Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by Rado_N, Jan 20, 2015.
Don't think anyone else has thought to compare these two if I'm honest.
I am sure there are debates within the season to say Ronaldo has had better ones than Messi, and arguments on ballon d'or, but I don't think in the GOAT debate, Ronaldo is as highly held as Messi in other sections.
=Messi 9851 votes Ronaldo 7428
=Messi 62% ronaldo 38%
=Messi 58% Ronaldo 42% from 13834 votes
Messi 63% Ronaldo 34% 2%unsure 1% someone else
These are 4 of the first results from a Messi v ronaldo poll search on google. Unanimous
Taken his country further into the World Cup than the 40+ years previously?
Are you a Trump fan by any chance? Internet polls are about as accurate as Trump tweets.
Messi outperformed Ronaldo last season? where was he when his team needed him against Juve?
Its just as staggering that the best finisher is also the best header and best athlete in the world.
Messi has been playing false 9, since when is that a midfield position?
I'd say the one i purposefully left out waiting for you to crawl into the thread again is the most important one.
How anyone can analyze the stats on this website and surmise anything other than Messi being the better player from a statistical standpoint is beyond me. Remove the names and the knowledge, you're presented with these stats... who do you pick? the guy with 32 more assists than the guy who's played 155 more games than him? or the other guy.
Over 300,000 votes in this poll and its 59% to 41% in favour of Messi. You can't liken it to a political opinion poll. This is too broad, and factually accurate.
Sorry this might be a debate for a different thread as I was not trying to imply that Ronaldo has done massively better himself. But I have always been a fan of International football tournaments and World cup is the biggest stage for me. As for International tournaments coming every four years, Messi played 3 International tournaments final consecutively and its not actually very different from the number of CL finals he has played. In general my point is that playing as the talisman of a side which is not filled to brim with superstars gives you a chance to show your individual class a bit more. As much praise as Messi gets for his club performances (and rightly so) it has to be remembered that he was playing with the core of the Spanish team that dominated International scene like few teams before with back to back Euros and a World cup and it was as much Xavi/Iniesta/Busquests and Pep'e tiki taka revolution as Messi that was behind all those trophies. Him leading Argentina to championship in Copas or World cups would have gone a long way to dispel the belief that he can do it without an all conquering supporting cast.
I really want to reiterate that this is not in any way a proof that Ronaldo has been better but despited of what we as Messi fans want to believe, Argentina had a damn good team, especially in SA with Brazil going through dark periods. Take it this way I think Messi is the best player to ever kick a football but if I have to pick a team to won a tournament without knowing rest of the cast I would never pick him above say Maradona, Pele, Platini or Zidane and most of this is because of their International success.
How much further? Would we value Pele, Maradona and all the past greats if they had just taken their countries much further but not actually to a final or silverware?
I mean Turkey won a 3rd place at a WC, so did Croatia. Hardly better teams at the time than current Portugal. Did Portugal get that far at a WC?
At least Messi came close. Losing a final against a rock solid Germany who beat Brasil on their turf 7-0.
I don't really understand your point in what does it prove for Ronaldo over Messi?
If statistics are something you don't like, then there is not much else to go by and for better or worse, Messi has simply been a phenomenal player as has Ronaldo, but with Messi edging it since he is so allround and truly a once in a lifetime talented player. Ronaldo I would say is the more complete athlete, but for me not the better footballer per se.
Messi is younger, has better statistics, came closer than Ronaldo to a World Cup and is the scary thing, at 30, he still has got a couple of years ahead of him to completely cement his status as the GOAT.
So you're basing your whole Messi is better view on the fact that Barca were a better side than Sporting and that Messi was played centrally earlier than Ronaldo?
Basing it more on the 300,000+ votes in the poll. 59-41 is conclusive enough. If you can think of a better way of deciding who a better player is than pretty much the entire population of Lexington Kentucky voting on one specific thing, im all ears.
Between 1965 and 2006, Portugal only qualified for 2 WCs and failed to make it past the group stage both times.
With Ronaldo they made the SF, how is that not significant? Compare that to Argentina, who have qualified and made the knockout stage and further most of the time with or without Messi.
Messi only has better stats than Ronaldo because he played for a dominant Barca side in a goal scoring position much much earlier.
These are great points Cal. I don't think anyone would ever consider Portugal to win the WC or Euros irrespective of who plays for them, and yet they have done quite well. Argentina on the other hand, have not quite reached their potential based on the players they have had over the past decade or so.
Back to your internet vote?
I'm lost for words
Exactly, most people think of Portugal as one of the better teams in europe nowadays because of Ronaldo. Before him they fail to make the WC most of the time.
I've said on numerous occasions that I think Ronaldo is the best European player I've seen in 50+ years of watching football but Portugal did in fact make to the WC semis in 1966 losing to England where Bobby Charlton (wor Bobby) scored both goals.
They were thought of as one of the better teams in Europe before Ronaldo had emerged. They made the semis of Euro 2000 and took a great France team to extra time. They topped a tough WC 2002 qualifying group that saw Holland eliminated before underperforming in the finals, and they were third favourites with the bookies going into Euro 2004. That's not to deny Ronaldo's impact in keeping them relevant as the 'golden generation' faded away, but they were hardly no marks before he came along.
All this silly stats and figures. All you need to do is open your eyes and realise; Messi is simply better at kicking a ball around a pitch. Plain and simple.
Sure Ronaldo is good too, he works incredibly hard and scores a metric ton of goals. He's like the Terminator, but Messi is the T-1000.
He comfortably outscored him. Barca were poor however so he didn't win the league or CL. Anyway I'm not going to enter into a debate with you. You've been at this Ronaldo worship crap for years. I know you'll never change your mind or listen to anyone.
It should be that easy. The best way to judge players is still to watch them play. To watch both players free of bias is to admit Messi is a better footballer and be ok with that. But people have favourites and will drag out any od metric to argue for them.
That 1965 was supposed to say 1966, problems with typing in the phone
So they've gone from qualifying twice from 1967 to 2005, to qualifying every single time since then.
As for Euros, 2002 he was there and they made the final.
That's exactly the problem with the Messi fan brigade. The think of their opinions as facts.
Im not a Messi fan whatsoever. I just think he's easily better. I detest Real slightly less than Barca and like united so if anything I should be biased the other way around.
Have you not consistently changed your justification of why Ronaldo is better based on the past season or two for the past 7 years, just to keep Ronaldo ahead of Messi? It's fine to think Ronaldo is better if you want, but at least have a consistent reasoning.
It's not about Messi specifically Cal?. What's implicit when people say things like 'All you need to do is open your eyes and realise; Messi is simply better' or 'the best way to judge players is still to watch them play. To watch both players free of bias is to admit Messi is a better footballer...', is that he embodies what most people regard as the highest attributes in the game. No amount of stats are going to change that.
What you should be arguing is that Ronaldo's qualities and attributes should be regarded on an equal footing.
There's a lot more to football than when the ball is at your feet. With the ball at his feet Messi is better than Cristiano, there's no doubt about that
I don't have an issue with people who think Messi are better, only those who state their opinions as facts.
Example: 'All you need to do is open your eyes and realise; Messi is simply better'
Unlike Messi fans who go on and on about dribbling all the time, Ronaldo excels at different facets of the game.
That's exactly the problem with the Messi brigade, they state their opinions as facts, disregard every evidence that points the opposite direction.
Incidently, Messi scored 2 goals last night and everyone got all excited. Ronaldo just scored 2 and it's just business as usual
You cannot be fecking serious. LOOK AT THE OPPOSITION.
That wasn't the point I made.
This post sums up your problem.
I mean even ignoring the opposition, the two goals also display the difference between the two players as a whole.
Dude come on, this is just wumming
You mean Juventus, the team Ronaldo scored 2 goals against in the CL final a few months ago?
Juve were also missing about half their team.
One goes past players with the ball, the other goes past them without the ball. The problem is people will see Cristiano's first as an easy tap in instead of seeing how he got away from the defender marking him.
If you want to talk about oppositions, you do realize that Ronaldo has far more CL knockout stage goals than Messi?
so you think Apoel would have given that juve team a game?
Separate names with a comma.