Answer his question please and stop equivocating. If the level is so poor, then why does a player who has scored dozens of knockout goals in the CL struggle to score?
Lionel Messi is OFFICIALLY the Greatest Player of all Time (CONFIRMED OFFICIAL)
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
Answer his question please and stop equivocating. If the level is so poor, then why does a player who has scored dozens of knockout goals in the CL struggle to score?
He is the best that I have seen. I still struggle to understand how he consistently manages to target a place that is very difficult for goalkeepers, how he actually hits that target and also puts a lot of velocity into the ball. People have been so accustomed to see it that they don't even mention it.
Well for one, at the start of his career for Portugal he was playing in a relatively weak side, and while the side has been stronger the least few years, they've been playing under a manager that makes Louis van gaal look adventurous. Plus he's played a grand total of 8 knockout games in the world Cup in his career, two of them off the bench at the age of 37, 6 full games aren't a big enough sample size to judge a player off of. You've had players who look incredible at world cups but then go back to average for their club, its because its such a small sample size over a career, form, injuries, shit manager. These things generally even out over an entire career, but over 7 games (at most) in the space of a few weeks every year, they don't
very solid post and I meant all in the same package but all your points are Fair
If there's any player you could give the ball to in his prime and have any hope that he could take on the entire opposition on his own and find a way to score it's Messi. He just had that ability to create his own opportunities. With Ronaldo it's always been about the service.
I could explain to you better what happened on every WC for him. I would say his best for numbers was 2018, I get that the Spain game is the most mediatic because he scored 3 goals but for me the game he played and made me believe he was going to be a top player was vs France in 2006 and he didn't scored or assisted.
Regarding the Euros his best was 2012, a reasonable game against a good Germany, crap game vs Denmark where he even failed a open goal, after that it was the Netherlands game where he made one of his best performances for Portugal and he was on top of his game, and surely he still dribbled with speed, don't get the nonsense he only scored goals.
After that another top performance vs Czech Republic and finally a normal performance vs a top Spain side, not great and not bad. But as some in this Forum like to mention if it was by the eye test would say his game vs Spain and the Netherlands in Euro 2004 were the ones who told me what he would be. Of course Rooney was the best young player there.
Now don't get me wrong, but in everyone of those teams he still had good players around him, only tournament where I think he can complain about is South Africa 2010 under Queiroz ultra defensive tactics who wanted to make him a pure striker when he was a top winger/forward cutting from the left to the area. And 2014 his knee wasn't ok.
But if you think guys like a veteran Figo, Deco, Ricardo Carvalho, Maniche, Moutinho, Nani, Pepe and others never helped him on tournaments you should tell me what football did you watched. Finally, as much as I dislike Santos he actually tried to put the team playing a different way this time, he didn't performed this time not for tactics but because he wasn't at his best.
I'm not saying he played with total scrubs or anything, but the only times he had a really solid team around him was at the start and end of his career but not really at his peak. Either way he played 6 total knockout games in full, one a 15 minute cameo, and about 40 mins in another, its not a huge sample size to judge a player off of
He was at his peak in 2012, and he had a peak Pepe, Nani and Moutinho, hell, even Coentrão was looking good at the time. I do agree in 2010 Queiroz was to blame for him not showing up and 2014 he had a problem on the knee, and the team was terrible.
He didn't exactly get help. I mean we could say Ronaldo got help when they extended the Ballon d'or voting to fit in his International performance allowing him to win it. I will agree the media were behind Messi this world cup though which is understandable, we are watching an all time great so to see him complete his trophy collection is special, add to that it being his last world cup. It was a fairy tale most football fans wanted.
The treatment of Ronaldo mostly comes from the way he acts on the pitch and recently.. off it. If he was more likeable and Portugal were in the final, he'd get the same love from the media - talent wise though, he simply doesn't compare. Obviously pissing off one of footballs biggest fanbases (United) just before the world cup wasn't the smartest move if one cares a lot about PR.
Good point about Ronaldinho, he is and always will be my favourite and most entertaining player. R9 and Dinho just don't have the longevity of Messi and Ronaldo though, fans were robbed in that aspect.
Well the Euros aren't included in the 0 knockout stage goals stat that the other poster was talking about. Even then though with those players I don't think you'd have had Portugal as a top 5 team would you? Even then they only lost to Spain on penalties, though Spain were comfortably the best international side in my opinion at that time
On the 2012 Euros? Spain and Germany were the better sides. Italy was on a similar level to us. Netherlands was on a big crisis, also England/France didn't looked great, but ok we weren't top 5 in the World I give you that.
I mean it was a decade ago so I'm not going to pretend my memory of it is perfect, but I don't remember any tournament where Portugal have been considered one of the top 4 or 5 favourites pre tournament in my lifetime. Maybe if you're living in Portugal it's different and there's expectation, the same way England are usually hyped up as favourites in the UK for every international tournament, but I can't remember any time that Portugal were considered anything other than dark horses at major tournaments. That's not to say Ronaldo couldn't have done better for Portugal in tournament finals, but it's such a small sample size compared to a whole club career that I don't give it that much wright, that's why I had Messi clear of Pele and Maradona before this world cup or his copa america win, I give far more weight to whats done over a career than one tournament every 4 years
I agree a player carreer shouln't be measured by short time International Tournaments, but all the great players in the past were measured by that.
Of course there are some motives for those WC's and don't think including 4 knockout games in 2006 (one of them he had to leave injured soon, the other was a third place match), 1 in 2010 against a top Spain side, other vs Uruguay and 2 games where he had to come from the bench can explain his entire carreer.
Problem is if he scored it would be used as a great thing for him, didn't happened is used against him. That's the way it works. But there are other players in past tournaments who played for Dark horses and performed better, you don't need to be part of a contender team.
The median height of the 3 greatest players of all time is 1.69m...
I mean, in case it wasn't already obvious just by, i dunno, look at who the best creative forwards have been for the past 20 years, or the barcelona/spain sides that dominated a decade ago, being short is actually quite the advantage for football. Lower center of gravity, smaller feet(this matters for touch and technique), superior balance and agility, superior reactions times, superior acceleration/deceleration, superior turning speed
At his physical peak Messi was one of the most explosive players we've ever seen. Strenght isn't that important in football, and size only matters for CBs, goalkeepers, and CF, and with the latter it's not a particular necessity either
Rather than focusing on Cristiano's natural physical gifts it would do to focus on his technical ones - touch, crossing, passing, shooting, as well as his mental qualities, spatial awareness, decision making, motor memory, information processing speed...
I think the great players in the past were measured by that because we weren't able to watch every single game in their career live, most people only got to see them perform at a world Cup, not everyone obviously but I'd imagine that's the big reason world cups were generally used as a way to measure greatness, but it doesn't make it the right way to do it, not to mention the lack of money in the club game in the past meant that the world Cup probably was a higher level often than the European Cup. But nowadays that's completely flipped, and yes it will always be a mark against him that he didn't have any really standout international tournaments, but like I said I'd give far more weight to his performances in the Champions league which I see as clearly the highest level of football. Others won't though and might see the world Cup as the highest level, but I feel like this a relic from a past time
I agree with you that Ronaldo's personality put him in a bad spot with the media, unlike Messi. But if Ronaldo had the antic that Messi had this WC the narrative would be very different.
When it comes to longevity no player comes close to Pele, Messi and Ronaldo. Tried looking it up but Maradona and Ronaldinho peaks lasted nearly the same number of years (might be wrong) if one is considered by many the GOAT the other at least need to be in the conversation.
So much nonsense. Salty.
I agree.
Also agree.
Only part where I don't agree is he never had a good International Tounament. 2012 and 2018 were closer to his best. 2016 was ok. Even 2004 and 2006 for someone who was between 19 and 21 it was ok.
But as usual people like to mix things and say it was all crap. It's the same thing as he never had dribbling and when you show him doing with 17 or 18 then he was showboating, and after showboating he was a pace merchant. We all know when we don't like someone we just twist things in our favour...
He had good tournaments, but I don't think he ever really replicated his club form at international level and that's the metric that's really used to judge, we've seen him produce incredible displays for his club so anything less than that is considered sub-par. Still good tournaments but nothing that truly stands out as being on his usual level
Quite impossible to replicate that if at club level he had some of the best players in the world around him. If that is used against him so what about Lewandowski? Has he done anything of note in International level for Poland? Maybe not having Bayern players around has something to do with it...
There are some aspects of the game in which Messi absolutely blow Cristiano away. One of them is playmaking. Everyone and their dog knows that. You simply cannot compare; shooting yourself in the foot.
Yeah I'm not arguing it's a huge negative, actually the opposite, that failing to recreate his club level at a tournament that takes place every 4 years for a handful of games with a team and manager that he doesn't regularly train with shoudlnt really be held against him, but many in this thread seem to be doing so
Of course they do it. How many years have you been around this Forum? The trick is always the same. Starts with playmaking, then switches to dribbling, you show him dribbling when he was younger it wasn't dribbling, it was showboating, then when he stopped showboating it was pace merchant. But ok, they made their day on Sunday let them be happy one time in their life...
False. Go back and look at the team that he started with in the mid 2000s that got to the final of the Euros and the last 4 of the World Cup.
That's not an excuse or an explanation for zero goals and assists. I'd submit that a more logical reason is that the World Cup is not quite the cakewalk that you think it is.
Yes it is if the player is not able to manage a single goal or assist in 8 games. And it is 8 games, you are in fact allowed to score goals when you come off the bench. But if you really think that's an issue, let's include the group stages as well. In total, he's played 22 games and scored 8 goals. That's a ratio of 0.36. I'd be grateful if you could show me any CL tournament where he had a goal ratio of 0.36.
It's not 7 games though is it? A player can get hot over 7 games, sure. But when you've played at FIVE World Cups, it's more than enough of a sample size. So respectfully, I ask again: If the quality of the World Cup is so much lower than the level of the Champions League, then why does CR7 have a goal ratio of 0.77 in the CL and a goal ratio of 0.36 in the World Cup (and 0.00 in the knockout rounds)?
He obviously doesn't have the greatest variety of finishing, but the area he excels at the most - left footed finishing from 15-25 yards on the centre-right of the box, he does consistently to such a ridiculously high level I don't think anyone in football history gets anywhere near it.
Just mind boggling.
I don't get these discussions about Portugal NT or even Argentina. they weren't losing knockout games to Argentina and you certainly don't need to have a stacked team to have a good tournament. before Messi, golden ball was awarded to Modric. before him it was Messi again and before him it was Forlan. even after their Euro win, they lost against Uruguay, Belgium and Morocco in their next couple of tournaments with him being a non factor in those matches. they also lost to Chile in confederations cup. the squad was fine. it doesn't matter if it wasn't in top 3 in tournament as they weren't losing to such teams anyway.
Statistically you can see why you can brush away a lot of critics, when you have enough data of all football leagues and what he outputs.
He's 1 in a few million in terms of ability.
He has only 3 knockout stage goals in the Euros, but this is not about his poor record in international tournament KO games. Rather, I'm trying to demonstrate that the World Cup remains by far the biggest challenge for any player, not the Champions League. Let us not forget that Messi also had 0 WC knockout stage goals as recently as last month.
Here Is why Messi is the Goat in every attribute compared to CR7:
Best Dribbler : Messi (Pretty Obvious)
Best Finisher: Messi
Best Free kick taker: Messi (Pretty Obviously)
Better In the Air: Ronaldo ( I mean he's taller so this one goes without saying)
Best Penalty Taker: Messi (This world cup proved it, he scored the most pressure penalties including 2 in the final)
Best at Shooting: Messi
Stronger Mentality: Messi (As of 2021 Messi and lost International 3 finals, yet as of now he has turned it back around won the holy trinity of the Copa, Finalisma, and World Cup. That takes a strong mentality)
Best playmaker: Messi
Best Dribbler : Messi (Pretty Obvious)
Best Finisher: Messi
Best Free kick taker: Messi (Pretty Obviously)
Better In the Air: Ronaldo ( I mean he's taller so this one goes without saying)
Best Penalty Taker: Messi (This world cup proved it, he scored the most pressure penalties including 2 in the final)
Best at Shooting: Messi
Stronger Mentality: Messi (As of 2021 Messi and lost International 3 finals, yet as of now he has turned it back around won the holy trinity of the Copa, Finalisma, and World Cup. That takes a strong mentality)
Best playmaker: Messi
Going through the thread, the conclusion I have reached is that there are STILL many salty Cristiano fans continuing a debate that is now dead and buried. History will judge CR7 as the Michel Platini to Messi's Maradona or the Eusebio to Messi's Pele. It's time to wake up and smell the coffee!
Messi having so few world Cup knockout goals should suggest that it's not the best way to judge how great a player is. Its certainly a challenge to play in a team that you don't regularly train with or play with, but that doesn't make it a higher level of football or tougher competition. Look at this year, and the teams Messi played en route to the final, can you seriously suggest that Australia, Netherlands or Croatia were even close to as strong to the teams you'd likely face in the last 16, quarter finals and semi finals of the CL?
I always say that United fans have been a different breed when it came to Ronaldo worship. The man spent more years at Madrid, accomplished far more there and actually liked being there (Kissed their badge often, never kissed the United badge) and yet no one worshipped Ronaldo like large sections of our fanbase.
Find me any final where you play 3-4 great teams on the route to the final.
Most groups are comprised of 2 underdogs, 2 strong teams.
Then you're often unlucky if you face more than one "strong high ranked" team on the route to the final if you top your group.
Knockouts, RO16, QF, SF, Final
Brazil 1994: USA, Netherlands, Sweden, Italy
France 1998: Paraguay, Italy, Croatia, Brazil
Brazil 2002: Belgium, England, Turkey, Germany
Italy in 2006 : Australia, Ukraine, Germany, then France in the final.
Spain 2010: Portugal, Paraguay, Germany, Netherlands (so this was harder BUT its because of where Portugal finished in their group)
Germany 2014: Chile, France, Brazil, Argentina (Again harder teams)
France 2018: Argentina, Uruguay, Belgium, Croatia
Generally you face 2 strong teams on the way to the final, or sometimes just one.
This year was about shocks, Croatia beat Brazil which was largely unexpected.
Last edited:
That's my point, I wasn't trying to single out this year as an anomaly or anything, I was saying that the teams you face en route to the world Cup final are nowhere near as strong as the teams you'd likely face to get to the Champions league final, it's nowhere near as high a level
Agreed but even in the CL you do generally get a weak RO16, and sometimes a weak opponent in the QF.
Teams often do get cannon fodder essentially and it's generally the SF and the Final that's the hard tie unless you're very unlucky.
You can't call people hipocrites for stating a truth to the eye and then say this with a clean conscience.
Benzema's numbers:
At Lyon:
52 games, 31 goals
47 games, 23 goals
At Real Madrid with Ronaldo:
33 9
48 26
52 32
50 20
52 24
46 22
36 28
48 19
47 12
Post-Ronaldo
53 30
48 27
46 30
46 44
On 9 seasons with Ronaldo he cracks over 30 goals once, failt to score over 20 on 3 seasons,
On 6 seasons without Ronaldo he goes over 30 goals 4 times, never dips below 20 goals.
Gonzalo Higuain
Pre-Ronaldo and first Ronaldo season (where Higuain still gets to play as a pure striker with Ronaldo missing games and playing as a winger)
44 24
40 29
Ronaldo era
25 13
54 26
44 18
Napoli
46 24
58 29
42 38
Juventus
55 32
50 23
With Ronaldo at Juve, 44 11
Higuain fails to score more than 20 goals on a team with Ronaldo at full steam and on his last season with Juve, he only fails to score more than 20 goals without Ronaldo in the season he has two different clubs (41 games 13 goals between Milan and Chelsea, still better than his last season at Juve with Ronaldo).
Then we have Rashford's season with Ronaldo and resurgence once Ronaldo is out of the team, which is tragic.
You can extract three outcomes from this:
1 - There's a world scale plot to undermine Ronaldo's prestige and his teammates tank their scoring numbers because they love Messi
2 - Strikers that play with Ronaldo are seen as "wasteful" players because they score less when they share the pitch with him. This doesn't mean Ronaldo arguably makes other strikers worse, just that he eats their chances and this hurts their reputation as scorers.
3 - This data is worthless, therefore the same can be said of your point that in context, Messi's assist numbers can be considered "underwhelming" compared to the quality of his strikers.
The only outliers that have scored less goals with Messi are players he displaced to the wing on Griezmann, David Villa (who went from playing striker and shooting FKs and penalties at Valencia, to play as a winger with not set pieces at Barcelona and lost around 8 goals per season), Alexis Sanchez (from winger in Barcelona to Striker at Arsenal) and the weird case of Ibrahimovic, who still had that year his 3rd best scoring tally (29, 22 with Inter, 21 with Barcelona) up to that point on his career.
Every other striker that has played with Messi improved his scoring ratio compared to other teams/seasons, Eto'o, Suarez, Neymar, Pedro, Mbappe...
No, the baseless assertion that Pele would walk into any elite team of the modern era - you've provided no evidence beyond endless argumentum ad populum.
My assertion is that it's more difficult to be dominant in this era than in the 60s and I have stated my reasons for my position many times - namely:
1) Football was demonstrably slower and poorer quality in the 1960s. Even if we take the much vaunted Brazil 1970 you mentioned; you can watch the full stream of the Brazil vs. Italy final here - just look at the amount of misplaced passes, the slow pace, the defending, the positioning, the space, the loose touches, the shooting, the goalkeeping. At 7m30, Rivelino takes a corner and it nearly hits the other corner flag 
. It's objectively worse than what we see now at international level and only tedious football hipsters would say otherwise.
. It's objectively worse than what we see now at international level and only tedious football hipsters would say otherwise.2) Garrincha won the World Cup, collecting the Golden Ball and Golden Boot in the 1960s despite being an alcoholic, with a deformed spine and legs and having only started playing professionally at 19-years-old. This wouldn't happen in the modern game.
3) The talent pool is much larger, with scouts finding talents from every corner of the globe and training them in world class facilities from an early age, meaning there is more competition to become professional.
4) Modern sports science and nutrition means that players are optimised to perform at their very best every game and fitness levels have never been higher
5) Tactics have developed and there is less space and time for players to affect the game. Teams now have numerous staff members dedicated to creating tactics and game-plans to stop star players like Messi.
I also note that you avoided answering my question so I'll ask again: do you think Ronaldo Nazario would have performed better in 2020 or in 1960?
You answer my question please and I'll answer yours
But the difference in quality and performances between the top 6 teams in the UCL and the 20th ranked team is bigger than the difference between rank 6 in Fifa and rank 20, Qatar were the worst squad of the World Cup, but they weren't "Viktoria Plzen on a group with Bayern, Inter and Barcelona" bad.
Belgium can be ranked 1st but they can't sign 4 defenders to challenge for the World Cup, Brazil or Germany might have a stacked team but they're not drilled to play together 9 months a year.
There's exceptions like France who have been working with the same squad and tactics for almost 5 years now, but in a World Cup you don't get more than 2 or 3 teams that have months worth of training over the last 4 year cycle, the World Cup is the stage on which a single player can make the biggest difference because tactical anarchy runs rampant. South American teams don't face Mbappe and Griezmann 2 to 4 times per year giving them time to adjust, there's no room to screw a game and have a second 90 minutes at home with your fans support.
The world cup turns great players into legends and unknown players into cult heroes because it's the biggest equalizer in the sport, there's no oil money, unfair TV deals or time to steer things around in the middle of a tournament by hiring a new coach or getting extra players in January, you play with what you get, for 3 to 7 games and 90 minutes the 22 players in the pitch are the less prepared they'll ever be on the 60+ games they'll play that year.