Who has had the better international career? Messi or Ronaldo?

[TheLiverBird]

Both of them ended up with brilliant international careers that still somehow feel a bit disappointing compared to their overall standing in football history. Ideally one of them would’ve had a tournament performance of Pelé/Cruyff/Maradona’s or even Platini’s (Euros) quality to secure the top spot for themselves, but neither one had managed to do it.

Cristiano’s overall influence on Portugal was immense, especially considering his performances in 2004, but he gets way too much credit for the 2016, which wasn’t even his best tournament (and people are actually counting him jumping on the side of the pitch as a huge factor in their win ).

Messi had a more consistent career with less big moments (like the game against Sweden or hat-trick against Spain), although that’s not to say that he didn’t have them.

Still, neither one of them is “clearly” ahead of the other. And for almost every argument that I’ve seen in this thread (friendlies, minnows, relative strength of the tournament) you can find a counter-argument.

This all day long for me

Neither have a blatantly better international career than the other

 

[Daysleeper]

Conveniently leaving out Portugal beat the 2 teams who contested the WC final 2 years later enroute to winning the Euro.

mentioned it in another list, Croatia 2018 >>>> Croatia 2016. France was significantly better in 2018 as well. Portugal lost to a mediocre Uruguay 2 years later as well

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

You should be addressing this point to @The Corinthian
Which is it? Are Portugal a football nation with history and pedigree or are they a bunch of plucky underdogs who were carried to a title by Cristiano?

Ronaldo was in both squads.

This is the whole point. Ronaldo has done well for Portugal. The final result of that is winning 1 title. That the title was not won when he was at his strongest or the squad was at his strongest is just a normal thing that happens in football and is in fact the same thing that's happened with recent winner of Copa America and 34-year-old Messi.

 

[The Corinthian]

No. Here’s where you’re wrong and how your post was debunked by kc7’s post. You said this:

“The Euros is a much harder tournament to win, and the fact Ronaldo did it with an unfashionable side that haven't been a 'big team' on the international stage is an incredible achievement.”

Let’s leave aside the notion of the Euros being harder to win (very debatable IMO, and would be for anyone who actually watched the Copa America this year and saw the SA teams kicking lumps out of eachother). Also, the Euros has been won by a number of unfancied teams so how hard is it really? It’s certainly not the World Cup, which is exclusively won by strong teams. But as I said, leaving that aside….

You said ‘Ronaldo did it with an unfashionable team (false, Portugal has a tremendous history in club and international football) that haven’t been a big team on the international stage (false, see above) and that it was an incredible achievement (arguably true, given that it wasn’t a vintage Portugal team, whatever their history).

But it’s true in the same sense that Greece winning the Euros was, or Denmark winning the Euros was, i.e. if Ronaldo was not in the team, it would have been construed as a lucky, one-off win.

Ronaldo’s mere presence in the team has enabled people to construct a narrative that it was because of him that they won (and you also insinuate this), a notion which doesn’t stand up to the slightest probing. Had he won the golden ball and the golden boot, had memorable, iconic performances a’la Van Basten, scored in the final etc, you’d have to construe it as an epic carry job to a title. But that is not in fact what happened.

I'll break this down for you to understand and see if you can keep up.

1) Portugal historically has not been in the same bracket of conversation for best national sides in the same way Argentina has. It's just idiocy that you think they are. We're talking about 2 time World Cup winning and 15 Copa winning Argentina here.

2) The Copa is an easier tournament to win for Argentina. There's been 7 Copa's since 2004 (since both Ronnie and Messi have been active). Argentina have been in finals for 5 of them. Brazil have been in 4 of them. It's pretty clear as daylight who the strongest teams are year in year out for the Copa. There's been 4 in the last 6 years, with Argentina in 3 of the finals.

2a) In the same timeframe, there's been 5 Euros - a contest that is held every 4 years. Do you think the make up of a team changes more or less in a tournament held every 4 years, or a tournament held 4 times in 6 years?

3) Your point on Euros being won by unfancied teams - since both players have been active, it's been won by Greece, Spain x2, Portugal, and Italy. The most a team has appeared in a final in this timeframe is twice (Spain, & Portugal...12 years apart) and should tell you all you need to know about the competitive nature of the Euros. It's a much more difficult tournament to win, and the level of competition is a grade higher.

4) You've written 'narrative that it was because of him that they won (and you also insinuate this)' - please show me in this thread where I've insinuated this.

As mentioned earlier, @Camara has posted some excellent fact based posts that should help with your understanding. I'd encourage you to have a read through.

 

[The Corinthian]

It is not debatable at all. It is nowhere near. Since 2002 (when Brazil won the WC), South American teams have been shit. Between them, they have 0 World Cups, 1 finalist and 3 semi-finalists. Compare to Europeans who have 4 World Cups, 7 finalists, and 14 semi-finalists. Yet somehow we are going to believe that the competitions are of the same level.

Let's see what has happened since then when South American nations faced European ones in World Cups.

Brazil:

win 1-0 against Croatia (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 against France (quarters 2006)
draw 0-0 vs Portugal (group stage 2006)
lose 2-1 vs the Netherlands (quarters 2010)
win 3-1 vs Croatia (group stage 2014)
lose 7-1 vs Germany (semis 2014)
lose 3-0 vs the Netherlands (third place 2014)
draw 1-1 against Switzerland (group stage 2018)
win 2-0 against Serbia (group stage 2018)
lose 1-2 against Belgium (quarters 2018)

Overall record: 3 wins, 2 draws, 5 defeats.
Overall goals: 10 goals for, 17 against

In KO stage: 0 victories, 5 defeats
In KO goals: 3 goals for, 15 goals against

Argentina:

win 6-0 vs Serbia and Montenegro (group stage 2006)
draw 0-0 vs Holland (group stage 2006)
lose in penalties vs Germany (1-1 in regular time) (quarters 2006)
win 2-0 against Greece (group stage 2010)
lose against Germany 0-4 (quarters 2010)
win 2-1 against Bosna (group stage 2014)
win 1-0 against Switzerland (1/8th of final 2014)
win 1-0 against Belgium (quarters 2014)
win in penalties against the Netherlands (semis 2014, 0-0 regular time)
lose 1-0 against Germany (final 2014)
draw 1-1 against Iceland (group stage 2018)
lose 3-0 vs Croatia (group stage 2018)
lose 4-3 vs France (1/8th of final 2018)

Overall record: 6 wins, 2 draws, 5 defeats
Overall goals: 17 goals for, 15 against

In KO stage: 3 wins, 3 defeats
In KO goals: 6 goals for, 10 against

Uruguay:

draw 0-0 vs France (group stage 2010)
lose 3-2 vs the Netherlands (semis 2010)
lose 3-2 vs Germany (third place 2010)
win 2-1 vs England (group stage 2014)
win 1-0 vs Italy (group stage 2014)
win 3-0 vs Russia (group stage 2018)
win 2-1 vs Portugal (1/8th of final 2018)
lose 2-0 vs France (quarters 2018)

Overall record: 4 wins, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 12 goals for, 10 goals against

In KO stage: 1 win, 3 defeats
In KO goals: 6 for, 9 against

Chile:
wins 1-0 vs Switzerland (group stage 2010)
lose 2-1 vs Spain (group stage 2010)
wins 2-0 vs Spain (group stage 2014)
lose 2-0 vs the Netherlands (group stage 2014)

Overall record: 2 wins, 2 defeats
Overall goals: 4 for, 4 against

Paraguay:

lose 1-0 vs England (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 vs Sweden (group stage 2006)
draw 1-1 vs Italy (group stage 2010)
wins 2-0 vs Slovakia (group stage 2010)
lose 1-0 vs Spain (quarters 2010)

Overall record: 1 win, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 3 for, 4 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 0 for, 1 against

Colombia:

wins 3-0 vs Greece (group stage 2014)
wins 3-0 vs Poland (group stage 2018)
loses in pens vs England 1-1 regular time (1/8th of finals, 2018)

Overall record: 2 wins, 0 draws, 1 defeat
Overall goals: 7 for, 1 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 1 for, 1 against

Ecuador:

wins 2-0 vs Poland (group stage 2006)
lose 3-0 vs Germany (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 vs England (1/8th of final 2006)
lose 2-1 vs Switzerland (group stage 2014)
draw 0-0 vs France (group stage 2014)

Overall record: 1 win, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 3 for, 6 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 0 for, 1 against.

Aggregate results:

Overall record: 19 wins, 7 draws, 22 defeats
Overall goals: 56 for, 57 against

In KO stage: 4 wins, 14 defeats (!!!)
In KO goals: 23 for, 43 against (!!!)

Essentially, we can pretend that the competitions are the same strengths (cause those teams kick each other), but since Messi and Ronaldo play with their countries, European teams dominate South American teams, and it is not even close. When it matters most (lose or you are out), in 18 matches, the Europeans have win 14 times (78%) scoring twice as much.

Winning Euros is almost as difficult as winning the World Cup nowadays. Because South American teams are a bit shit and irrelevant. When they face European teams, they go home.

Top post.

@NasirTimothy - tagging you so you can read this as it may help your understanding.

 

[Gehrman]

It is not debatable at all. It is nowhere near. Since 2002 (when Brazil won the WC), South American teams have been shit. Between them, they have 0 World Cups, 1 finalist and 3 semi-finalists. Compare to Europeans who have 4 World Cups, 7 finalists, and 14 semi-finalists. Yet somehow we are going to believe that the competitions are of the same level.

Let's see what has happened since then when South American nations faced European ones in World Cups.

Brazil:

win 1-0 against Croatia (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 against France (quarters 2006)
draw 0-0 vs Portugal (group stage 2006)
lose 2-1 vs the Netherlands (quarters 2010)
win 3-1 vs Croatia (group stage 2014)
lose 7-1 vs Germany (semis 2014)
lose 3-0 vs the Netherlands (third place 2014)
draw 1-1 against Switzerland (group stage 2018)
win 2-0 against Serbia (group stage 2018)
lose 1-2 against Belgium (quarters 2018)

Overall record: 3 wins, 2 draws, 5 defeats.
Overall goals: 10 goals for, 17 against

In KO stage: 0 victories, 5 defeats
In KO goals: 3 goals for, 15 goals against

Argentina:

win 6-0 vs Serbia and Montenegro (group stage 2006)
draw 0-0 vs Holland (group stage 2006)
lose in penalties vs Germany (1-1 in regular time) (quarters 2006)
win 2-0 against Greece (group stage 2010)
lose against Germany 0-4 (quarters 2010)
win 2-1 against Bosna (group stage 2014)
win 1-0 against Switzerland (1/8th of final 2014)
win 1-0 against Belgium (quarters 2014)
win in penalties against the Netherlands (semis 2014, 0-0 regular time)
lose 1-0 against Germany (final 2014)
draw 1-1 against Iceland (group stage 2018)
lose 3-0 vs Croatia (group stage 2018)
lose 4-3 vs France (1/8th of final 2018)

Overall record: 6 wins, 2 draws, 5 defeats
Overall goals: 17 goals for, 15 against

In KO stage: 3 wins, 3 defeats
In KO goals: 6 goals for, 10 against

Uruguay:

draw 0-0 vs France (group stage 2010)
lose 3-2 vs the Netherlands (semis 2010)
lose 3-2 vs Germany (third place 2010)
win 2-1 vs England (group stage 2014)
win 1-0 vs Italy (group stage 2014)
win 3-0 vs Russia (group stage 2018)
win 2-1 vs Portugal (1/8th of final 2018)
lose 2-0 vs France (quarters 2018)

Overall record: 4 wins, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 12 goals for, 10 goals against

In KO stage: 1 win, 3 defeats
In KO goals: 6 for, 9 against

Chile:
wins 1-0 vs Switzerland (group stage 2010)
lose 2-1 vs Spain (group stage 2010)
wins 2-0 vs Spain (group stage 2014)
lose 2-0 vs the Netherlands (group stage 2014)

Overall record: 2 wins, 2 defeats
Overall goals: 4 for, 4 against

Paraguay:

lose 1-0 vs England (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 vs Sweden (group stage 2006)
draw 1-1 vs Italy (group stage 2010)
wins 2-0 vs Slovakia (group stage 2010)
lose 1-0 vs Spain (quarters 2010)

Overall record: 1 win, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 3 for, 4 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 0 for, 1 against

Colombia:

wins 3-0 vs Greece (group stage 2014)
wins 3-0 vs Poland (group stage 2018)
loses in pens vs England 1-1 regular time (1/8th of finals, 2018)

Overall record: 2 wins, 0 draws, 1 defeat
Overall goals: 7 for, 1 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 1 for, 1 against

Ecuador:

wins 2-0 vs Poland (group stage 2006)
lose 3-0 vs Germany (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 vs England (1/8th of final 2006)
lose 2-1 vs Switzerland (group stage 2014)
draw 0-0 vs France (group stage 2014)

Overall record: 1 win, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 3 for, 6 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 0 for, 1 against.

Aggregate results:

Overall record: 19 wins, 7 draws, 22 defeats
Overall goals: 56 for, 57 against

In KO stage: 4 wins, 14 defeats (!!!)
In KO goals: 23 for, 43 against (!!!)

Essentially, we can pretend that the competitions are the same strengths (cause those teams kick each other), but since Messi and Ronaldo play with their countries, European teams dominate South American teams, and it is not even close. When it matters most (lose or you are out), in 18 matches, the Europeans have win 14 times (78%) scoring twice as much.

Winning Euros is almost as difficult as winning the World Cup nowadays. Because South American teams are a bit shit and irrelevant. When they face European teams, they go home.

I think winning the Euro is in general harder than the Copa, but it depends how easy an route you have to the final/knockouts. England had an incredibly easy route to the semi finals in the 2018 WC and got knocked out by the first decent team they faced. Denmark wasnt far away from making it to this years Euro final despite losing easily their best and only elite player apart from their goalkeeper, but also got knocked out by the first strong side they faced. Essentially how hard it is to win or go far depends on who you are matched up against. Essentially I agree, but there is always a context.

 

[Revan]

I think winning the Euro is in general harder than the Copa, but it depends how easy an route you have to the final/knockouts. England had an incredibly easy route to the semi finals in the 2018 WC and got knocked out by the first decent team they faced. Denmark wasnt far away from making it to this years Euro final despite losing easily their best and only elite player apart from their goalkeeper, but also got knocked out by the first strong side they faced. Essentially how hard it is to win or go far depends on who you are matched up against. Essentially I agree, but there is always a context.

These 'easy' roads to reaching semis or the final in Euros is the default situation in Copa America. There is no hard road to reach the final there. Even the hard roads are more or less as easy as the historical roads in Euros.

For the most part, you have a couple of B-tier teams (Brazil and Argentina), and 1 or two other teams that are at that level (Uruguay, Chile, or at times Colombia). The remaining are essentially their Northern Macedonia equivalents. You mention that Denmark is a meh team and reaches the semis, but in Copa, Peru (who are far worse) reached the semis too. And 2 years ago, they reached the final.

So, in whatever contest you put, there is no viable scenario where winning Euros is easier than winning Copa. You could even try to make artificial paths and you would struggle finding a path where winning the Euros is easier than winning Copa.

NB: We might laugh at Portugal's path in 2016. However Argentina's path this time was: a group of 5 where 4 qualify and that group had Bolivia (who are worse than any top 30 or so European team), Ecuador, Colombia, Brazil. The last time they reached the finals, they were in a group of 4 that also had Chile (good), Bolivia (shit), Panama (shit). Then they defeated Venezuela and the United States, before losing to Chile in the final. And the time before that, they were in a group with Paraguay, Uruguay and Jamaica (!!!), to then defeat Colombia and Paraguay before losing to Chile. Pretty much all these teams I mentioned except Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia and Chile would likely not manage to qualify in Euros if put in UEFA.

'Defeating Brazil in Maracana' that has been mentioned a zillion times is irrelevant nowadays. Brazil is utter shit, it is like saying 'defeating England in Wembley' after the new Wembley stadium till Southgate became manager. Who cares? Defeating Sweden is probably harder than defeating Brazil.

 

[Gehrman]

These 'easy' roads to reaching semis or the final in Euros is the default situation in Copa America. There is no hard road to reach the final there. Even the hard roads are more or less as easy as the historical roads in Euros.

For the most part, you have a couple of B-tier teams (Brazil and Argentina), and 1 or two other teams that are at that level (Uruguay, Chile, or at times Colombia). The remaining are essentially their Northern Macedonia equivalents. You mention that Denmark is a meh team and reaches the semis, but in Copa, Peru (who are far worse) reached the semis too. And 2 years ago, they reached the final.

So, in whatever contest you put, there is no viable scenario where winning Euros is easier than winning Copa. You could even try to make artificial paths and you would struggle finding a path where winning the Euros is easier than winning Copa.

I can't disagree with that.

 

[Bubz27]

Don't think it's an indicator of who had a better international career, but I feel Messi will have more "what if" moments in his international career, given the finals he's lost.

 

[GreenFieldsGoldenBarley]

Paul Pogba

 

[NasirTimothy]

I'll break this down for you to understand and see if you can keep up.

1) Portugal historically has not been in the same bracket of conversation for best national sides in the same way Argentina has. It's just idiocy that you think they are. We're talking about 2 time World Cup winning and 15 Copa winning Argentina here.

Never said that. Try and actually read what I wrote

2) The Copa is an easier tournament to win for Argentina. There's been 7 Copa's since 2004 (since both Ronnie and Messi have been active). Argentina have been in finals for 5 of them. Brazil have been in 4 of them. It's pretty clear as daylight who the strongest teams are year in year out for the Copa. There's been 4 in the last 6 years, with Argentina in 3 of the finals.

if it’s that easy for them to win, why have they managed it only twice in 60 years?

2a) In the same timeframe, there's been 5 Euros - a contest that is held every 4 years. Do you think the make up of a team changes more or less in a tournament held every 4 years, or a tournament held 4 times in 6 years?

There’s also world cups for Ronaldo to try and perform in, which he usually doesn’t. That’s an international tournament every 2 years.

3) Your point on Euros being won by unfancied teams - since both players have been active, it's been won by Greece, Spain x2, Portugal, and Italy. The most a team has appeared in a final in this timeframe is twice (Spain, & Portugal...12 years apart) and should tell you all you need to know about the competitive nature of the Euros. It's a much more difficult tournament to win, and the level of competition is a grade higher.

We’ve already been through the route Portugal took to win the Euros and the fact that they won one game in 90 minutes throughout the whole tournament. So I guess it’s not as hard as you think.

4) You've written 'narrative that it was because of him that they won (and you also insinuate this)' - please show me in this thread where I've insinuated this.

I mean it’s pretty clear that you insinuated that, I don’t need to hold your hand there.

As mentioned earlier, @Camara has posted some excellent fact based posts that should help with your understanding. I'd encourage you to have a read through.

he’s stated his opinions like everyone else here. There’s nothing fact based about it.

Here’s the crux of the matter and let’s see if you can ‘keep up’ with and ‘understand’ what I’m saying:

it is being postulated that Messi and Ronaldo both have a continental title and therefore they are essentially equal except for the fact that the Euros is harder to win. So therefore Ronaldo is ahead.

I disagree, because even if that is true about the Euros being harder to win (very debatable IMO), RONALDO WAS NOT THAT GOOD IN THOSE EUROS. He contributed, but it was very much a team (largely defensive) effort and they had a LOT of good fortune (weak teams, finishing third in the group, not beating anyone over 90 minutes etc). Plus he played 15 minutes in the final. So how does that put him ahead in the debate over who had the better international career?

Had he dominated those Euros performance wise, this line of thinking might have more merit.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Top post.

@NasirTimothy - tagging you so you can read this as it may help your understanding.

Don’t tag me to alert my attention to biased hyperbolic nonsense please. Thanks

 

[NasirTimothy]

It is not debatable at all. It is nowhere near. Since 2002 (when Brazil won the WC), South American teams have been shit. Between them, they have 0 World Cups, 1 finalist and 3 semi-finalists. Compare to Europeans who have 4 World Cups, 7 finalists, and 13 semi-finalists. Yet somehow we are going to believe that the competitions are of the same level.

Let's see what has happened since then when South American nations faced European ones in World Cups.

Brazil:

win 1-0 against Croatia (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 against France (quarters 2006)
draw 0-0 vs Portugal (group stage 2006)
lose 2-1 vs the Netherlands (quarters 2010)
win 3-1 vs Croatia (group stage 2014)
lose 7-1 vs Germany (semis 2014)
lose 3-0 vs the Netherlands (third place 2014)
draw 1-1 against Switzerland (group stage 2018)
win 2-0 against Serbia (group stage 2018)
lose 1-2 against Belgium (quarters 2018)

Overall record: 3 wins, 2 draws, 5 defeats.
Overall goals: 10 goals for, 17 against

In KO stage: 0 victories, 5 defeats
In KO goals: 3 goals for, 15 goals against

Argentina:

win 6-0 vs Serbia and Montenegro (group stage 2006)
draw 0-0 vs Holland (group stage 2006)
lose in penalties vs Germany (1-1 in regular time) (quarters 2006)
win 2-0 against Greece (group stage 2010)
lose against Germany 0-4 (quarters 2010)
win 2-1 against Bosna (group stage 2014)
win 1-0 against Switzerland (1/8th of final 2014)
win 1-0 against Belgium (quarters 2014)
win in penalties against the Netherlands (semis 2014, 0-0 regular time)
lose 1-0 against Germany (final 2014)
draw 1-1 against Iceland (group stage 2018)
lose 3-0 vs Croatia (group stage 2018)
lose 4-3 vs France (1/8th of final 2018)

Overall record: 6 wins, 2 draws, 5 defeats
Overall goals: 17 goals for, 15 against

In KO stage: 3 wins, 3 defeats
In KO goals: 6 goals for, 10 against

Uruguay:

draw 0-0 vs France (group stage 2010)
lose 3-2 vs the Netherlands (semis 2010)
lose 3-2 vs Germany (third place 2010)
win 2-1 vs England (group stage 2014)
win 1-0 vs Italy (group stage 2014)
win 3-0 vs Russia (group stage 2018)
win 2-1 vs Portugal (1/8th of final 2018)
lose 2-0 vs France (quarters 2018)

Overall record: 4 wins, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 12 goals for, 10 goals against

In KO stage: 1 win, 3 defeats
In KO goals: 6 for, 9 against

Chile:
wins 1-0 vs Switzerland (group stage 2010)
lose 2-1 vs Spain (group stage 2010)
wins 2-0 vs Spain (group stage 2014)
lose 2-0 vs the Netherlands (group stage 2014)

Overall record: 2 wins, 2 defeats
Overall goals: 4 for, 4 against

Paraguay:

lose 1-0 vs England (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 vs Sweden (group stage 2006)
draw 1-1 vs Italy (group stage 2010)
wins 2-0 vs Slovakia (group stage 2010)
lose 1-0 vs Spain (quarters 2010)

Overall record: 1 win, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 3 for, 4 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 0 for, 1 against

Colombia:

wins 3-0 vs Greece (group stage 2014)
wins 3-0 vs Poland (group stage 2018)
loses in pens vs England 1-1 regular time (1/8th of finals, 2018)

Overall record: 2 wins, 0 draws, 1 defeat
Overall goals: 7 for, 1 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 1 for, 1 against

Ecuador:

wins 2-0 vs Poland (group stage 2006)
lose 3-0 vs Germany (group stage 2006)
lose 1-0 vs England (1/8th of final 2006)
lose 2-1 vs Switzerland (group stage 2014)
draw 0-0 vs France (group stage 2014)

Overall record: 1 win, 1 draw, 3 defeats
Overall goals: 3 for, 6 against

In KO stage: 0 win, 1 defeat
In KO goals: 0 for, 1 against.

Aggregate results:

Overall record: 19 wins, 7 draws, 22 defeats
Overall goals: 56 for, 57 against

In KO stage: 4 wins, 14 defeats (!!!)
In KO goals: 23 for, 43 against (!!!)

Essentially, we can pretend that the competitions are the same strengths (cause those teams kick each other), but since Messi and Ronaldo play with their countries, European teams dominate South American teams, and it is not even close. When it matters most (lose or you are out), in 18 matches, the Europeans have win 14 times (78%) scoring twice as much.

Winning Euros is almost as difficult as winning the World Cup nowadays. Because South American teams are a bit shit and irrelevant. When they face European teams, they go home.

‘Winning the Euros is almost as difficult as winning the World Cup now’ says this guy.

 

[The Corinthian]

Never said that. Try and actually read what I wrote



if it’s that easy for them to win, why have they managed it only twice in 60 years?



There’s also world cups for Ronaldo to try and perform in, which he usually doesn’t. That’s an international tournament every 2 years.



We’ve already been through the route Portugal took to win the Euros and the fact that they won one game in 90 minutes throughout the whole tournament. So I guess it’s not as hard as you think.



I mean it’s pretty clear that you insinuated that, I don’t need to hold your hand there.



he’s stated his opinions like everyone else here. There’s nothing fact based about it.

Here’s the crux of the matter and let’s see if you can ‘keep up’ with and ‘understand’ what I’m saying:

it is being postulated that Messi and Ronaldo both have a continental title and therefore they are essentially equal except for the fact that the Euros is harder to win. So therefore Ronaldo is ahead.

I disagree, because even if that is true about the Euros being harder to win (very debatable IMO), RONALDO WAS NOT THAT GOOD IN THOSE EUROS. He contributed, but it was very much a team (largely defensive) effort and they had a LOT of good fortune (weak teams, finishing third in the group, not beating anyone over 90 minutes etc). Plus he played 15 minutes in the final. So how does that put him ahead in the debate over who had the better international career?

Had he dominated those Euros performance wise, this line of thinking might have more merit.

No, no, no, no, no.

If Argentina, with a stronger team historically, play in a weaker competition (Copa) more often than an equivalent Euro team (4 Copas in 6 years), in the same timeframe (let's say since 2004 to now) and only win once, then they are underperforming.

If Portugal, with a weaker team historically, play in a stronger competition (Euros) less often than an SA equivalent Copa team (2 Euros in 8 years), in the same timeframe (let's say since 2004 to now) and 'only' win once, then they have done well.

Argentina being the top 2 for their competition really should have won it more than once in the timeframe. They've had a GOAT level player, as well as some exceptional players all playing in Europe for some of the biggest and best teams in Europe. They've bottled finals to be frank.

 

[Daysleeper]

Never said that. Try and actually read what I wrote



if it’s that easy for them to win, why have they managed it only twice in 60 years?



There’s also world cups for Ronaldo to try and perform in, which he usually doesn’t. That’s an international tournament every 2 years.



We’ve already been through the route Portugal took to win the Euros and the fact that they won one game in 90 minutes throughout the whole tournament. So I guess it’s not as hard as you think.



I mean it’s pretty clear that you insinuated that, I don’t need to hold your hand there.



he’s stated his opinions like everyone else here. There’s nothing fact based about it.

Here’s the crux of the matter and let’s see if you can ‘keep up’ with and ‘understand’ what I’m saying:

it is being postulated that Messi and Ronaldo both have a continental title and therefore they are essentially equal except for the fact that the Euros is harder to win. So therefore Ronaldo is ahead.

I disagree, because even if that is true about the Euros being harder to win (very debatable IMO), RONALDO WAS NOT THAT GOOD IN THOSE EUROS. He contributed, but it was very much a team (largely defensive) effort and they had a LOT of good fortune (weak teams, finishing third in the group, not beating anyone over 90 minutes etc). Plus he played 15 minutes in the final. So how does that put him ahead in the debate over who had the better international career?

Had he dominated those Euros performance wise, this line of thinking might have more merit.

Fantastic response

 

[IWat]

Last 4 world cup winners have been from Europe. Infact, 7 out of the 8 teams to get to the final have been from Europe.

Don't think it's really a discussion about if it's been harder to win the Euro's or Copa during their playing careers. It's obvious.

 

[Revan]

‘Winning the Euros is almost as difficult as winning the World Cup now’ says this guy.

Exactly. Since South American football went to shit (and Europeans improve), the number of top sides in both competitions are the same. As you might have seen from my post, Americans tend to lose against European.

No surprise that 13 of the last 16 semi-finalists, 7 out of the last 8 finalists and 4 out of the last 4 champions come from Europe. So in this period of time, the quality of the competitions is very similar.

 

[Bole Top]

Let’s leave aside the notion of the Euros being harder to win (very debatable IMO, and would be for anyone who actually watched the Copa America this year and saw the SA teams kicking lumps out of eachother).

I'm usually in Messi camp, but I really have no issue with claim that Euro is usually harder to win. for example, I'm from Croatia. imagine we beat Spain and France went past the Switzerland, we have Spain > France > Italy > England. it's like that hell difficulty in Diablo, almost unbeatable. or maybe the draw that Belgium had, equally crazy. SA teams play rough and do kick you for 90 minutes, but this kind of draw is simply something else compared to that.

the only problem is, that wasn't the case in 2016. so the tough draw argument makes no sense in this particular case. you can't base your argument on traditional big nations if you aren't playing traditional big nations. in general, you can't base your argument on something that simply isn't there. absurd.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Last 4 world cup winners have been from Europe. Infact, 7 out of the 8 teams to get to the final have been from Europe.

Don't think it's really a discussion about if it's been harder to win the Euro's or Copa during their playing careers. It's obvious.

How many of those world cups were held in South America?

 

[Daysleeper]

Yes, home advantage is pretty and when we do have a WC in South America we tend to get SA teams doing fairly well

Not disagreeing that euros aren’t tougher than Copa America on average but 2016 Euro was a joke

 

[IWat]

How many of those world cups were held in South America?

Germany, South Africa, Brazil, Russia. Argentina got to the final when it was in Brazil. It switches continent each time pretty much.

 

[NasirTimothy]

No, no, no, no, no.

If Argentina, with a stronger team historically, play in a weaker competition (Copa) more often than an equivalent Euro team (4 Copas in 6 years), in the same timeframe (let's say since 2004 to now) and only win once, then they are underperforming.

How is it historically a weaker competition? First of all it was ‘Europe’s better’, now it’s ‘Europe has always been better’? Haha, OK.

Also, Argentina have won 2 in 60 years. So if they win one, it is an achievement

If Portugal, with a weaker team historically, play in a stronger competition (Euros) less often than an SA equivalent Copa team (2 Euros in 8 years), in the same timeframe (let's say since 2004 to now) and 'only' win once, then they have done well.

Portugal has done well. Ronaldo hasn’t necessarily unless he actually plays exceptionally well. Fortunately, we have plenty of players who have played at an elite level in international tournaments to demonstrate to us what that actually looks like.

Argentina being the top 2 for their competition really should have won it more than once in the timeframe. They've had a GOAT level player, as well as some exceptional players all playing in Europe for some of the biggest and best teams in Europe. They've bottled finals to be frank.

I guess actually reaching finals doesn’t matter anymore. Not even World Cup finals. And losing on penalties is ‘bottling’ now. Good to know.

 

[The Corinthian]

How many of those world cups were held in South America?

How many were held in Europe?

2002 - Japan / S Korea - Brazil winners, Germany runners up
2006 - Germany - Italy winners, France runners up
2010 - S Africa - Spain winners, Netherlands runners up
2014 - Brazil - Germany winners, Argentina runners up
2018 - Russia - France winners, Croatia runners up

In the last 5 WCs, we have 4 winners from Europe with S America's last win coming nearly 20 years ago.

In the last 5 WC finals, we have 8 finalists from Europe with 2 from S America.

In the last 5 WCs, 2 have been held in Europe, and 1 in S America. A massive advantage for European teams having a whole extra world cup held in Europe!

 

[The Corinthian]

How is it historically a weaker competition? First of all it was ‘Europe’s better’, now it’s ‘Europe has always been better’? Haha, OK.

Where did I say Europe is better or has always been better? Or are you making things up again?

Also, Argentina have won 2 in 60 years. So if they win one, it is an achievement

Just answer me this - since Messi has been around (mid 00s), which South American teams would you say have been better than Argentina? And I'm not talking about 'Chile beat them in the final so they are better', I'm saying looking broader than single one off games. You keep on referencing the 2 in 60 years as if it validates the banal point you're trying to make but its just irrelevant.

Portugal has done well. Ronaldo hasn’t necessarily unless he actually plays exceptionally well. Fortunately, we have plenty of players who have played at an elite level in international tournaments to demonstrate to us what that actually looks like.

I guess actually reaching finals doesn’t matter anymore. Not even World Cup finals. And losing on penalties is ‘bottling’ now. Good to know.

They bottled two finals against Chile. Although Chile had some talented players, you'd still take Argentina as favourites.

 

[Mickeza]

It’s Ronaldo. He’s going to score more international goals than any other player has ever done before. That’s an incredible achievement. And he took his country to their first ever major trophy. I think Messi is a better player even if the debates are incredibly tedious - but Ronaldo wins this.

 

[NasirTimothy]

How many were held in Europe?

2002 - Japan / S Korea - Brazil winners, Germany runners up
2006 - Germany - Italy winners, France runners up
2010 - S Africa - Spain winners, Netherlands runners up
2014 - Brazil - Germany winners, Argentina runners up
2018 - Russia - France winners, Croatia runners up

In the last 5 WCs, we have 4 winners from Europe with S America's last win coming nearly 20 years ago.

In the last 5 WC finals, we have 8 finalists from Europe with 2 from S America.

In the last 5 WCs, 2 have been held in Europe, and 1 in S America. A massive advantage for European teams having a whole extra world cup held in Europe!

The World Cup, as you may know, was always held either in Europe or South/Central America. When it was held in Europe, a European team won (with one exception), and when it was held in South America, a South American team won. Germany were the first European team to win a World Cup in South America. 84 years after the competition started. So where it is played does actually matter, believe it or not.

 

[Revan]

How many were held in Europe?

2002 - Japan / S Korea - Brazil winners, Germany runners up
2006 - Germany - Italy winners, France runners up
2010 - S Africa - Spain winners, Netherlands runners up
2014 - Brazil - Germany winners, Argentina runners up
2018 - Russia - France winners, Croatia runners up

In the last 5 WCs, we have 4 winners from Europe with S America's last win coming nearly 20 years ago.

In the last 5 WC finals, we have 8 finalists from Europe with 2 from S America.

In the last 5 WCs, 2 have been held in Europe, and 1 in S America. A massive advantage for European teams having a whole extra world cup held in Europe!

Yup. And to be fair, I do not think it adds anything adding WC2002, considering that neither Messi nor Ronaldo were playing senior football back then.

 

[Revan]

The World Cup, as you may know, was always held either in Europe or South/Central America. When it was held in Europe, a European team won (with one exception), and when it was held in South America, a South American team won. Germany were the first European team to win a World Cup in South America. 84 years after the competition started. So where it is played does actually matter, believe it or not.

I think it had more to do with South American teams being good, rather than the competition being there.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Where did I say Europe is better or has always been better? Or are you making things up again?

You called it a historically weaker competition. Do you understand what ‘historically’ means?

Edit: Just read it again. You said Argentina are historically stronger and the Copa is weaker. My mistake, but I still don’t think the Copa has been significantly weaker throughout their careers.

Just answer me this - since Messi has been around (mid 00s), which South American teams would you say have been better than Argentina? And I'm not talking about 'Chile beat them in the final so they are better', I'm saying looking broader than single one off games. You keep on referencing the 2 in 60 years as if it validates the banal point you're trying to make but its just irrelevant.

It’s not banal, it’s a simple fact. During this era, Brazil, Colombia, Uruguay and Chile have all had very strong teams. Those teams are aging at present and the new crop coming through to replace them may not be as strong, but to say these teams were not good is just dumb. Or blinkered.

They bottled two finals against Chile. Although Chile had some talented players, you'd still take Argentina as favourites.

Saying things like ‘bottling’ just makes you sound like a 12 year old on Twitter. Did Portugal ‘bottle’ the 2004 final against Greece (at home)? Did France ‘bottle’ the 2016 final (at home) against Portugal? Or did they just lose?

 

[SportingCP96]

Ronaldo.

Little debate on this one.

Their was a Portugal before him and one after. All time scorer in Euro and the qualifiers and has won 1(2) trophies for Portugal.

Considering the competition and the difference in quality historically between Portugal and Argentina it’s obviously a much bigger achievement.

 

[We need an rvn]

Ronaldo - all time international record and winning Euro for very first time for his country is bigger achievements/legacy which edge it for me.

to be fair he didn't actually contribute much in the final and was basically out after 17 minutes...he might deserve a cheerleader medal but surely that's it???

It's a toss of a coin as Messi has got his team to 4 finals, which he might have won all 4 if he had better support or team.

But then i'm nearly always going to favour Messi over Ronaldo in most of these debates

 

[NasirTimothy]

I think it had more to do with South American teams being good, rather than the competition being there.

No it’s to do with where the tournaments were played. That’s why it happened every single time with one exception

 

[Camara]

to be fair he didn't actually contribute much in the final and was basically out after 17 minutes...he might deserve a cheerleader medal but surely that's it???

It's a toss of a coin as Messi has got his team to 4 finals, which he might have won all 4 if he had better support or team.

But then i'm nearly always going to favour Messi over Ronaldo in most of these debates

He obviously didn't do much in the final but the Euro wasn't just 1 game, in the whole tournament he was involved in 67% of the goals of Portugal (6 goals + assists) and was a leader in or off the pitch.
He definitively deserves recognition as one of the biggest factors in the conquest of Euro 2016 (imho the defensive performance of Portugal was the main factor but Ronaldo was also decisive in the outcome).
This is a bigger involvement than Messi had in the 2014 WC (62.5%, 5 goals + assists) for example, still many people say Ronaldo was irrelevant and Messi was decisive.
(For 2014 I also think Argentina's defensive performance was the main factor for reaching the final but Messi was also decisive in this outcome).

Messi literally won the Copa this year with a goal from a teammate.
It's obvious he would win more if he had better teammates but that applies to Ronaldo and to everyone else.
Unlike many players though Messi had almost always good companions in attack, especially compared to what Ronaldo generally had.
And I won't again enter the Euro and Copa comparison again :P

 

[NasirTimothy]

He obviously didn't do much in the final but the Euro wasn't just 1 game, in the whole tournament he was involved in 67% of the goals of Portugal (6 goals + assists) and was a leader in or off the pitch.
He definitively deserves recognition as one of the biggest factors in the conquest of Euro 2016 (imho the defensive performance of Portugal was the main factor but Ronaldo was also decisive in the outcome).
This is a bigger involvement than Messi had in the 2014 WC (62.5%, 5 goals + assists) for example, still many people say Ronaldo was irrelevant and Messi was decisive.
(For 2014 I also think Argentina's defensive performance was the main factor for reaching the final but Messi was also decisive in this outcome).

Messi literally won the Copa this year with a goal from a teammate.
It's obvious he would win more if he had better teammates but that applies to Ronaldo and to everyone else.
Unlike many players though Messi had almost always good companions in attack, especially compared to what Ronaldo generally had.
And I won't again enter the Euro and Copa comparison again :P

This is actually a fair post

 

[Gehrman]

He obviously didn't do much in the final but the Euro wasn't just 1 game, in the whole tournament he was involved in 67% of the goals of Portugal (6 goals + assists) and was a leader in or off the pitch.
He definitively deserves recognition as one of the biggest factors in the conquest of Euro 2016 (imho the defensive performance of Portugal was the main factor but Ronaldo was also decisive in the outcome).
This is a bigger involvement than Messi had in the 2014 WC (62.5%, 5 goals + assists) for example, still many people say Ronaldo was irrelevant and Messi was decisive.
(For 2014 I also think Argentina's defensive performance was the main factor for reaching the final but Messi was also decisive in this outcome).

Messi literally won the Copa this year with a goal from a teammate.
It's obvious he would win more if he had better teammates but that applies to Ronaldo and to everyone else.
Unlike many players though Messi had almost always good companions in attack, especially compared to what Ronaldo generally had.
And I won't again enter the Euro and Copa comparison again :P

Does stuff like setting records in key passes and dribbling count for anything at all? I know a goal is a goal and an assist is an assist, but Messi's playmaking duties are far higher than any pure forward and he's still expected to score like a striker.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

We can ask Messi if he'd trade dribbling records for the World Cup.

 

[Gehrman]

We can ask Messi if he'd trade dribbling records for the World Cup.

Oh he definitely would, it's just whether those having any relevance at all when assesing the performances of a player. It's a bit like I can acknowledge that Ronaldo had a good game where he had lots of good shots on target but was unlucky they didn't go in or the goalkeeper had a worldie.

 

[Cal?]

Do you see what I did there?

Yes I do, but no matter how much you try to twist the stats, the fact is 16/24 is much harder than 8/10.

 

[Cal?]

mentioned it in another list, Croatia 2018 >>>> Croatia 2016. France was significantly better in 2018 as well. Portugal lost to a mediocre Uruguay 2 years later as well

Yet somehow you go on and on about how Chile 17 beat Portugal in a glorified friendly whilst ignore they also beat Messi & co twice in 15 & 16.

 

[We need an rvn]

He obviously didn't do much in the final but the Euro wasn't just 1 game, in the whole tournament he was involved in 67% of the goals of Portugal (6 goals + assists) and was a leader in or off the pitch.
He definitively deserves recognition as one of the biggest factors in the conquest of Euro 2016 (imho the defensive performance of Portugal was the main factor but Ronaldo was also decisive in the outcome).
This is a bigger involvement than Messi had in the 2014 WC (62.5%, 5 goals + assists) for example, still many people say Ronaldo was irrelevant and Messi was decisive.
(For 2014 I also think Argentina's defensive performance was the main factor for reaching the final but Messi was also decisive in this outcome).

Messi literally won the Copa this year with a goal from a teammate.
It's obvious he would win more if he had better teammates but that applies to Ronaldo and to everyone else.
Unlike many players though Messi had almost always good companions in attack, especially compared to what Ronaldo generally had.
And I won't again enter the Euro and Copa comparison again :P

Coming from someone who supports Porto and Portugal, and possibly who's English, whilst amazing and better than my 0% portugese, you might be a bit biased no?

My post had a big hint of sarcasm as I think they are both phenomenon and will be spoken about like Pele is today...yet there is not a debate about Pele...nor Cruijff, nor Maradona as non of those had players who were at the same elite world class level they are....we are blessed with having two Pele's, two Cruijffs, two Maradona's in these amazing players.