Knowing the amount of goals scored (even without context) is not research. If you'd watch Pelé's performances at both 1962 and 1966 tournaments (both available), you'd see what he was talking about. And those performances are even backed by his stats as well, even though he was brutally kicked out of both tournaments.
Cristiano Ronaldo should go down as top 5-6 players of all time
- Thread starter Interval
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
I am not able to keep discussing this back and forth so I'll give this round of comments and leave it at that, I think it's obvious we won't agree in some points.
Once again, this discussion when started was only about the knockout stages, that's where I commented only, that's also why I never said anything about Pelé in 1966.
Now it seems to be dragging the group stage of the WC too and how good Pelé was in the group stages - that is not part of "my" discussion as the point here was that Messi and Ronaldo never scored in the knockout stages.
I see won in 58 with Pelé, won in 62 without Pelé, (1966 was atypical as Brazil missed and had injured Pelé or Garrincha in the games vs Hungary and Portugal = not full strenght), won in 70 with Pelé - I just see Brazil winning with or without Pelé.
Like I said already I don't judge Pelé for 1966 because it's not fair for him, I never brought that up, and this was only about the knockout stages.
I'll conclude by saying I completely disagree that Pelé was essential in 1962 (remember, this discussion is about knockout stages) as I don't think that a player that didn't play was decisive.
And for the nth time, yes I said many times before that it's a flaw they didn't score in that stage yet, I just don't think it's a big flaw given the teams they've had.
This discussion is about knockout stages in the WC (how Messi and Ronaldo never scoring there is a major flaw) so the group stages are not relevant for the discussion.
***********
Like I said I won't keep discussing as I don't have time for all out discussions, we agree in some things and disagree in others, that's fine
Once again, this discussion when started was only about the knockout stages, that's where I commented only, that's also why I never said anything about Pelé in 1966.
Now it seems to be dragging the group stage of the WC too and how good Pelé was in the group stages - that is not part of "my" discussion as the point here was that Messi and Ronaldo never scored in the knockout stages.
I wrote that wrong and I'm sorry for the mistake, I wanted to say that even if you consider that Pelé in 1970 was vital (I'm not saying he was or wasn't) how can a player be vital when the team keeps winning without him (1962).
I see won in 58 with Pelé, won in 62 without Pelé, (1966 was atypical as Brazil missed and had injured Pelé or Garrincha in the games vs Hungary and Portugal = not full strenght), won in 70 with Pelé - I just see Brazil winning with or without Pelé.
I don't think a good game vs Bulgaria in a group stage is enough to classify as a super performance in a WC.
Like I said already I don't judge Pelé for 1966 because it's not fair for him, I never brought that up, and this was only about the knockout stages.
I'll conclude by saying I completely disagree that Pelé was essential in 1962 (remember, this discussion is about knockout stages) as I don't think that a player that didn't play was decisive.
Going far in the competition has nothing to do with scoring goals, as I've shown Portugal got through by barely scoring goals, Portugal was very defensive, so regardless of Ronaldo going far he will have few chances to score.
And for the nth time, yes I said many times before that it's a flaw they didn't score in that stage yet, I just don't think it's a big flaw given the teams they've had.
I was not the one saying the opponent lacks research and I completely agree knowing the number of goals does little.
This discussion is about knockout stages in the WC (how Messi and Ronaldo never scoring there is a major flaw) so the group stages are not relevant for the discussion.
***********
Like I said I won't keep discussing as I don't have time for all out discussions, we agree in some things and disagree in others, that's fine
Right - I see what you mean now.
Well, that's a different debate. But the fact that Brazil were generally very strong throughout the era in question can't be used against Pelé. If you go down that road, you can use the same argument against multiple historically great players: Very few in that bracket played for anything but extremely strong teams - indeed teams that may have been successful without the player in question too.
Granted, Brazil 1958-1970 is arguably a special case - their WC squads were simply loaded with historically great players. What happened in '62 is exceptional: Lose one GOAT match winner - but who cares, we have another one, we''ll just get on with it.
But, again, this really can't be used against Pelé: The counter argument is simply that Pelé was the best of this brilliant batch.
Finally, you're talking about Brazil - a national team. Which is common in these debates - Pelé's achievements for his club side tend to be undervalued and even dismissed, largely due to a misinformed view about South American football in the 1960s. The overall quality was easily on par with that of Europe (some would argue that it was even higher). Santos won the Libertadores back-to-back (and defeated their European counterparts in back-to-back Intercontinental Cups too) - there were no Garrinchas, Didis, Niltons or Djalmas to bail him out in those tournaments.
For me he is the GOAT.
Better than Pele, better than Maradonna, certainly better than Messi.
There are multiple version of Ronaldo, from the baby face trick pony, world class winger, false 9 United, complete player, complete forward, to the poacher he is today.
No other player in history can keep improving like he did.
Happy birthday Cristiano.
Better than Pele, better than Maradonna, certainly better than Messi.
There are multiple version of Ronaldo, from the baby face trick pony, world class winger, false 9 United, complete player, complete forward, to the poacher he is today.
No other player in history can keep improving like he did.
Happy birthday Cristiano.
cheers Camara, appreciate the thoughtsI am not able to keep discussing this back and forth so I'll give this round of comments and leave it at that, I think it's obvious we won't agree in some points.
Once again, this discussion when started was only about the knockout stages, that's where I commented only, that's also why I never said anything about Pelé in 1966.
Now it seems to be dragging the group stage of the WC too and how good Pelé was in the group stages - that is not part of "my" discussion as the point here was that Messi and Ronaldo never scored in the knockout stages.
I wrote that wrong and I'm sorry for the mistake, I wanted to say that even if you consider that Pelé in 1970 was vital (I'm not saying he was or wasn't) how can a player be vital when the team keeps winning without him (1962).
I see won in 58 with Pelé, won in 62 without Pelé, (1966 was atypical as Brazil missed and had injured Pelé or Garrincha in the games vs Hungary and Portugal = not full strenght), won in 70 with Pelé - I just see Brazil winning with or without Pelé.
I don't think a good game vs Bulgaria in a group stage is enough to classify as a super performance in a WC.
Like I said already I don't judge Pelé for 1966 because it's not fair for him, I never brought that up, and this was only about the knockout stages.
I'll conclude by saying I completely disagree that Pelé was essential in 1962 (remember, this discussion is about knockout stages) as I don't think that a player that didn't play was decisive.
Going far in the competition has nothing to do with scoring goals, as I've shown Portugal got through by barely scoring goals, Portugal was very defensive, so regardless of Ronaldo going far he will have few chances to score.
And for the nth time, yes I said many times before that it's a flaw they didn't score in that stage yet, I just don't think it's a big flaw given the teams they've had.
I was not the one saying the opponent lacks research and I completely agree knowing the number of goals does little.
This discussion is about knockout stages in the WC (how Messi and Ronaldo never scoring there is a major flaw) so the group stages are not relevant for the discussion.
***********
Like I said I won't keep discussing as I don't have time for all out discussions, we agree in some things and disagree in others, that's fine
The fact he is 36 years old and would still improve any team in the world speaks volumes about him being the GOAT. I don't think he was born with the greatest talent of any player (Maradona or Ronaldhino both oozed talent), but he has had the greatest tenacity and single minded determination to be the greatest of all time. His achievements in the football stage will not be equaled or surpassed easily.
How the feck is this a valid opinion? Was it Brwnd who started this comparison between Ronaldo and Muller? It's just insane how people have ditched watching the game and focus on stats. It's either that or having short memories.
You can split Ronaldo’s career in 2 and Both would be careers worthy of one of the greatest players of all time. Now put them together.
His 20s and then from 30-present
Thays how obscene this man is.
His 20s and then from 30-present
Thays how obscene this man is.
OP showing Ronaldo a lot of disrespect to be fair... top 5!?. The man is obviously top 2 together with Messi, there just isn’t any discussion to be had. Tops every metric imaginable, has won everything when football is at it’s most professional and at physical peak, ballon d’ors, insane amount of (important) goals, has changed football forever with his stuff on the pitch, delivered in three top leagues, great goals, physical monster, longevity.... perhaps he’ll only be fully appreciated once he’s retired, samme with Messi.
While Muller offered a lot more deeper, at the end of the day, their primary job was still to put the ball in the net.
I am not sure why you think that is not the case.
Muller was a great striker with an insane record.
That’s where you and I differ. I’m a bigger fan of genius talent than drive and discipline. That’s why I’d favour someone like Maradona over Cristiano. It’s a spectator sport after all.
For all Ronaldo’s quantitative achievements, he hasn’t come close to matching the best performances I saw from peak Diego. I’d also say that Lionel Messi’s best performances have been better than Ronaldo’s. I’m talking about all round performances, not just goals
I think he should. In my case as someone who's 27 years old Messi and Ronaldo are the best players I've ever seen. Prior to them I used to rate Zidane as the best one, and is still my favorite over the likes of Messi and Cristiano. Then there's always talk about Maradonna and Pelé being the best players ever and I get it given their legacy and performances in both club football and playing for their country in World Cups. Anyway I'm really not very fussed about them but rate more someone like Di Stéfano and also rate more someone like Franz Beckenbauer.
So many of my choices are just personal preferences, having everything into account I and trying to be objective I think it's fair Pelé is regarded as the best footballer with Maradonna in second but I also think you can't make direct comparisons between players from different eras and kind of pointless in the end. Having said that I do think Cristiano Ronaldo can easily be ranked within the top 6 players even if you're not his fan and try to be as objective as possible.
So many of my choices are just personal preferences, having everything into account I and trying to be objective I think it's fair Pelé is regarded as the best footballer with Maradonna in second but I also think you can't make direct comparisons between players from different eras and kind of pointless in the end. Having said that I do think Cristiano Ronaldo can easily be ranked within the top 6 players even if you're not his fan and try to be as objective as possible.
Will be forgotten after 1 day he retires
Perfectly put, thank you
Everything comes down to personal preferences so no need to have long debates i.e. just put your top 6 and the thread is done.
I admire Cr7 and he belongs to my top 10. However, not sure he would make my top 6 (Maradona, Zico, Beckenbauer, Ronaldo, Pele etc.)
When it comes to Portuguese football, I am even more fascinated by Eusébio
I admire Cr7 and he belongs to my top 10. However, not sure he would make my top 6 (Maradona, Zico, Beckenbauer, Ronaldo, Pele etc.)
When it comes to Portuguese football, I am even more fascinated by Eusébio
Last edited:
His Manchester United career alone would have put him in the top 50 of most people (I think)
His Madrid career definitely puts him in the top 10 of most people.
So, depending on what he does with his Juventus career... for me, he could be top four. Something like Pelé/Maradona and him/Messi.
His Madrid career definitely puts him in the top 10 of most people.
So, depending on what he does with his Juventus career... for me, he could be top four. Something like Pelé/Maradona and him/Messi.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Agree with this description. For me there are 4 main stage/version of Ronaldo
03-06 - talented trick pony
- the most talented version of him, probably the most exciting young talents I’ve ever watched
- very very skillful, full of tricks and electrifying performances
- George Best once said he felt it’s compliment to compare this Ronaldo to him, this is indeed very high praise from someone who is regarded as one of the most talented footballer ever
- tendency to dive, becoming more of show pony, subject to poor decision making at times, with little end products
06-09 - worldclass winger with end products (goals+assist)
- this is the one who combined skills, goals and assists perfectly
- arguably the most exciting version of him, full of tricks, and full of goals and assists, beautiful skills and goals, and playing at very high tempo, can do everything on his own
- become truly worldclass player, winning his first ballon D’or too (should have won 2, he is clearly better than Kaka throughout the season, but KaKa won CL in the end with great performances too)
09-14 - complete forward with everything
- at his physical peak, a beast in everything, unstoppable and keep driving his team forward throughout the matches, with perfect balance of pace, strength, skills, tricks, athleticism and goals
- insane number of goals, combined with memorizing performances
- consistency throughout
- coincide with same period of competing with peak Messi supported by peak Xavi/Iniesta at peak Barca team, hence enjoy less success trophy-wise
- imho this is the best version of him, truly playing at GOAT level performance-wise, I’d have this version of Ronaldo over anyone else I’ve seen in football, but not the most successful version of him as he can’t really beat the Barca golden trio all by himself.
14-present - worldclass striker/poacher
- most efficient version of him, maintain very high return of goals and high level of consistency
- developed great off ball movement, turning more into goal poacher instead and become less involve in buildup play, and more conservative
- doing less dribbling, running less with the ball, focus more on running into box poaching for goals rather than everything else, scoring a lot of goals but regress in his all round play, hence he was often symbolized as “hardwork” over “talented”, as oppposed to his earlier career
- most clutch version of him, scoring a lot of big goals in big matches, becomes truly a big game player and match winner
- has very big impact on winning games and trophies for his team, especially with his goals
- his metal aspect of the game is probably second to none throughout this period, very determined and composed, develop big presence and leadership on the pitch
- enjoying most successful period of his career, breaking records after records, winning trophies after trophies, and winning all those biggest ones too
Last edited:
Yeah. Reading all that make him the GOAT.
4-in-1 world class player.
We can have all the peles, maradonas, ronaldinhos, but none of them can even try to be like Ronaldo.
Eras define players. He'd be dominant in any...greatest of all time? Well, debatable; that's the rub. Aren't we lucky to see him and Messi having a go? We are so fortunate. I don't see any player being like them at the moment.
Then Berba vs Liverpool made him the greatest player if just rate GOAT based on performances here and there.
MJ isn't the greatest of all time just because of his performances, he got double 3-peat to show off.
So what now, 3 world cups is better than countless trophies won combined from Ronaldo?
GOAT standing has been dethroned for awhile now. Just accept the fact.
fecksake, this is like a youtube comment sectionWhat are you laughing for? I'm being serious, I'm being serious.
You see I'm talking fachts here, I don't do the ifs, buts, and maybes, I do absolutes.
With respect, this post doesn’t make sense. Who said anything about performances ‘here and there’? Obviously a GOAT puts in genius level all-round performances regularly. That’s what Maradona did. Did you see him play?
I’m not sure why you’re bringing up Jordan, what’s your point there?
What are you talking about with regard to the 3 World Cups? The only player who’s won 3 World Cups is Pele and he doesn’t have to put just those up against Ronaldo’s trophies because he won dozens of other titles as well.
“GOAT standing has been dethroned for awhile now. Just accept the fact.”
I have no idea what this means
Cause at his peak he was incredible, and based on peak form, for me he is the best of all time.
But as I've said a million times, being the best is not the same as being the greatest.
I have Maradona, Pele, Cruyff and CR7 as greater. You could also make a case for the likes of Messi and Di Stefano as beibg greater as well.
Getting back to the title of this thread, most of us posting on this forum see CR7 as top 5 in terms of greatness, but that doesn't mean he's also top 5 in terms of peak form.
Pele is still greater than CR7 and Messi
Sure the same old peak vs longevity argument. But if we are talking about top 5 player of all time, we have to look in broader sense, other than just look narrowly at a very short peak period and ignore the rest, such as how they have performed and achieved throughout their whole career.
For example, peak Owen was great, he won Ballon D’or after all, but is he better than Henry, Ruud, Shearer though?
Peak Ronaldinho looks amazing too, is he better than Di Sefano though?
Or the classic one, is Best better than Pele?
Or random one, is Kaka better than Iniesta?
I can give plenty more examples of peak vs longevity, a lot of those would make no sense on hindsight, but still would present a sound argument on better peak vs better overall career.
Last edited:
I really wish Cristiano and Messi did more at world cups. We romanticise about the all time greats and their World Cup exploits but we can’t with arguably the two greatest of all time.
I think it hurts Di Stefano when we talk about the greatest because I don’t think he ever played in one despite playing for 3 national teams
I think it hurts Di Stefano when we talk about the greatest because I don’t think he ever played in one despite playing for 3 national teams
Ronaldo is the GOAT and the thing that I don't understand the most is how some people think he's "less talented" than other players in this discussion.
Talent is not just how visually pleasing a player is on the ball. Being able to adapt your game as you age IS talent. Being able to consistently perform over years and years IS talent. Does it take hard work? Sure of course, but it also takes massive amounts of talent. There's plenty of players who work really, really hard and never get even close to Ronaldo's level.
Mental aptitude is talent.
Talent is not just how visually pleasing a player is on the ball. Being able to adapt your game as you age IS talent. Being able to consistently perform over years and years IS talent. Does it take hard work? Sure of course, but it also takes massive amounts of talent. There's plenty of players who work really, really hard and never get even close to Ronaldo's level.
Mental aptitude is talent.
Pele's peak was better than Best's peak though.
If more than 700 goals, as well as a record of 450 goals in 438 games for one club (!!!), 5 Champions Leagues across multiple teams, 5 Ballon D'Ors and a Euro win doesn't get you into the top 5 players of all time, then I don't know what does.
And this is based on raw statistics, without even going into this footballing quality or consistency, which are even more out of this world. Like his overhead kick goal against Juventus in the Champions League, if Maradona or Pele scored that exact same type of goal in a World Cup it would go down as the greatest goal ever scored hands-down.
And this is based on raw statistics, without even going into this footballing quality or consistency, which are even more out of this world. Like his overhead kick goal against Juventus in the Champions League, if Maradona or Pele scored that exact same type of goal in a World Cup it would go down as the greatest goal ever scored hands-down.
I am sure this will deserve a thread on its own, with many counter arguments.
For a start, peak Best is simply a better dribbler and more talented footballer. He also managed to score a lot of goals as a winger (in his peak season he scored 32 goals, playing in the wing. That was unheard back in those time, when there is no such thing as modern goalscoring wing forward).
Pele also once said, Best is the greatest ever player in the world too.
In terms of Ballon D’or, FF has make a reassessment of Ballon D’or presented before 1995 to include players from all countries. Pele would win 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 70. But Best is still winner in 68. Which means, regardless of longevity/consistency, Best still has at least 1 year during his peak which he has outperformed Pele during his active peak period (58-70).
Last edited:
How many posters are there who believe that CR7 is not amoung top 5-6 of all time? Not more than 20% I believe. The guy is an absolute monster and is aging really really well.
Last edited by a moderator:
As impressive as Best's return was, it wasn't unprecedented for wide attackers. In the same league a decade earlier Tom Finney was putting up similar numbers for lowly Preston from wide areas. Over in Serie A, Kurt Hamrin was pushing 30 goals a season from the right side of the attack. In Brazil, Pele's side-kick on the left wing Pepe scored over 400 goals in his career, etc.
Sure, those are good examples, indeed maybe there were a few others who had managed to score a bunch of goals from wing throughout the history. But it’s very rare.
I don't know why/how anyone compares modern players (2000 on) with ones from previous eras. Just completely different games.
You look at the clips of Pele, Eusebio and so on, and the balls are heavy and different, the pitches were rough and uneven, the sports science wasn't there, and the players weren't, on average, the same quality as professionals are now.
In those days you would stand out with some talent/skill, but that alone wouldn't get you a contract now - you need to be an elite athlete, a skilled player, and have an incredible mentality.
As contentious as it is, I can imagine CR still looking good back then, but I can't see the likes of Best/Gazza getting near top teams in this age, if that makes sense. The main issue, for me, is that the overall quality has increased and so the top players now don't stand out as much as they did back then, making them seem less incredible.
Imagine a Harry Kane playing against defenders who have a pint before kick off, for example, or having 40-odd game league seasons like Shearer did.
You look at the clips of Pele, Eusebio and so on, and the balls are heavy and different, the pitches were rough and uneven, the sports science wasn't there, and the players weren't, on average, the same quality as professionals are now.
In those days you would stand out with some talent/skill, but that alone wouldn't get you a contract now - you need to be an elite athlete, a skilled player, and have an incredible mentality.
As contentious as it is, I can imagine CR still looking good back then, but I can't see the likes of Best/Gazza getting near top teams in this age, if that makes sense. The main issue, for me, is that the overall quality has increased and so the top players now don't stand out as much as they did back then, making them seem less incredible.
Imagine a Harry Kane playing against defenders who have a pint before kick off, for example, or having 40-odd game league seasons like Shearer did.
that’s the key question.
personally I’m not interested who is ‘the best’ - in all honestly I don’t think there is an answer, and it’s such a futile exercise trying to argue the case.
what is beyond doubt (for most people), is that he’s one of the best, and belongs in a group with Messi, Maradona and Pele.
there will always be a % who will beg to differ, and they may be noisy on social media and forums - but they are a minority.
I can’t help but think that people automatically go to Pele as their default number One because “Pele” and FIFA said so.
In ronaldo and Messi, surely we have not witnessed the number 1 and 2 in our lifetime? Ronaldo slightly ahead for me.
Pele never played outside of Brazil apart from a joke US soccer league briefly. The standard of defending in Brazil is not at the standard that we’ve seen in Europe.
Ronaldo has cut the mustard in multiple leagues and international level breaking all kinds of records and at 36 is still going. This is why I’d have him a little ahead of Messi for GOAT.
In ronaldo and Messi, surely we have not witnessed the number 1 and 2 in our lifetime? Ronaldo slightly ahead for me.
Pele never played outside of Brazil apart from a joke US soccer league briefly. The standard of defending in Brazil is not at the standard that we’ve seen in Europe.
Ronaldo has cut the mustard in multiple leagues and international level breaking all kinds of records and at 36 is still going. This is why I’d have him a little ahead of Messi for GOAT.
International football is not held in such a high regard as it once was. With the current Champions League format and more international transfers creating greater club sides, the World Cup is not the absolute pinnacle that it use to be (in my opinion, of course). Times change.