Considering cristiano ronaldo is unquestionably one of the 20 greatest players of all time, I'd say he's better than very many players
Don't know about Ronaldo's skills but your comprehension skills do not impress me at all. Read my posts again, try to understand them and good luck if you think that you've answered my points.
Is that really the case? I always get the impression that there are very Ronaldo fans -- because he's from a small country, because he's European and this is an English forum, who knows? But everyone goes on an on about who he's not better than.Considering cristiano ronaldo is unquestionably one of the 20 greatest players of all time, I'd say he's better than very many players
That's why we tend to compare him to the ones who were either as good or better. It's easier because there are so few, and because they are the ones cristiano can be compared to.
yes
To be fair to Van Basten (Even though I prefer Cristiano) and spice things up a bit, Van Basten was Balon D'or winner multiple times, ahead of Maradonna during his Napoli years when he was revered as a God
Maradona wasn't eligible back then, only European players could win it. Besides, Maradona was playing for a relatively non-big European team that couldn't reach even the final of the European cup, let alone win it multiple times.To be fair to Van Basten (Even though I prefer Cristiano) and spice things up a bit, Van Basten was Balon D'or winner multiple times, ahead of Maradonna during his Napoli years when he was revered as a God
I don't know how old you are but it sounds like you are just naming any player who was great in his day, in particular the old days which is very lame. What parts of football were they superior to our Ronnie at? looking at your profile it says you are 43. so you were born after the Era of Puskas and Beckenbaur but you are resolute they were better than Cristiano. In fact you are post Cruyff as well. So your basis is on what here say? youtube vids? Because you don't have the pleasure of accessing their seasons and the ups and downs they experienced. You have nolstagia which focuses on the good parts. Of course if you are in your 70's then I stand corrected.
fair enough. That makes sense
He was one of the most skilful of our generation. At his pomp he beat players left and right and even embarrassed some. your memory must be short. Ronaldo has been embarrassing defenders for a decade. R9 also toned down on the dribbling when he got older. Doesn't mean he once wasn't a wizard.
Well, I guess you either didn't watch these matches, or you are extremely biased. Messi actually topped stats for dribbles and chances created on World Cup, and was named Player of the tournament. Someone recently made a video that sums up his NT career so far. He beats a couple of players, looks around, and there's absolutely no one available. When he makes the pass, his teammates try their best to immediately lose the ball. Horrible team, regardless of names.
This is just embarrassing.
Yes, let's say he's the difference between winning like, 10 vs 20 trophies. Sounds right, as there is not a single player who can make such a huge difference by himself, except Messi.
Its Van Basten, if you dont rate the guy Tony Adams said was "the best he ever played against" then i pity your knowledge.
Puskas joined Real at the age of 31. He spent most of his best years at Honved who, had their been a European Cup in the early 1950s, would have in all likelihood mopped up. Had their been a Ballon D'Or at the time, he'd have won a few of those as well. His Hungary side were arguably the greatest never to win the World Cup and Puskas' record for them - 84 appearances, 83 goals - is impeccable. His case for being amongst the very greatest attackers of all time and the most productive goalscorers is crystal clear.
If Puskas was playing today, his failure to win a single trophy at international level despite playing for a stacked (the best) international team would endlessly be used against him on these forums.
Plus Puskas being a genius on the ball by all accounts.
Ifs and buts. They had an attempt at the European cup and failed. The best team never to win a WC counts for nothing in my book. Like the Dutch they LOST to the Germans. Oh well. And please be mindful of international goal tallys. The amount of meaningless friendlies they play can be astounding. beating teams like Albania, Luxembourg by cricket scores....56 or so goals in Friendlies. Some in the "Balkan Cup?" Central European Cup etc. That's great.
deceptive as you are comparing forwards with guys who started out as young wide players. Why not compare their ratios to Ronaldos last 9 years for example? whats the point in comparing young wingers to strikers? as the previous poster pointed out, 9 seasons in a row, Ronaldo has been Balon D'or contender, i.e. since he has been a wide forward
He was that player in his early years at Madrid too. check the vids. I remember him dancing past defenders in Spain. Basically as he aged and lost some of his physique, he adapted his game and for some reason people have short term memories
Pele scored 1000 goals in a garbage brazilian league. He's overrated.
Its not 'deceptive', because I don't try to belittle Messi (who I think is one of the 3-4 best of all time) or Ronaldo. My point was that many seem to underrate these players from other eras and I'm sure quite a few are not actually aware of their goalscoring prowess.
I'm not who you quoted but, you can't really laugh at Beckenbauer, he was one of the most complete players in the history of the game. He pretty much defined the Libero position and started attacks, could glide through players, defend, sweep, he was phenomenal.
Nothing. In my mind I made the point with an upwards inflection which cannot be replicated through keyboards unfortunately
I was suspicious about the Beckenbauer comparison too. Different teams would need one over the other depending on the gaps in their team
Garbage league, you are basing that on what?
Alrighty!Nothing. In my mind I made the point with an upwards inflection which cannot be replicated through keyboards unfortunately
Everyone remembers Hungary 1954, Holland 1974/1978 and Brazil 1982 more than the teams that actually won those competitions. And if you're going to make a statistical comparison, don't compare a 31-39 year-old Puskas with a 24-31-year-old Ronaldo.
It took Platini 5 games and one tournament to reach 9 goals. It has taken Ronaldo 21 games and four tournaments to get to the same total. Hard to say who's better as they were very different players who started from far different positions, but safe to say they're both right up there in the top handful of greatest Europeans of all time.
Sounds like youtube videos vs player currently playing unfortunately. people don't make highlights of the 'rainy nights in Stoke' but current players have games there.
C. Ronaldo is the greater player because that's what he was. Being professional and taking care of yourself is a part of being a top player and that's why Ronaldo and Ronaldinho, for all their great talent, won't be remembered as one of the absolute best of all time. They'll have to do with being the best players in a period of their career which I'm sure they're fine with (although Ronaldo seems to have some regrets).
So much this. Look at the Ledley King thread and posts about van Basten here - 'if they had been fit' well they were not! One man has taken immense care of his fitness and athleticism and prolonged his peak performances which is still ongoing. Completely ignoring that aspect and putting them on the same scale with those who couldn't achieve the length of careers anywhere near that is a massive disservice. The consistency and longevity of both Messi and Cristiano is unreal and very few if any in the history of the sport can match that while sustaining top level.
Not sure how Maldini became comparable to Beckenbauer. Beckenbauer is a different class in my book, arguably the greatest defensive palyer in history who could create and score goals as well. Maldini's one of the best LBs. That's about it.
Yup. Ronaldinho was amazing in his pomp, but he really took the piss with his lifestyle and declined far too soon.
Yeah, that was me. And the reason is that George Best at his peak was the best european player ever together with Cruyff. Cristiano Ronaldo never played at the level Best did at his peak. It's a matter of peak vs longevity. I tend to favor peak
No, it doesn't. That someone is Alfredo Di Stefano. Some may consider other ex-madrid greats better than cristiano or not, and that's very much up for debate(myself i also put zidane ahead of him. Same reason as with Best. Not puskas in terms of madrid greats because while still incredible, the version that played for us wasn't better than cristiano). But Di Stefano being the greatest to ever wear the white is not.
For one thing, I rate Messi 3rd. For another, once you get past the top 5-6(maradona, pelé, messi, cruyff, di stefano, garrincha), the difference between the others is veeeery slim, and very much up to personal taste as well.
Might be, it's a natural thing for the younger generations to hold the best they have seen above the best they never saw, and cristiano peaked with globalization. But if you ask a madrid fan from spain, someone who became a madridista because of his family, Di Stefano will remain the best. The benchmark.
Disagreed with Maldini, he's one of the best LBs who had a stellar career as a CB too, he won 5 European Cups in that period, a complete dominant force in a very strong Serie A side. Synonymous with Milan, Maldini is by all rights a GOAT in the top 4 as a defender.
You give far too much value to the Ballon d'Or, Messi is quite a bit better than Ronaldo if you actually watch both.
Based on people who can't argue for themselves but need to use the number of bdo wins in an argument about how to rate players. If you need to rely on some authority to tell you who the best players are.. well I'd say that's insecure. And it's exactly what's happening here.
