Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance

[Lord SInister]

So what do you know dribbling is not the only skill in football! Take someone now who has made a career out of dribbling past players -- Eden Hazard.

Is Eden Hazard according to you better than Cristiano Ronaldo as a footballer?

Difference is unlike Hazard, Messi has been the statistically the best dribbler, playmaker and goal scorer(Cris has more goals, but Messi's ratio is better) of his era.
While he has played for Barcelona literally all his career he has been tactically changed his game from a raw winger to forward to attacking midfielder, while putting up exceptional numbers all through.
While I agree that people who just say Messi is better because he is technically superior to Messi is annoying and stupid, but thing is Messi has been putting up better productivity (while marginally better and not by much) while still influencing the overall play of his team much more than Cristiano.

Although obviously Cristiano proving himself in different teams and league can make people put him over Messi, and it is preference at the end of the day. But as a footballer, I don't think Cristiano has anything over Messi, apart from his aerial prowess, where he is on another level.

Although obviously those saying Neymar is better than Cristiano are just clutching straws.

 

[Gehrman]

I rather have an excellent dribbler and playmaker player than a pure finisher. At least the first will create chances while the other needs chances to be created to score. I'm not saying this is the case of Ronaldo, but an example of what i would prefer in a player and why those types of players are more valuable.

I know some people would chose Pippo Inzagui over Pirlo probably.

They can't really be compared since one was a pure poacher the other a deep lying playmaker. Ronaldo and Messi on the other hand have played similar positions albeit sometimes in different roles with Messi dropping deeper because of his dribbling and playmaking skills.

 

[charlenefan]

For the record Carragher says Messi, Neville says Ronaldo

 

[NasirTimothy]

So what do you know dribbling is not the only skill in football! Take someone now who has made a career out of dribbling past players -- Eden Hazard.

Is Eden Hazard according to you better than Cristiano Ronaldo as a footballer?

That is the same as your Carrick/Taraabt question and it doesn’t work because in each case you are comparing a consistent player with an inconsistent one. If Hazard and Taraabt did what they did consistently at all levels, (i.e. if Hazard was Messi) then they’d potentially be better than Carrick and Ronaldo. But because they don’t, they’re not. They both take whole seasons off. You’re perfectly aware of this, that’s why you’re asking for these particular comparisons.

And I don’t know why you’re framing Ronaldo as someone that can’t dribble. I mean he can’t now, but he used to be a top dribbler. He mostly cut it out of his game. The reasons why are unclear: some say it was because of a knee injury, others say that it’s because he wanted to become a goal poacher.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Depends on the metrics. You could easily argue that Lampard was twice the midfielder of both Iniesta and Xavi based on his goals and assist stats, yet if you actually watched them play you wouldn't doubt who was the greater footballer. The whole thing with Messi and Ronaldo is that they are equally great in goalscoring but Messi is a goat in playmaking and dribbling as well.

Good point. You could never argue that Lampard was better than Iniesta, despite the fact that he scored a lot more goals.

But surely ‘goals win games’ and ‘it’s all about the bottom line’ and ‘effectiveness and efficiency over style’ etc etc. When you really break it down, all that is BS, or at least extremely reductive. Watch them play.

 

[Gehrman]

For the record Carragher says Messi, Neville says Ronaldo

Gerrard says Messi. So does Scholes, Giggs, Beckham, RVP and Rooney. Keane goes with Ronaldo. Not quite sure where Ferdinand really stands at this point in team. Now that Ronaldo is back with United I imagine he would back him.

 

[Gehrman]

Good point. You could never argue that Lampard was better than Iniesta, despite the fact that he scored a lot more goals.

But surely ‘goals win games’ and ‘it’s all about the bottom line’ and ‘effectiveness and efficiency over style’ etc etc. When you really break it down, all that is BS, or at least extremely reductive. Watch them play.

Lampard might be a bit underrated by non-Chelsea fans, but the thing about greats is that you recognize their quality on the pitch by watching them play. The now much maligned "eye-test".

 

[shamans]

That is the same as your Carrick/Taraabt question and it doesn’t work because in each case you are comparing a consistent player with an inconsistent one. If Hazard and Taraabt did what they did consistently at all levels, (i.e. if Hazard was Messi) then they’d potentially be better than Carrick and Ronaldo. But because they don’t, they’re not. They both take whole seasons off. You’re perfectly aware of this, that’s why you’re asking for these particular comparisons.

And I don’t know why you’re framing Ronaldo as someone that can’t dribble. I mean he can’t now, but he used to be a top dribbler. He mostly cut it out of his game. The reasons why are unclear: some say it was because of a knee injury, others say that it’s because he wanted to become a goal poacher.

Again you're totally missing the point (and btw Ronaldo still dribbles. That's how he makes space for the ridiculous goals he scores from ridiculous angles).

Consistency is not a question here. Are you saying Hazards best game is better than Ronaldo's best game? Let's say both players have their best games every week, who is better? You're shying away from the question because it exposes a key tenant that your whole Messi obsession hinges on (so much so that you think Neymar is a better player than Ronaldo).

 

[shamans]

Difference is unlike Hazard, Messi has been the statistically the best dribbler, playmaker and goal scorer(Cris has more goals, but Messi's ratio is better) of his era.
While he has played for Barcelona literally all his career he has been tactically changed his game from a raw winger to forward to attacking midfielder, while putting up exceptional numbers all through.
While I agree that people who just say Messi is better because he is technically superior to Messi is annoying and stupid, but thing is Messi has been putting up better productivity (while marginally better and not by much) while still influencing the overall play of his team much more than Cristiano.

Although obviously Cristiano proving himself in different teams and league can make people put him over Messi, and it is preference at the end of the day. But as a footballer, I don't think Cristiano has anything over Messi, apart from his aerial prowess, where he is on another level.

Although obviously those saying Neymar is better than Cristiano are just clutching straws.

I agree with you, I have no problem with anyone who says Messi is better than Ronaldo but there's this sub section of Messi fans who underrate Ronaldo purely because of their warped image of football and what matters more. So much so that Neymar is rated higher than Ronaldo. I've noticed this with quite a few on here.

In fact, @Zehner once posted his all time top ten player list somewhere and no surprise it was all dribblers and the same type of players. It's okay to have that preference -- my personal preference is a player like Scholes who can ping balls from deep and dictate the game, but when it comes to rating players it can cloud your judgement. Scholes is my favorite player but I would not say he is a better footballer than Ronaldo.

Actually, that's another good question for @NasirTimothy -- Scholes is consistent, and well recognized as one of the most skillful guys in training. Is he a better footballer than Ronaldo as well then?

Anyway a lot of them simply haven't seen Ronaldo play consistently for 90 minutes. This idea he's some Chicharito type goal scorer who gets on the end of the crosses is pretty silly.

 

[shamans]

Gerrard says Messi. So does Scholes, Giggs, Beckham, RVP and Rooney. Keane goes with Ronaldo. Not quite sure where Ferdinand really stands at this point in team. Now that Ronaldo is back with United I imagine he would back him.

Most people prefer Messi, some prefer Ronaldo.

The real issue is almost none of these professionals think they are miles apart (or Neymar > Ronaldo) which to me just exposes lack of understanding.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Again you're totally missing the point (and btw Ronaldo still dribbles. That's how he makes space for the ridiculous goals he scores from ridiculous angles).

Consistency is not a question here. Are you saying Hazards best game is better than Ronaldo's best game? Let's say both players have their best games every week, who is better? You're shying away from the question because it exposes a key tenant that your whole Messi obsession hinges on (so much so that you think Neymar is a better player than Ronaldo).

Hilarious. What key tenet does it expose, pray tell?

By the way, the answer to your question is Hazard. His best game will involve an all round performance. Ronaldo’s best game will involve goals (assuming that you are talking about Ronaldo at the peak of his Madrid success and not Ronaldo at United the first time round). But Hazard’s best game happens once in a blue moon.

 

[SportingCP96]

He lost in the final, but is still in a final. Ask yourself this, is a silver medal in the olympics the same as a bronze or no medals, or does this “no gold medal means its all the same” logic works only if it is messi?

At the end of the day, olympics silver medal > bronze medal, being placed 2nd in your university cohort > being placed 4th in your university cohort, a world cup final > a world cup semi final. This is reality.

Well I mean if we’re going off that metric then

2 euro finals 1 win
A World Cup semi final
Nations league final win
Euro semi final 2012

All with a country that has no business competing with the top country’s in the world considering the level of quality Ronaldo player with for a large majority of his career.

That sounds a a lot better then all the cops América finals Messi had considering 9x/10 it’s going to be Brazil or Argentina that make the final in that competition.

Ronaldos record and performances are far better then Messi.

CL as well he is a much superior player especially in the KO stages.

At league level Messi has more trophies but he also played in the better team and one of the best ever a majority of his career.

A team that consists of the core of the Spain team which was the most dominant national team of all time. Along with that he played with a prime Neymar and Messi along with Xavi and iniesta still doing the business.

I’ll even give you that Messi is more talented then Ronaldo but Both are both abnormalities when it comes to talent as their has never been anything like them. Maradona probably the only similar player to Messi but never had the same longevity. However Ronaldo is the “greater” player and he has shown it time and time again.

Similar to basketball where Lebron is probably the most talented basketball player ever but Jordan is the greater player.

In football (American) Guys like Peyton Manning or Montana are more talented then Brady but Brady is the greater player.

MJ, Brady, Ronaldo are all cut from the same cloth.

 

[Lord SInister]

I agree with you, I have no problem with anyone who says Messi is better than Ronaldo but there's this sub section of Messi fans who underrate Ronaldo purely because of their warped image of football and what matters more. So much so that Neymar is rated higher than Ronaldo. I've noticed this with quite a few on here.

In fact, @Zehner once posted his all time top ten player list somewhere and no surprise it was all dribblers and the same type of players. It's okay to have that preference -- my personal preference is a player like Scholes who can ping balls from deep and dictate the game, but when it comes to rating players it can cloud your judgement. Scholes is my favorite player but I would not say he is a better footballer than Ronaldo.

Actually, that's another good question for @NasirTimothy -- Scholes is consistent, and well recognized as one of the most skillful guys in training. Is he a better footballer than Ronaldo as well then?

Anyway a lot of them simply haven't seen Ronaldo play consistently for 90 minutes. This idea he's some Chicharito type goal scorer who gets on the end of the crosses is pretty silly.

I agree, while Neymar is obviously is a better dribbler, but as a player any manager will have Ronaldo over Neymar everyday and twice in Sundays.

 

[Lord SInister]

Hilarious. What key tenet does it expose, pray tell?

By the way, the answer to your question is Hazard. His best game will involve an all round performance. Ronaldo’s best game will involve goals (assuming that you are talking about Ronaldo at the peak of his Madrid success and not Ronaldo at United the first time round). But Hazard’s best game happens once in a blue moon.

Ronaldo at his best is better than Hazard at his best. Come on man, let's not exaggerate to this extent.

 

[Sayros]

I agree, while Neymar is obviously is a better dribbler, but as a player any manager will have Ronaldo over Neymar everyday and twice in Sundays.

Not in 2021, I certainly wouldn't. I can name 5-6 players I'd have over CR7 right now at least in the attack. Messi, Neymar, Mbappe, Haaland, Benzema, Lewa, and maybe Kane too would comfortably go ahead of CR7 for me. There's a reason CR7 found it difficult to get out of Juve for a little while, no clubs wanted him on those crazy wages.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

There's a reason CR7 found it difficult to get out of Juve for a little while, no clubs wanted him on those crazy wages.

Made himself available, City came instantly, United then swooped in.

“difficult” my arse

 

[Steve Bruce]

Not in 2021, I certainly wouldn't. I can name 5-6 players I'd have over CR7 right now at least in the attack. Messi, Neymar, Mbappe, Haaland, Benzema, Lewa, and maybe Kane too would comfortably go ahead of CR7 for me. There's a reason CR7 found it difficult to get out of Juve for a little while, no clubs wanted him on those crazy wages.

The reason is his high wages, few clubs can afford them. It's not down to his ability.

As for your assessment on who's better than Ronaldo, I don't know where to start, so I'll not bother....

 

[NasirTimothy]

Well I mean if we’re going off that metric then

2 euro finals 1 win
A World Cup semi final
Nations league final win
Euro semi final 2012

All with a country that has no business competing with the top country’s in the world considering the level of quality Ronaldo player with for a large majority of his career.

That sounds a a lot better then all the cops América finals Messi had considering 9x/10 it’s going to be Brazil or Argentina that make the final in that competition.

Ronaldos record and performances are far better then Messi.

CL as well he is a much superior player especially in the KO stages.

At league level Messi has more trophies but he also played in the better team and one of the best ever a majority of his career.

A team that consists of the core of the Spain team which was the most dominant national team of all time. Along with that he played with a prime Neymar and Messi along with Xavi and iniesta still doing the business.

I’ll even give you that Messi is more talented then Ronaldo but Both are both abnormalities when it comes to talent as their has never been anything like them. Maradona probably the only similar player to Messi but never had the same longevity. However Ronaldo is the “greater” player and he has shown it time and time again.

Similar to basketball where Lebron is probably the most talented basketball player ever but Jordan is the greater player.

In football (American) Guys like Peyton Manning or Montana are more talented then Brady but Brady is the greater player.

MJ, Brady, Ronaldo are all cut from the same cloth.

I’m going to ignore the biased first part of your post and address the bolded because I think it’s very interesting what you’ve said there.

It is true that people often describe Rodgers as being more talented than Tom Brady but Tom Brady is greater. But the reason it’s not applicable to the Messi and Ronaldo debate is that Messi and Ronaldo have a similar amount of success (you can quibble about the details, as you have in a very biased way above, but it’s pretty obvious that you can make arguments both ways in terms of achievement). That’s not the case in the NFL. Brady has 7 super bowl rings, Peyton has 2 and Rodgers has one. If Rodgers had 5 or 6 rings and he was displaying his greater level of talent whilst winning all those rings, everyone would be calling Rodgers the GOAT, even if he had one or two less than Brady.

It’s similar with Lebron and Jordan. I don’t actually agree that Lebron is more talented than MJ, but I have heard some people claim this. However, the ring count was 6v3 for a long time. Now it’s 6v4. The more Lebron wins, the more the clamour for him to be called the GOAT increases. If he gets to five it will become a cacophony, especially as he has done it with different teams.

Ronaldo in my view does not have a level of achievement that is great enough to negate the clear disadvantage he has in talent. In fact he has less team and individual trophies than the guy he is less talented than.

 

[Eplel]

Anyone that would pick a joker like Neymar, who has played less than 50% of his teams league games since joining for a record fee, over a model professional like Ronaldo, who even at 36 gives his 100%, is out of their minds and have no idea about football outside FIFA on PS4

 

[gibers]

Neville saying Ronaldo is the greatest ever based on goal scoring, yet in the same stats, you can see Messi's goal scoring is superior to Ronaldo's

Off the bench Messi has ACTUALLY scored more than Ronaldo, yet Gary picks Ronaldo based on some FIFA metric

You can't make this stuff up

 

[Gonçalo Motta]

Hilarious. What key tenet does it expose, pray tell?

By the way, the answer to your question is Hazard. His best game will involve an all round performance. Ronaldo’s best game will involve goals (assuming that you are talking about Ronaldo at the peak of his Madrid success and not Ronaldo at United the first time round). But Hazard’s best game happens once in a blue moon.

I actually like Hazard but there's no coach in the world that would take Hazard over Ronaldo in any situation, let alone to decide a game with 10 minutes left.

 

[Sweet Square]

If only there was a player who had the heading ability of Ronaldo and the talent of Messi.........

Spoiler

 

[Sayros]

Made himself available, City came instantly, United then swooped in.

“difficult” my arse

Yes, difficult. City didn't take him because he refused to lower his wages and PSG had no interest, they were two clubs that's widely reported he went to before coming to United. Don't take it personal my man, I'm not talking about your family here, but moving a player like CR7 or Messi, or anybody with huge wages is difficult, no matter what, but even more so when it's an aging star with ridiculous wages.

 

[Pickle85]

Yes, difficult. City didn't take him because he refused to lower his wages and PSG had no interest, they were two clubs that's widely reported he went to before coming to United. Don't take it personal my man, I'm not talking about your family here, but moving a player like CR7 or Messi, or anybody with huge wages is difficult, no matter what, but even more so when it's an aging star with ridiculous wages.

Yes, because city are famously poor payers...

 

[Sayros]

The reason is his high wages, few clubs can afford them. It's not down to his ability.

As for your assessment on who's better than Ronaldo, I don't know where to start, so I'll not bother....

It's not just his wages, it's his wages, his age, and him looking for 3 year contract.

Again, this isn't 2018. This is a 36 year old aging star and yeah, I think every single name I mentioned I'd rather have than him, unless you're talking for just a season then that's different but I'm thinking as a transfer with a few years in mind, and so did the other clubs who turned him down.

Yes, because city are famously poor payers...

They'll pay but not for a 36 years old looking to be on crazy wages until 39 and I can't blame them.

 

[gibers]

Yes, because city are famously poor payers...

Still doesn't change the fact that City were refusing to pay up to Juve, THEN Mendes approached us 2 days AFTER negotiating with City. Ronaldo was already offered to us last year and throughout the season and we turned it down. Messi and Ronaldo both had few options because of their crazy wages. Juve wanted Ronaldo off the books since almost 2 seasons ago because he was earning stupid amounts of money. Will never blame him, anyone that pays these guys that much is at fault.

 

[Pickle85]

It's not just his wages, it's his wages, his age, and him looking for 3 year contract.

Again, this isn't 2018. This is a 36 year old aging star and yeah, I think every single name I mentioned I'd rather have than him, unless you're talking for just a season then that's different but I'm thinking as a transfer with a few years in mind, and so did the other clubs who turned him down.


They'll pay but not for a 36 years old looking to be on crazy wages until 39 and I can't blame them.

Nonsense, if they had any idea we would gazump them they would have paid up and then some. As a PSG fan I get why you'd try to pretend that the amount of money city spends actually means something to them but the reality is that if they want something badly enough (see Grealish) then they're likely to spend for it.

 

[DaGOAT]

Don’t understand the Ronaldo comparison considering the 10 la liga titles is over a span of 17 years vs. 9 for Ronaldo and he barely featured in his first 2 league wins.

Overall, It’s 7-8(10) in favour of Messi and Ronaldo has the added bonus of winning his across 3 different leagues.

Don’t understand the Ronaldo comparison considering the 10 la liga titles is over a span of 17 years vs. 9 for Ronaldo and he barely featured in his first 2 league wins.

Overall, It’s 7-8(10) in favour of Messi and Ronaldo has the added bonus of winning his across 3 different leagues.

Despite Ronaldo having one more CL title, Messi has beaten Ronaldo is a CL final and CL semi final while scoring and deciding outcome in both (remember that solo goal in Bernabeu?).

While both playing in Spain Messi won 6 league titles compared to Ronaldo’s 2 league title.

 

[Pickle85]

Still doesn't change the fact that City were refusing to pay up to Juve, THEN Mendes approached us 2 days AFTER negotiating with City. Ronaldo was already offered to us last year and throughout the season and we turned it down. Messi and Ronaldo both had few options because of their crazy wages. Juve wanted Ronaldo off the books since almost 2 seasons ago because he was earning stupid amounts of money. Will never blame him, anyone that pays these guys that much is at fault.

All of this is hearsay and paper talk. We will likely never have the full story but I don't for a second buy that city wouldn't have put the money down if given the opportunity at the end.

 

[Eplel]

At the end of the day, one chose to arise to the challenge, and the other chose to join a farmers league.

 

[Pickle85]

Despite Ronaldo having one more CL title, Messi has beaten Ronaldo is a CL final and CL semi final while scoring and deciding outcome in both (remember that solo goal in Bernabeu?).

While both playing in Spain Messi won 6 league titles compared to Ronaldo’s 2 league title.

You know they weren't playing one on one, right?

 

[Lord SInister]

Not in 2021, I certainly wouldn't. I can name 5-6 players I'd have over CR7 right now at least in the attack. Messi, Neymar, Mbappe, Haaland, Benzema, Lewa, and maybe Kane too would comfortably go ahead of CR7 for me. There's a reason CR7 found it difficult to get out of Juve for a little while, no clubs wanted him on those crazy wages.

I am talking about peak. Although even now I think most managers will take Cristiano over Neymar.

 

[gibers]

All of this is hearsay and paper talk. We will likely never have the full story but I don't for a second buy that city wouldn't have put the money down if given the opportunity at the end.

Fabrizo Romano already confirmed it as did most credible journos. City did not want to cough up the money. It's not the first time. They refused to pay Sanchez more and we got him. They refused to pay more for Maguire and we got him. They are weird like that. Their transfer policy is shambolic. How do you try signing Harry Kane yet you pay 100m for Grealish first? All the top teams now have at least 1 great goal scorer apart from them.

 

[Sayros]

Nonsense, if they had any idea we would gazump them they would have paid up and then some. As a PSG fan I get why you'd try to pretend that the amount of money city spends actually means something to them but the reality is that if they want something badly enough (see Grealish) then they're likely to spend for it.

You're funny. I don't care about City's spending, I just know that's not their style to pay silly wages to a player until they're 39, it's common sense. The United move is great PR and it's like him coming home sort of, so it doesn't have to follow common sense as much, but it makes perfect sense for City to turn the deal down if he's not lowering his wage demands and the length of the contract. Grealish is a terrible comparison for so many reasons, but I also think that was a bad move that makes very little sense to me. Kane was the only thing that made sense or Haaland.

I know you'd really like to think you've beaten City to CR7, but I really don't think that's what happened at all, I think they turned him down because he wouldn't lower his demands and then United came in and offered him a 2+1 deal which is what he was looking for and no one else was willing to offer it.

 

[Zehner]

You know they weren't playing one on one, right?

Technically, Messi played 1 vs 11 when he scored that goal.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Despite Ronaldo having one more CL title

feck me he played 322 minutes in one of those CL titles you’re giving him
Missed every minute of the quarters, semis and final and scored one goal all tournament v Panathinaikos. Something of a Luke Chadwick Premier League title that.

 

[Pronewbie]

Fabrizo Romano already confirmed it as did most credible journos. City did not want to cough up the money. It's not the first time. They refused to pay Sanchez more and we got him. They refused to pay more for Maguire and we got him. They are weird like that. Their transfer policy is shambolic. How do you try signing Harry Kane yet you pay 100m for Grealish first? All the top teams now have at least 1 great goal scorer apart from them.

To get the exclusives from the agents / clubs, they have to do their part and peddle the PR spin too. That's how media relations with corporations work. I'd rather listen to the ex-United players and staff and when someone like Rio who has actually spoken to Ronaldo about this dismisses this out of hand I'd take his word more seriously.

Rio Ferdinand EXCLUSIVE: Cristiano Ronaldo called me - YouTube

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Yes, difficult. City didn't take him because he refused to lower his wages

City wanted him, they didn't get him because during negotiations United gazomped them.

But sure, City as always, were in fact the ones to turn him down. fecking hell, some of you lot would believe the sky was purple if City's PR machine fed it to you. Gullible doesn't cut it.

 

[NasirTimothy]

I actually like Hazard but there's no coach in the world that would take Hazard over Ronaldo in any situation, let alone to decide a game with 10 minutes left.

That’s not what was being discussed though.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Ronaldo at his best is better than Hazard at his best. Come on man, let's not exaggerate to this extent.

Hazard at his best would score a goal, create off the dribble, create with playmaking etc etc. An all round performance. Ronaldo has whole games where he does nothing but scores a crucial goal. It’s been like that for years now. The difference is that Ronaldo scores nearly every game whereas Hazard has entire seasons where he can’t be bothered. If Hazard was as consistent as Ronaldo, do you know who he’d be? He’d be Messi.