Yes you can
Would Ronaldo have been so adored if he played football in this current era
- Thread starter Sir Erik ten Hag
- Start date
Romario being better is debatable. But this post generally is nonsense.
Romario v Ronaldo is an interesting one, Sir Bobby Robson once said what Romario can from from 10 yards, Ronaldo can do from 30 (or something similar). But I know Brazilians who rate Romario a lot higher and vice versa. I missed a lot of Romario but my school friends all wanted to be him, until Ronaldo popped up.
Romario played a lot more in Brazil which may be part of the reason why some Brazilians rate him more. Also, he didn't have the injuries so his career numbers in terms of games and goals are much higher. Romario is definitely an all time great but whether he was better than Ronaldo is open to question. They were both awesome.
I’ve you were in a lab and were tasked to make the most perfect striker with regard attributes what he could do etc. The closest you could get is R9.
he was strong he was explosive he was skilful he could be rough he was equally good with either foot. Good in the air, could hit free kicks could hold up and bring others into game he could score wordies and follow up with a potchers goals as striker there was nothing he didn’t have.
I was lucky to be at old Trafford the time he score the hat trick. When I watch the game back he didn’t really have many touches that day but when he did he was devastating and that was him basically on the way out.
he was strong he was explosive he was skilful he could be rough he was equally good with either foot. Good in the air, could hit free kicks could hold up and bring others into game he could score wordies and follow up with a potchers goals as striker there was nothing he didn’t have.
I was lucky to be at old Trafford the time he score the hat trick. When I watch the game back he didn’t really have many touches that day but when he did he was devastating and that was him basically on the way out.
Unplayable, until he played at a World Cup.
Yeah the same way r9 was unplayable then managed 14 goals in 40 champions league games. Its a vague statement that makes absolutely no sense. Because at their peak, there's thousands of players that have been unplayable for a single game, when they've scored hat tricks or just had absolutely incredible performances, so saying, at his peak, r9 was unplayable is essentially meaningless
Average People on social media make up a massive part of worldwide football fans, so to ask whether a player would be universally adored, then ignore a massive chunk of social media that suggests he wouldn't isn't really correct.
Is that part even debatable? Unless you think they were paying millions to the vice president of referees for a laugh
A lot of R9's CL record is post-injury and it's been said numerous times that 'super teams' weren't prevalent back in R9's day as they are now. Goal-scoring was down for generally everyone.
Ronaldo though is apparently 'the greatest goal scorer ever, the greatest player ever, most clutch player ever', but has not performed at a World Cup, has no player of the tournament awards at the World Cup or Euros(never even finished top 3 at the World Cup), and has no knockout goals at a world cup. And people will continue to find excuses for why he's failed to do what I said.
They'll bring up Portugal aren't a team with World Cup 'heritage', but completely ignore that critiques leveled at Ronaldo are more about performances and not Portugal winning the WC itself.
I don't disagree with this but the world cup is a tournament that takes place over a month every 4 years, an injury (like he was carrying in 2014) can basically wreck your chances of performing for 4 years. I mean people are including the games he played at this world cup at the age of 37 as his total, or in 2006 before he'd even scored a champions league goal, asking why he hadn't performed in knockout ties. A 35 year old Messi outperformed a 23 year old Messi but is anyone stupid enough to suggest Messi was a better player at 35 than at 23 just because he had a better world cup?
He could have had better performances but one tournament that takes place every 4 years isn't the best judge of players.
The super team accusation is so dull, after ronadlo left, despite keeping every other player, they only managed 63 goals and got knocked out by ajax after making 8 straight semi finals, that team owed a lot more to Ronaldo than he did to them
But the World Cup is the sport's prestige and Ronaldo has simply not performed. It's not that he's not even in the running for best player, he's never even had a 'good' WC campaign.
Ronaldo Nazario had a WC campaign where he was the best player throughout the tournament(until his unfortunate seizure prior to the'98 final) and even his diminished self in the 2002 World Cup was very good(only probably bested by Kahn's performances until the final ironically).
When people want to prop Ronaldo into the Messi, Pele, Maradona territory, you can't ignore his WC failings.
I mean Real Madrid definitely struggled without Ronaldo initially, but how has Ronaldo done in the Champions League without them? They won a CL without him and Ronaldo's never even sniffed the semi-finals since leaving. I'm not going to diminish his effect on their 3-peat success in the CL, but we can't just ignore the fact that top teams now are typically filled with more world class players than they were back in R9's day. If you're going to cite the original Galacticos as a rebuttal, my rebuttal is that they contained a R9 clearly past his best, a Beckham clearly past his best and Perez foolishly letting Makelele go hampered that team's success.
Messi at 35 years old is obviously not as good as 23 year old Messi, but Messi's inability to stamp his mark on Argentina at the WC and be an inspirational figure that inspires them to play above and beyond was definitely a fair criticism IMO. And even me as a Messi fan, I always felt like he needed a WC run(like the one he had) in his CV. I was very critical of his failings in the World Cup prior to 2022.
I just can't see why the world cup changes your opinion of Messi, he's performed agaisnnt the top defences for 15 years, but getting past Saudi Arabia, Poland, Mexico, Australia, Netherlands Croatia and France somehow changes his legacy as player? I know the world cup is a huge tournament but when you're discussing the quality of a player 7 games against, if we're generous, OK standard of opposition isn't the best barometer. Ronaldo was 33 when he left them, he reached 3 CL semis in a row before joining them and 2 finals in a row, and they hadn't reached a semi final in 7 years until Ronaldo joined
Perhaps it seems nonsensical until you go deeper in analysis. These games carry a different weight. You've got the weight of a nation pretty much on your shoulders.
You've shown an ability to be by far the best player in the world under circumstances that help achieve greater levels of consistency for players.
Once these circumstances differ, there's been a dip in performances compared to your best Barcelona self.
But it's not about the success itself. It's the performances with the added pressure(pressure that is different than the one he had with Barcelona or even PSG). You don't get as much time with your national team as you do with your club team. There's less structure involved. Less familiarity with the players and coaching staff. The routine is different. Everything is different. You need to establish the platform yourself in a way and spearhead the group. You need to be this inspirational figure that galvanizes an entire nation. And I never felt like he did so until this past WC. I thought he was their best player in every single game and he stepped up every single time when they needed him.
Right, But all these things add an artifical level of difficulty the quality of your opposition isn't any higher there are just handicaps put on you thsy aren't evenly distributed, Ronaldo had Santos, a dour, defensive, manager for 8 years who would never have lasted thay long at a club side. It's certainly different and performing in that environment perhaps makes you more adaptable, but as for judging a player's quality it's like when those south Americam teams go yo bolivia and they struggle with the altitude. It might be more difficult to perform under those conditions but itt doesn't make it a better judge of quality or a higher level of football.
If r9 played 7 or 8 seasons now in the top 3 leagues , won no champions leagues, one league title and a world cup, he'd probably get cult hero status, but he'd also get loads of criticism for not performing on a consistent basis, fsr more than he did at the time
Do you guys think R9 will excel in EPL ?
The comparison between Cristiano and Messi/R9 (Or whatever all time great) in the WorldCup was always extremely unfair, Messi/R9 played in NTs that were among the favourites to win every single tournament, Very attacking oriented sides that could take a lot of load from Messi/R9. Regardless of Portugal being overall considerably inferior side, Just take a look at Portugal squad during 2010-2014 (Cristiano peak), There was nobody that could help Cristiano upfront and take from his attacking load, We're talking here about a player who used to majorly play with Liedson and Danny as attacking partners (In 2010 they were starters too in almost every single fecking game!), At best with Hugo Almeida, Postiga and if he was lucky, Injury free or out of shape Nani (In 2010 Nani didn't even play, In 2014 we're talking here about a player that played 6 matches in full united season prior to the world cup), Now compare it to Prime Di Maria, Higuain, Aguero, Tevez, Diego Milito, Lavezzi, I don't even need to elaborate on R9 partners. ffs even Argentina/Brazil bench was leagues above anything Portugal had to offer in their starting 11.
The point is, Excluding Cristiano, I would argue Portugal was one of the worst attacking sides in both WorldCup 2010 and 2014, Lining it against R9 or Messi attacking partners makes the whole comparison seem is insane. Also, I would add that Cristiano in 2010 was predominantly positioned as a RW, A clearly disadvantageous position for a right footer when it comes to finding the net, In 2014 he played with injury, It's a known fact, I believe it was the same injury that made him worse dribbler/shooter permanently.
Last edited:
Has it been proven in court? There are many potential reasons for paying the vp of referees, one being money laundering, which I feel is the more likely reason even if it has not been proven.
What happened to innocent until proven guilty, of course its guilty until proven innocent for you with anything relating to Messi.
I like how you say “even debatable” as if you are the judge and jury.
Last edited:
"What happened to innocent until proven guilty" didn't la liga change the rules just before the story broke to limit their powers to a time outside the window where Barca were paying refs? I mean innocent until proven guilty is the standard for a criminal conviction, you're allowed to think someone is guilty based on the available evidence. Which you've also done thinking they guilty of money laundering. It is really odd that a top club pays a senior referee and you think that it being for refereeing favours is implausible
Notice, I think it may be money laundering, it can also be bribing/rigging, but I cannot say it as a fact because it is unproven, unlike your “is it even debatable”.
Like you, I have no supporting evidence to prove it or otherwise, or do you have actual proof to confidently say it is not even debatable? If so, show us the proof and bring it to the investigators, I am sure they will be convicted tomorrow.
Do you even notice how low level your logic is? Let me give you another example of this low level logic. “CR7 is guilty of raping the women in Lv, is it even debatable? Do you think he paid hush money for fun?”. Yup it is this low level.
Last edited:
Tbf in your first post you said that people suggesting Barca rigged the refs must be paid PR people, I think the idea that a club paying the vice president of referees for years who seemed to benefit massively in terms of red cards for and against and penalties for and agaisnt during those years, wouldn't just limited to paid PR people
So at the end of the day, your “not even debatable” statement is not even based on concrete proof or professional investigation, but just based on some “maybes?”, some hot air, probably some echo chamber talk and likely your own agenda to discredit Messi.
Apply that low level logic to the CR7 rape case and did you get the same conclusion? I am pretty certain it is a no because its CR7 right? Did he paid the hush money for laughs?
Well I guess the difference is that celebrities often pay hush money to stop bad stories coming out whether true or false, whereas no other club paid the vice president of referees.
Though that hasn't stopped plenty of people referring to him as a rapist, and if you believe he is then that's up to you.
But tbh no I don't think it's debatable that a team that paid the vice president of referees for years, stopped paying him when he left that post, and received a disproportionate number of beneficial decisions like red cards and penalties during that time period can be described as rigging the refs. I think you'd need to have quite a biased agenda yourself to suggest it's more likely a club with over a billion in revenue was having to launder 7 million pounds by paying the vice president of referees
Once again, do you have concrete evidence on that? Otherwise it is nothing but hearsay and hotair.
1) How did you know the money is for bribing the referees?
2) Which decisions were directly affected by that money?
3) Which are the refs that are directly implicated and guilty of taking bribe money and awarding favourable decisions to them?
Tell us and send the evidence to the authorities, what is not debatable to me is you do not have any actual answers, otherwise you will be in Spain assisting with investigations at the moment. Hotair and I rest my case.
Remember the social media hype around Mbappe because he was so incredible fast and scored that regularly at such a young age? Or how clips of Neymar's skill were all over YouTube and Facebook when he was 18 years old at Santos?
Ronaldo was both mixed together and more. Young R9 these days would be in every Instagram and TikTok reel. The idea that he'd be less adored is really silly.
And imagine the conspiracy theories on the mysterious sickness story before the WC final against France in the social media age. Jesus
Ronaldo was both mixed together and more. Young R9 these days would be in every Instagram and TikTok reel. The idea that he'd be less adored is really silly.
And imagine the conspiracy theories on the mysterious sickness story before the WC final against France in the social media age. Jesus
This is just nonsense. There's plenty of jobs in the UK likethe civil service where you'd have declare potential conflicts of interest and breaching that is a serious matter. The idea that if you don't have the resources of the Spanish authorities at your disposal you can't say that one of the biggest clubs having an exclusive relationship with the vice president of referees where they paid him millions was a massive conflict of interest and was an attempt to rig the referees is an idea of someone with a huge agenda.
I like the way you admit that you do not have the resources of government agencies even though agencies with actual resources cannot even confirm the fact that they rigged the refs.
At the end of the day, it is your belief that Barca rigged the ref, but you do not have any actual evidence, just your beliefs. So don’t come here with the “not even debatable” as if it is a fact.
What happens if the investigators found that the money was not used for rigging but for other shady purposes? Or if the money was not enough or the person bribed was not powerful enough for an actual rig? Are you going to tell the authorities that “it is not even debatable, your investigation is flawed”?
It is evident enough that you have nothing but a belief, end of story
The same authorities that had bags of blood incriminating plenty of Spanish athletes in the fuentes case a decade ago destoryed? No I might not take their word for it
Yet you have no problems believing them when they said that Barca paid the VP refs..it seems like you select what you want to believe from the authorities because you want your “undebatable fact” to be simply true.
Again, you are someone with little resources and hence have nothing but hearsay, yet you believe you can already conclude versus those with actual resources and are actually investigating, laughable.
You just want an asterisk to messi’s club achievements, that is the way you cope with your idol’s inferiority. Cope harder
Last edited:
He was just so explosive. Looking at some of the attempted 'tackles' that were aimed at him, they just wouldn't fly today. R9 would be unplayable still if he were playing now. At the peak of his powers he was possibly the best striker of all time.
Not getting punished doesn't equal to 'innocent'.
Juventus never got punished for doping , war criminals like Bush and Obama aren't in jail, Trump most likely won't go to jail either, and City most likely will get out clean from all the mess too, we can talk about shady Nestle, and the list goes on.
I like Messi, but Barca is a corrupt club, so is Real Madrid.
The motto 'innocent until proven guilty', it's just bullshit for many cases where powerful institutions/politicians/businessmen get away with everything because of their power.
Ya sure, no doubt to me something is shady there, but jumping into conclusions that that “shady” is successfully rigging with zilch or just a belief?
At the end of the day, all of us are none the wiser, so instead of jumping into conclusions like the CR7 fanbase did, why not wait for the investigation results.
Last edited:
There are already a lot of conspiracy theories around that incident, though.
I think he obviously would have still been adored. I don't think he'd have been able to keep up with Messi and CR7's numbers, which might have made him a bit more like a Neymar (he was better than Neymar in his prime to clarify) in terms of being considered the 3rd best player in the world instead of the undisputed best in the world like he was for a while (maybe some would have debated Zidane instead but in general I think most would have said Ronaldo was the best player between 1997 and 2002, I certainly would).
You do hear some people who grew up watching him as their 1st superstar saying he was better than Messi and CR7. I do think in reality this probably would have been disproven if he was playing at the same time, whereas now they have the lens of nostalgia to convince them otherwise.
You do hear some people who grew up watching him as their 1st superstar saying he was better than Messi and CR7. I do think in reality this probably would have been disproven if he was playing at the same time, whereas now they have the lens of nostalgia to convince them otherwise.
Football has been through a peak in terms of an individual's ability to excite in my opinion, people loved R9 not just because he scored goals but because he ran at people and was a dribbler. Haaland is boring as hell, I can appreciate he's a supreme goal scorer but I don't think he's exciting, kind of like Shearer, I respect the hell out of him but I'd much rather pay money to watch Henry, to witness a bit of magic from time to time. Look at Maradona, his stats aren't that amazing compared to some of today's players but he is inarguably better than all but two of them (and arguably still better than those two).
Football used to be about entertainment and expression with the ball whilst trying to win, it's almost exclusively about winning now. Ironically managers who the media say are exciting make made it all about risk vs return, you almost never see players really have a go at their opposition unless they are in a very safe area to do, when was the last time someone got properly done by some skill in a 1 vs 1? Players like R9 would sadly get moulded into different players to what we grew up watching, there'd be a post on redcaf saying Ings would be a safer bet than R9 because he presses off the ball or something equally as ridiculous.
It's much, much easier to score now. Fenomeno would be the best player in the world now. He'd outscore Halaand.
Yep, pele/maradonna level if not for his knee injuries. Dont think ive seen a player since with his explosive pace, combined with balance and ball control at speed. Just mezmerising.
Messi might be the best dribbler of all time, so I don't agree with your point. R9 was a better dribbler than CR7 imo because he could keep the ball closer to his foot. That being said CR7 used skills which would surely be about entertainment and expression? Neymar, Vini Jr and Kvaratskelia, even Mitoma for Brighton are all very talented dribblers and entertaining to watch. I still get excited watching Mbappe. There are still plenty of those type of players, tactics have got miles better though, which has no doubt helped defenders learn how to deal with them better than before when they basically just kicked them as much as possible.
If Maradona was a pundit after he retired football will still be talked of in terms of expression and edge of sit moments. Instead, such artist hardly ever go unto that side of football and we’re left with former players that made no significant impact on football in their generation.
I believe there should be some sort of snobbery in who should be a pundit. Just listen to Henry describe a Salah move and Carragher do it, the disconnect is so obvious. I’m not shitting on Carragher or guy like him but they can’t appreciate something they are incapable of imagining, let alone execute. So as time goes on they’ll gradually render it irrelevant to the game.
After that Rant, I’d say Ronaldo was awful with his head and whenever he headed a goal it was news. How is a striker like that going fare in football today?