances on the international stage, particularly in the 2002 World Cup, could have elevated his status even further in the eyes of fans.
Additionally, Ronaldo's sheer talent and ability to score goals in a variety of ways would likely still be appreciated by fans today. He was a truly unique player in his prime, with a combination of pace, power, and skill that few others could match. Even if he didn't win as many trophies as some other players, his individual brilliance on the pitch would likely still command respect and admiration.
Overall, while there are certainly some factors that could work against him, I believe that Ronaldo's talent and ability would still make him a highly regarded player in the current era of football. He may not have quite the same level of god-like status that he achieved in his prime, but he would still be remembered as one of the greatest players of his generation
I also think that Ronaldo would be better utilized playing in the super club era. The style of play and tactics have evolved over the years, and modern managers would certainly be able to build a team around Ronaldo's strengths. He was an incredible finisher, had a great turn of pace, and was able to dribble past defenders with ease. In today's game, where the emphasis is on possession-based football and creating chances through intricate passing and movement, Ronaldo would still be a valuable asset to any team.
Moreover, modern teams have access to advanced analytics and sports science, which could help identify and maximize Ronaldo's strengths. He was a powerful and explosive player, and with the right training and conditioning, he could have been even more of a dominant force in the game.
In conclusion, while it's difficult to say how Ronaldo would have fared in the current era of football, I believe that his incredible talent and abilities would have shone through, and he would still be considered one of the best players of all time.
Additionally, Ronaldo's sheer talent and ability to score goals in a variety of ways would likely still be appreciated by fans today. He was a truly unique player in his prime, with a combination of pace, power, and skill that few others could match. Even if he didn't win as many trophies as some other players, his individual brilliance on the pitch would likely still command respect and admiration.
Overall, while there are certainly some factors that could work against him, I believe that Ronaldo's talent and ability would still make him a highly regarded player in the current era of football. He may not have quite the same level of god-like status that he achieved in his prime, but he would still be remembered as one of the greatest players of his generation
I also think that Ronaldo would be better utilized playing in the super club era. The style of play and tactics have evolved over the years, and modern managers would certainly be able to build a team around Ronaldo's strengths. He was an incredible finisher, had a great turn of pace, and was able to dribble past defenders with ease. In today's game, where the emphasis is on possession-based football and creating chances through intricate passing and movement, Ronaldo would still be a valuable asset to any team.
Moreover, modern teams have access to advanced analytics and sports science, which could help identify and maximize Ronaldo's strengths. He was a powerful and explosive player, and with the right training and conditioning, he could have been even more of a dominant force in the game.
In conclusion, while it's difficult to say how Ronaldo would have fared in the current era of football, I believe that his incredible talent and abilities would have shone through, and he would still be considered one of the best players of all time.
True his knee injuries is the main reason why people tend to give him benefit of doubt and being nostalgistic when assessing L.Ronaldo.
But we also need to understand that L.Ronaldo during his post injuries years (2000-2011), barely even made into top 5 forward in the world at that time. I’d say Henry, Ruud, Shevchenko, Eto’o are all better CF than post injuries L.Ronaldo.
And I am not even counting the likes of Ronaldinho, Zidane, Rivaldo or Figo being better player too.
Hence, for majority of his career, he wasn’t among elite player in the world. Even though his pre injury form (which last for around 2-3 years) was quite a force of nature, and was pretty much comparable to the peak of Messi and Ronaldo.
Post-injury Ronaldo got a standing ovation at Old Trafford. Do you think they are handed out for fun?
He was always in the top tier, even as a shadow of himself. The reality was, post injury, he was containable and could only show glimpses of his brilliance, with that still being enough to have him in the top bracket.
I remembered that as I’ve watched that game live too. But that was just one game out of 300+ other games he had played during his post injuries period. Even Pogba has those dominating unplayable performances for us once in a while too. And I think I have watched a decade of his other games to come up with such assessment.
But don’t get me wrong, I think he is still among top 10-15 player in the world during his post injuries period, and probably among top 6-7 forward too. But just not among the very best of the era from 2000+ onwards.
96-98 - best player in the world. GOAT level.
99-01 - long injuries
02 - won WC and Ballon D’or. But I think his teammates are better (Rivaldo, Ronaldinho). I think the world simply owes him a Ballon D’or he deserves prior to his long injuries, hence it’s given to him that year.
03-04 - ranked 11th-12th in Ballon D’or
05-10 - not even shortlisted in top 30 in Ballon D’or
I think this pretty much aligns with my assessment of him during his post injuries years.
Last edited:
Post injury he wasn't the absolute best anymore, but he was still one of the best around until 2004.
It's not like he became irrelevant post 2000, he just wasn't the best anymore, and others were rated better than him.
Aye. I'd say there are three stages to his career:
- Pre-injury. Any time from 1994 to 1999 where he was an unstoppable force of nature. The penny dropped with wider audiences by 1995 (the game against England in particular) on just how good he was when it became clear he was revolutionising the centre-forward role.
- Post-injury. 2002 to 2004. As per your description above.
- Semi-retirement. After 2005 where the collection of physical (knees, thyroid, weight) and mental (motivation) issues finished him off.
@RedRonaldo this is pretty much it. His career had three distinct chapters for the wider audience.
Shevchenko was the biggest gun around at the time of stage 2, followed by Henry, and then there's a mix of strikers that Ronaldo sat comfortably in the company of. You can jostle for position amongst them, but the point would still remain: he was in the elite bracket still, just not head and shoulders above it like he was in stage 1 (per above). By stage 3, he wasn't Ronaldo anymore.
Here is one element totally absent from your analysis - The eye test.
Football isn't enjoyed through wikipedia. It's watched.
I spent my childhood and adolescence thinking that R9 was the GOAT. Watching clips of him destroying goalkeepers like Oliver Kahn and defenders like Maldini, Nesta, etc... Until the Messi/Ronaldo era arrived. At that age I was already older and understanding more about football. R9 enchanted me as well as Ronaldinho Gaúcho. But to do what Cristiano and Messi did year after year without any drop in performance... Maintain THAT level for 10 years. It's something R9 and R10 could never do. I don't know why but this always happens to Brazilians. Neymar, R9, R10, Adriano, They cannot maintain the peak level for that long. Most of them have inconsistency issues. Caused by injury or not. I think eyetest can play tricks on us sometimes. Because it's subjective. Each person likes to see something different from the other in football. And we tend to overvalue the past. Just see what happens when a player retires or dies. Automatically he already turns the goat of the position. Status he didn't have when playing. The evaluation of a soccer player's performance should be based on a broader analysis of his role in the team, his technical and tactical quality and his leadership capacity.