Says every sane person!
Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance
- Thread starter Rado_N
- Start date
- Status
I think the conundrum of Real Madrid ca. 2014-18 resolves this way: That team was tailormade for big CL nights, but not so much for consistent league success.
They were exceptional game raisers with immense individual quality, but lacked the reliability & consistency (especially against the ball) to repeatedly win a 38 games league. Higher ceiling than probably everyone else during that timeframe, but lower bottom than other top teams. They needed to overcommit for playing at 100% in spite of tactical deficits, which is something you can only do in stretches each season. But their 100% was extremely good.
I think these characteristics can explain the difference in CL and La Liga success. Luck always plays a part, but they also had the players to force success in super tight situations.
They were exceptional game raisers with immense individual quality, but lacked the reliability & consistency (especially against the ball) to repeatedly win a 38 games league. Higher ceiling than probably everyone else during that timeframe, but lower bottom than other top teams. They needed to overcommit for playing at 100% in spite of tactical deficits, which is something you can only do in stretches each season. But their 100% was extremely good.
I think these characteristics can explain the difference in CL and La Liga success. Luck always plays a part, but they also had the players to force success in super tight situations.
Pretty much this.
Luiz Ronaldo, Best, Garrincha, Eusebio?
Now you're just having a laugh.Yet somehow the football world voted Ronaldo the better player 7 out of 12 years. Do they all fail to watch football or you're somehow deluded?
I have never claimed Ronaldo being better is a FACT, unlike you lot
Firstly, this thread is so bad it could do with a good tangent.
Secondly, religion and theistic belief are not the same thing.
Lastly, I'm a like short to contribute to that thread.
Last edited:
Yeah, that Madrid team could win against anyone in a knockout tie. They had an elite level of talent, and were incredibly balanced, more than enough to compensate for tactical flaws and inconsistency.
But three years in a row is a bit too much, even for teams better than them. They were immensely talented and knew how to turn up for an occasion, but they also had a huge amount of luck along the way, and definitely overachieved.
Then why do you take something that was a viable argument out of context and ridicule it? If you want a profound discussion maybe you should avoid doing such things.
I have never claimed it is a fact and you don't get angered because someone says so but because someone says it is not even close. Well, that's my opinion and although you tirelesly state that you accept differing views you you don't "accept" mine, so?Pretty much this.
Luiz Ronaldo, Best, Garrincha, Eusebio?
Yet somehow the football world voted Ronaldo the better player 7 out of 12 years. Do they all fail to watch football or you're somehow deluded?
I have never claimed Ronaldo being better is a FACT, unlike you lot
Messi has scored the same amount of career goals in over 700 less shots. How can Ronaldo possibly be better?
Free Kicks, Messi has scored more in less attempts. I don’t know the exact figures but Ronaldo has always just blasted it and 1 in 10 went in.
Dribbling, no chance is Ronaldo better. Messi has much better close control, has has many more successful dribbles in their careers. Ronaldo has never scored the goals that Messi has by taking on 2/3/4 players.
I accept that you're entitled to an opinion, laughable though it may be.
See, you are doing the exact same thing you complain about which is ridiculing someone for his opinion.
What was the viable argument? That CLs - the most decorated club competition in the world in luck-based? That is viable?
Just blasted it - you haven't seen him at United have you? His knuckleball technique was revolutionary. Dribbling, I kinda agree since after joining RM, he seemed to not focus on it at all (someone great told him goals are all that matters). Your last sentence makes no sense - I can probably send you a link of a montage of such goals scored by Ronaldo. Again, for finishing, I don't think you have seen much of United since Ronaldo was a winger (in a 4-4-2) for 2-3 seasons when he had joined us.
There is a difference between disagreeing with someone and claiming one's opinion as a FACT.
Are you really claiming that it's 'debatable' about who the better dribbler is? Even Cal? and Peyroteo aren't that blinkered. Pre-Madrid/post-madrid; Ronaldo has never been as good at dribbling as Messi.
Where did I say it was luck based? I said it was _more_ luck based than a league which is a fact. You say you are interested in a real discussion? Don't think so, you didn't even read what I replied to you let alone try to understand what I wanted to say.
Again, the people you are primarily discussing with didn't do that. That is something you make up in order to antagonize those you deem 'the Messi brigade'. Either stop complaining or don't do the things you are complaining about yourself.
Well the bolded is not true. Roberto Carlos and Juninho Pernambucano took free kicks that way before Ronaldo.
For dribbling Messi has a much higher success rate, look at the stats. He is far better.
For finishing it is not even a debate. How can Ronaldo be better if Messi has scored the same amount of goals in over 700 less shots. What does Ronaldo playing as a winger at United have to do with it?
I watched every United game when Ronaldo was there, I know exactly how good he was. He was unbelievable. It has nothing to do with me thinking Messi is better in certain aspects.
I thought I’d seen it all. Then comes along a dude claiming CRonaldo is a better dribbler than Messi. No point in continuing this thread when that is where we’re at.
There is no point in reducing this to a debate about individual skills, you have to look at the whole and what they contribute to the team. Messi does way more in the overall play, and is just as great as goalscorer as Ronaldo - therefore Messi is better (past and present).
You may not have done it, but there have been plenty of the Messi brigade who have used one or more of the following phrases:
(1) Fact
(2) Ronaldo isn't even as good as [insert 2nd tier footballers]
(3) You just have to use your eyes
(4) Anyone who doesn't like Messi isn't a football fan
I could go on...
I have on the other hand think Messi is the 2nd best player ever in the game.
This again... it’s goals per minute played that counts, and starting as a winger certainly has a big impact.
Shots per goal is utterly useless, if someone only ever shoots from 1 inch out and has a 100% conversion rate, does that make him great?
When this thread reappears in ten years time, I hope instead of debate there is just sadness that the two players in question have retired.
I will say as a kid watching Ronaldo with all the tricks in a United shirt was more exciting than watching today's crop of Martial, Rashford etc. We've not had a flair player to that level since in my opinion.
I will say as a kid watching Ronaldo with all the tricks in a United shirt was more exciting than watching today's crop of Martial, Rashford etc. We've not had a flair player to that level since in my opinion.
Pre-Madrid is debatable - maybe not post that - but yes, it is debatable - just because you haven't seen enough doesn't change my opinion (have seen both from a very young age)
Finishing not even a debate? 700 less shots shows the type of football played at the clubs/teams. This has been discussed before.
Yes, almost as ridiculous as someone saying CL wins are lucky or eyes should be checked.
Surely if they have scored the same amount of goals, (which they have) then the one who has done it in 700 less shots then he is obviously the better finisher.
The one who has had 700 more shots is less efficient. The law of averages shows that having enough shots will score you a lot of goals. The one with 700 more shots is obviously less precise and is not as good of a finisher.
If United finished on 90 points in 38 games, yet City got 90 points in 40 games, then it is obvious that the former has been better.
I've absolutely no idea how @Cal? has the time and energy for all this...
It's incredible. Really shows there's no point arguing with these people.
CL > League. I understood everything you said if not more.
No, that just reflects on their style of play, as mentioned a few pages ago.
If Messi dribbles and loses possession from 30 yards out, whilst Ronaldo shoots from 30 yards out and the shot was saved.
How was what Messi done any more effective/efficient/better than what Ronaldo did? The result is both gave away possession.
As for your analogy, that doesn't work at all.
A better one would be 2 NBA sides both scoring 108, one team scored 54 2 pointers and the other 36 3 pointers. The result is the SAME.
On a serious note, how many of these 'Més que un club' feckers do we have here?
My honest take - I grew up idolizing CR7 and hence United. For me, he was the best - I didn't watch much of La Liga back then (2003-04) When I did, I realized (slapped myself 2-3 times for admitting to this) but Messi was more talented. The next 3-4 years (including THAT season Messi broke all records), I kinda admitted Messi was the best only to realize what I was missing something the whole time - CR7 was written off within months of coming to United because Rooney was more talented (he was), and others - yet, he fought back. When we went to RM, he was written off since the best was Messi - yet he never gave up and now has the same number of Ballon D'Ors as the 'alien' Messi. What it thought me was something much greater - learn to be humble and hungry - there may be players touted as the next best thing - keep your head down and keep working and one day - you'll have done enough to be considered equal to an 'alien'. No offence to anyone who disagrees - we can have discussions any day but if you think CR7 isn't one of the all time bests or if he has somehow 'lucked-it' or been at the right place at the right time or that this debate shouldn't even exist, then I pray for you to realize greatness and accept it. I did (not CR7 ffs)
Indeed, Barca fans and their holier than thou attitude to everything.
I'll leave you guys with this:
I think we're close to agreeing here, with two exceptions: I rather saw a notable lack of balance, which they could compensate for with their overwhelming amount of matchwinning talent and some tweaks in personell (Di Maria in 2014, Casemiro).
And the notion of overachieving is a difficult one for me - isn't it usually like that for most great teams? For example, from that angle Bayern had overachieved in 1974-76 as well (they certainly didn't dominate all those finals and had the necessary amount of luck at the right time). But then again you got to have a lot of quality to ride your luck so consistently, and Real had it like those great teams before them.
All in all I think both their CL success and their relative failure in the league were quite fair reflections of their strengths and weaknesses as a team. Not denying the importance of coincidence, of course.
The result is the same but we are debating the better finisher, the one who scored the same in less shots is obviously a better finisher. You are blinkered. Messi will finish his career with much more goals and assists than Ronaldo, which will show that he was a better attacker.
What? God doesn't exist? I certainly agree.
Two down, one to go.
Funny how you've completely ignored my question, I'll ask it again:
If Messi dribbles and loses possession from 30 yards out, whilst Ronaldo shoots from 30 yards out and the shot was saved.
How was what Messi done any more effective/efficient/better than what Ronaldo did? The result is both gave away possession.
Just because Messi only shoots from better positions, that doesn't make him a better finisher.
Says the guy who hates Messi fans
Just noticed this poll is 357 votes each, dead even at 50%.
The first bolded part I avoided because I am not even talking about dribbling. Why take 700 more shots if you know they are not going to go in. If you are shooting so much then sometimes it isn’t even good finishing, it is sometimes speculative shooting in the hope that it will go in.
That is why Messi has scored the same amount in less shots, because he knows when to shoot, (obviously Ron knows when to shoot), but Messi is more aware of when he can score from shots. Which makes him a better finisher.
As for the bolded/underlined part. It shows that Messi has better awareness firstly. And if Ronaldo was as good at finishing then he would have scored more of them 700 shots. I don’t know how you can even debate it tbh. 700 shots is a full seasons worth of shots, probably more. It’s a lot of shots to take and not score considerng you believe him to be the better finisher.
Messi is more efficient and more productive in his goal scoring, you can’t even question that.
There is something some people here are getting wrong imo.
Shots in football are not the same as shots in basketball.
When you take a shot in football in a direct football approach with quick transitions you are "finishing the play" which is considered good praxis if the style is very direct.
In a possession oriented kind of game there are not so many shots per game, the final pass is normally made when the circumstances are optimal.
Ronaldo's ability to take MANY shots is a great virtue of his in a direct kind of game.
It's a bit of a simplification but it's understood better this way.
This post doesn't want to make a comparison between Ronaldo and Messi. I'm just surprised at people who think this asset can be seen as a defect. I just cannot understand it. For a defender it has to be a nightmare to pay attention to a forward who has the skill to make a lot of shots per game.
Shots in football are not the same as shots in basketball.
When you take a shot in football in a direct football approach with quick transitions you are "finishing the play" which is considered good praxis if the style is very direct.
In a possession oriented kind of game there are not so many shots per game, the final pass is normally made when the circumstances are optimal.
Ronaldo's ability to take MANY shots is a great virtue of his in a direct kind of game.
It's a bit of a simplification but it's understood better this way.
This post doesn't want to make a comparison between Ronaldo and Messi. I'm just surprised at people who think this asset can be seen as a defect. I just cannot understand it. For a defender it has to be a nightmare to pay attention to a forward who has the skill to make a lot of shots per game.
That’s not how it works, unless you have an empty net to shoot at from inches out, it’ll never be 100% you should score. It’s all about the percentages.
Ronaldo may only score 5% of his shots from out far, but those 5% does go in. If Messi thinks he only scores 2% from far out and improves his scoring to 20% if he dribbles closer, he’d likely do that. However if he only dribbles successfully to those positions 25% of the time, you wind up with Messi scoring at a similar rate as Ronaldo but with a higher shots to goal ratio.
He’s not more productive with his goal scoring, just more conservation with his shooting.
- Status