Cristiano Ronaldo - Much Ado About Al Nassr

Ronaldo likely didn’t make the team of the tournament due to politics in the aftermath of the Rooney red card incident. Similar reason he was snubbed for the young player of the tournament award (there are many articles about this).

From what I watched on my TV screen, he was the most dangerous Portuguese player on the pitch in every game especially in the QFs against England and semis against France.
Netherland used drastic measurement to stop Ronaldo by literally systematically chopping him down. They succeeded to remove him early from the game.

So yes. Lot of politic involved with FIFA rating, and awards. The rating system clearly flawed. Allowed them to pick popular player from semi finalists and finalists. FIFA at that time continued their tradition of giving the award to a player from World Cup winning team in World Cup year, by giving to Cannavaro. Giving to Cannavaro was already controversial. Then drastically changed their approach in 2010 which caused a different type of uproar of course.

All in all, these team of tournament is not the measure stick to rate the performance of players. Riquelme exclusion from even the short list of 23 player squad. He was easily seen as better performer even by the most casual fans, in that World Cup in comparison to Figo. Ronaldo might not get that end product, but he’s close especially with hindsight. He was the attacking spark of that Portugal team that lack creativity. A team built,on defensive solidity to grind result.
 
All this 'I still say he shouldn't be starting for Portugal and they'd be better without him if only anyone was brave enough to drop him...'

Portugal have just won the Nations League with Ronaldo as the second highest scorer in the whole competition with 8 goals in 9 games. Portugal's next highest scorer had 2 goals.

Most nations / players don't get to win international tournaments. Ronaldo's goals have just helped fire Portugal to another international success.

Why the f*** would you drop a player with his CV when he's still capable of being the second highest scorer in a competition and helping you to win it!? There's absolutely no need to be dropping a player who is still delivering those numbers and helping the team to be a success. Especially when there's no decent alternatives.

Everyone goes on about 'if you're good enough you're old enough' when it comes to young players. Well, 'if you're good enough you're young enough' applies to older players as well. If you're still outscoring pretty much everyone else in the entire competition, and helping your team to success by winning the whole thing, then you're definitely still good enough to be selected.

The answer is very simple. The Nations League is not a real tournament. This thread is full of Ronaldo stans trying to claim that it is, but it is not. It's nice to win, but it is not the World Cup, and it is not the Euros.

We saw what Ronaldo was like in a real tournament last year. Just last year. Proper intensity throughout the whole thing, everyone taking it 100% seriously (not 90% or 95%, but 100%), games every 3 or so days over a strenuous month, etc.. He scored zero goals.

We also saw him in a proper tournament in the World Cup 3 years ago. Again, proper intensity throughout the whole thing, everyone taking it 100% seriously (not 90% or 95%, but 100%), games every 3 or so days over a strenuous month. He scored one goal, in the group stages.

If he doesn't score, he doesn't do anything else, and other players have to do his running and his pressing for him. His link up play is also not what it used to be.

In these tournaments, he was younger than he is now. By the time the next World Cup comes around, he will be even older, than he is now. At age 40, another year makes a big difference.

So some people, with good reason, think he should step aside, so the very talented Portugal team doesn't have to carry any 41 year olds who don't do anything anymore in the major tournaments.

And he won't do anything. If Portugal go to the World Cup and start him every game, they are very likely to fail, and he is very likely to fail. It is obvious to all of us who are not part of the Church of Ronaldo.

But I guess we will have to wait until the World Cup and see what happens.
 
In these tournaments, he was younger than he is now. By the time the next World Cup comes around, he will be even older, than he is now. At age 40, another year makes a big difference.

Thanks Michael.
 
The answer is very simple. The Nations League is not a real tournament. This thread is full of Ronaldo stans trying to claim that it is, but it is not. It's nice to win, but it is not the World Cup, and it is not the Euros.

We saw what Ronaldo was like in a real tournament last year. Just last year. Proper intensity throughout the whole thing, everyone taking it 100% seriously (not 90% or 95%, but 100%), games every 3 or so days over a strenuous month, etc.. He scored zero goals.

We also saw him in a proper tournament in the World Cup 3 years ago. Again, proper intensity throughout the whole thing, everyone taking it 100% seriously (not 90% or 95%, but 100%), games every 3 or so days over a strenuous month. He scored one goal, in the group stages.

If he doesn't score, he doesn't do anything else, and other players have to do his running and his pressing for him. His link up play is also not what it used to be.

In these tournaments, he was younger than he is now. By the time the next World Cup comes around, he will be even older, than he is now. At age 40, another year makes a big difference.

So some people, with good reason, think he should step aside, so the very talented Portugal team doesn't have to carry any 41 year olds who don't do anything anymore in the major tournaments.

And he won't do anything. If Portugal go to the World Cup and start him every game, they are very likely to fail, and he is very likely to fail. It is obvious to all of us who are not part of the Church of Ronaldo.

But I guess we will have to wait until the World Cup and see what happens.
Huge flaw in your argument: the Nations League is a real tournament.

There isn't a rule saying there can only be one, maximum two, international tournaments. There happens now to be 3 main tournaments: The World Cup for everyone, and now two continental competitions: the European Championships / Copa America / African Nations, etc: And the Nations League.

Just because it's more recent, it lacks the historical pedigree of some of the continental trophies. But in levels of hardness / standard of opposition, the European Nations League is on a par with the European Championships, and levels above the other continental trophies like Copa America, African Nations, Asian Cup, Gold Cup. It's the joint second toughest trophy to win in terms of standard of opposition that you face, with only the World Cup above it.

Every nation takes it completely seriously, and picks their strongest players and gives 100% to try and win it (or to gain promotion / avoid relegation in the lower groups).

Portugal were 100% correct, and in keeping with every other nation, in taking this competition very seriously - despite your dismissive suggestions that it's only glorified friendlies and should be used as nothing more than preparation for a 'proper tournament' like next years World Cup.

They've now got a year to build towards that. What they've also got is a third major international honour - which for a country of around 10 million, who until 2016 had no international honours at all, is a big thing and not one to turn their noses up at just because none of them are the world cup.

You make a valid point about the shortened summer tournaments not being as suited for an aging player as games come thick and fast. And they've now got a year to work towards that. But the Nations League isn't set up like that, which allowed them to pick their aging - but by far best - striker and for him to finish the competitions second highest scorer and for them to win it. That makes complete sense to win the major international honour that was being played that year first, before directing attention at the even bigger tournament that takes place 12 months later. They've now got plenty of time to work towards that - and are doing so as Nations League champions thanks in no small part to the goals scored by Ronaldo.
 
Last edited:
Huge flaw in your argument: the Nations League is a real tournament.

There isn't a rule saying there can only be one, maximum two, international tournaments. There happens now to be 3 main tournaments: The World Cup for everyone, and now two continental competitions: the European Championships / Copa America / African Nations, etc: And the Nations League.

Just because it's more recent, it lacks the historical pedigree of some of the continental trophies. But in levels of hardness / standard of opposition, the European Nations League is on a par with the European Championships, and levels above the other continental trophies like Copa America, African Nations, Asian Cup, Gold Cup. It's the joint second toughest trophy to win in terms of standard of opposition that you face, with only the World Cup above it.
Is that why Portugal was eliminated by Morocco, Uruguay and mighty USA in the WCs?
Is that why Germany got eliminated twice in the group stage in the last two WCs losing to Japan, Mexico and South Korea?
Has England ever beaten the US in the WC on three occasions they met?

Below is how Europeans performed in 2022 WC:

Germany: lost to Japan, eliminated in the group stage
Belgium: eliminated by Morocco in the group stage
Denmark: lost to Australia, drew with Tunisia, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage
Netherlands: drew with Ecuador, lost to Argentina
Spain: lost to Japan, eliminated by Morocco in the 2nd round
Portugal: lost to South Korea, eliminated by Morocco in the QFs
Wales: lost to Iran, drew with the US, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage
England: drew with the US
Poland: lost to Argentina, drew with Mexico
Serbia: lost to Brazil, drew with Cameroon, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage
 
Huge flaw in your argument: the Nations League is a real tournament.

There isn't a rule saying there can only be one, maximum two, international tournaments. There happens now to be 3 main tournaments: The World Cup for everyone, and now two continental competitions: the European Championships / Copa America / African Nations, etc: And the Nations League.

Yes, of course there isn't a rule as such, when UEFA can easily make a naked money grab by replacing friendlies with a supposedly meaningful tournament in order to wring more funds out those boring international breaks that everyone hates because they disrupt club football. That doesn't make it a proper international tournament, because part of the test of a tournament is the games all taking place at the same time in a short period. It tests the stamina, togetherness, resolve and resilience of a group of players, coaches, staff etc.


Just because it's more recent, and a nation / player you don't like have now won it twice, doesn't mean it isn't now one of the three main international tournaments for European players to win.

The main international tournaments for a European player to win are the Euros and the World Cup. Same as it ever was. If you get to the end of your career and the only tournament you have won is the Nations League, it is not a successful international career. Portugal won the Euros, which is a proper competition, and Ronaldo's great international triumph.

Every nation takes it completely seriously, and picks their strongest players and gives 100% to try and win it (or to gain promotion / avoid relegation in the lower groups).

So, England, who got relegated, took it 100% seriously? Same as the World Cup? Or the Euros? Anyone who saw France and Germany players walking around in the 3rd place playoff knows this is nonsense. Never seen a 3rd place playoff like that in a Euros or a World Cup.

Portugal were 100% correct, and in keeping with every other nation, in taking this competition very seriously - despite your dismissive suggestions that it's only glorified friendlies and should be used as preparation for a 'proper tournament' like next years World Cup.

Clearly not every other nation
They've now got a year to build towards that. What they've also got is a third major international honour - which for a country of around 10 million, who until 2016 had no international honours at all, is a big thing and not one to turn their noses up at just because none of them are the world cup.

i don't turn my nose up at the Euros at all. But it is a tournament that has been won by smaller nations before.
You make a valid point about the shortened summer tournaments not being as suited for an aging player as games come thick and fast. And they've now got a year to work towards that. But the Nations League isn't set up like that, which allowed them to pick their aging - but by far best - striker and for him to finish the competitions second highest scorer and for them to win it. That makes complete sense to win the major international honour that was being played that year first, before directing attention at the even bigger tournament that takes place 12 months later. They've now got plenty of time to work towards that - and are doing so as Nations League champions thanks in no small part to the goals scored by Ronaldo.

And how do they work towards that? By making Ronaldo younger?
 
Last edited:
Yes, of course there isn't a rule as such, when UEFA can easily make a naked money grab by replacing friendlies with a supposedly meaningful tournament in order to wring more funds out those boring international breaks that everyone hates because they disrupt club football. That doesn't make it a proper tournament, because part of the test of a tournament is the games all taking place at the same time in a short period. It tests the stamina, togetherness, resolve and resilience of a group of players, coaches, staff etc.




The main international tournaments for a European player to win are the Euros and the World Cup. Same as it ever was. If you get to the end of your career and the only tournament you have won is the Nations League, it is not a successful international career. Portugal won the Euros, which is a proper competition, and Ronaldo's great international triumph.

The Euro used to be a final 4 tournament.
So, England, who got relegated, took it 100% seriously? Same as the World Cup? Or the Euros? Anyone who saw France and Germany players walking around in the 3rd place playoff knows this is nonsense. Never seen a 3rd place playoff like that in a Euros or a World Cup.

England were more excited about the first edition and made the semifinals in that one. They tried not to get relegated but couldn’t. Shit happens. That’s all.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/62922803


Nobody is comparing it to the Euros but it is a serious competition. And the only other trophy available at this level. At club level you get a shot at 5/6 trophies. Including 2 very big ones every season.
So it is easy to look down an FA Cup. You can’t do that at international football. At international football you only get the 2 major trophies once each in every 4 year cycle.

This final was the most watched event on Spanish TV this season. For a country that won the last Euros, playing a third consecutive final in Nations league, clearly their public didn’t take it for a friendly.

 
The Euro used to be a final 4 tournament.

OK, so maybe in 60 years time, the Nations League will be taken as seriously as the Euros is now. If it lasts that long, which it might not
England were more excited about the first edition and made the semifinals in that one. They tried not to get relegated but couldn’t. Shit happens. That’s all.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/62922803

Funny how they don't seem to flop similarly in getting to the business end of the ÿWorld Cup or the Euros. why doesn't 'shit happen' there?
Nobody is comparing it to the Euros but it is a serious competition. And the only other trophy available at this level. At club level you get a shot at 5/6 trophies. Including 2 very big ones every season.
So it is easy to look down an FA Cup. You can’t do that at international football. At international football you only get the 2 major trophies once each in every 4 year cycle.

Well there were many other trophies that came and went, Confederatioms cup, Le Tournoi etc. Who knows if this one will have legs? But the World Cup and the key continental tournaments endure, because those are the ones that make sense. Where theres's money to be made, these governing bodies will always try to create new toys.
This final was the most watched event on Spanish TV this season. For a country that won the last Euros, playing a third consecutive final in Nations league, clearly their public didn’t take it for a friendly.



The 'Finalissima' between Italy and Argentina had 6 million viewers in Italy and a 33.5% market share. Does that mean it is not a friendly?

I note that this is getting off the topic of CR7 though, this discussion really belongs elsewhere.
 
The answer is very simple. The Nations League is not a real tournament. This thread is full of Ronaldo stans trying to claim that it is, but it is not. It's nice to win, but it is not the World Cup, and it is not the Euros.
Funniest thing about this is that Barca fans wanted to use this Nations league tournament as strong ammunition for Yamal’s BDOR case, claiming that if he won then he should be undisputed favourite for the award. Now it’s back to being a non-serious and friendly trophy
 
It's only a serious tournament if the right people / NT win I guess :rolleyes:

Granted that is not as big as the Euros or WC and it will never be, but I find it funny that the tournament has more or less value depending on the team and the players that win it.
The Yamal bandwagon were defending that the Nations League would solidify him as the Ballon d'Or winner but now that he lost, it's just a glorified friendly tournament

Just watch in 2 years Spain win the Nations League and we are back to "It's a serious tournament with great football".
The funniest part is that the NT average ranking is far better than the Copa America, making it a competition harder to win.
 
Funniest thing about this is that Barca fans wanted to use this Nations league tournament as strong ammunition for Yamal’s BDOR case, claiming that if he won then he should be undisputed favourite for the award. Now it’s back to being a non-serious and friendly trophy

When did I say that?
 
I didn’t mean you specifically. I quoted that part because it reminded me of what I’ve been seeing on Twitter.
I mean, if you base your opinions on Twitter bullshit and then extrapolate it to say 'that's what Barca fans think', you would find every single fanbase absolutely toxic and idiotic.
 
Funniest thing about this is that Barca fans wanted to use this Nations league tournament as strong ammunition for Yamal’s BDOR case, claiming that if he won then he should be undisputed favourite for the award. Now it’s back to being a non-serious and friendly trophy
probably because it's Yamal vs Dembele playing against each other (Spain vs France)...
 
Is that why Portugal was eliminated by Morocco, Uruguay and mighty USA in the WCs?
Is that why Germany got eliminated twice in the group stage in the last two WCs losing to Japan, Mexico and South Korea?
Has England ever beaten the US in the WC on three occasions they met?

Below is how Europeans performed in 2022 WC:

Germany: lost to Japan, eliminated in the group stage
Belgium: eliminated by Morocco in the group stage
Denmark: lost to Australia, drew with Tunisia, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage
Netherlands: drew with Ecuador, lost to Argentina
Spain: lost to Japan, eliminated by Morocco in the 2nd round
Portugal: lost to South Korea, eliminated by Morocco in the QFs
Wales: lost to Iran, drew with the US, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage
England: drew with the US
Poland: lost to Argentina, drew with Mexico
Serbia: lost to Brazil, drew with Cameroon, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage

Also people don't know that historically Copa was won by Colombia, Bolivia, Paraguay, Peru and that even Mexico was a finalist two times.

Of course there are aspects, as simple as math related that make the Euros harder to win it:
. It's not played every two years, teams have to wait longer for the opportunity
. There are more teams involved and more possibilities of for instance more traditional teams to win it.

At the end of the day it looks like the fanatism with EPL makes people believe that teams from there walk on water and they only loose against other Continental rivals because they are more tired. Even if it's the best League, such huge gap does not exist, even in a world that has helped to create those diff in financial terms and it's not anymore a worldwide spread collection of very powerful and traditional Leagues like in the 40s and the 80s (yet even in those days, still had lots of snobism and prejudice coming from Europe).

It's football in a NT KO style competition that like WCs have shown every etidion anyone can beat anyone.

Every competition has its own tendencies, to play sometimes in altitude, with bad pitches, with fellas going after you 70 style, with studs on the chest and mostly a yellow and a siga siga even in a final, it's quite an enviroment. And at the same time as Brasil, Uruguay and Argentina are powers that would always have bigger chances, that also means that if some of them are on streak, sometimes it's like hitting a wall to knock them down and grab a title. Even with that aspect involved, still nor Diego, nor Pele and Brasil and Argentina for many reasons had to deal with lots of years not winning it.

Anyway leaving this silly suppose huge gaps aside, this comparisons only appeared when pushed by certain will or agenda to put the favorite player above another and like always ending devaluating sthg, in this case the NL, the Copa or whatever.

Also at the end of the day, more important than titles in NT KO competitions, or even stats, are perfomances, so it's not just a question of I was there when we won or got a second place, third or whatever, the main thing for me to evaluate, it's how the player in question played any of those tournaments.

And finally, few times it's talked that the records of any SA, African, Asian NTs against an Euro one, must be build in friendlies where hardly Euro teams ever travel to those places, almost always countries outside of Europe has to play as visitors and in WCs, all these areas tend to have way less representatives.

It's actually quite disrepectful to try always to demerit sthg in order to sustain any sort of idea, when not even between Elite players normally exists the suppose gaps in talent many people tend to believe are.
 
Last edited:
When did I say that?

You didn't say it, yet part of the common Media and specially silly social media talked about it. You just put some emphasis on how much better was Lamine than Dembele and cia in the Spain vs France game, nothing serious thought, a tad spicey quote, nothing serious.

PD: as aside note, Yamal himself has been a bit too cocky in some of his social media and interviews. I like his confidence, yet someone must talk to him, it's just a kid and he is starting to get a bit dizzy
 
Last edited:
Is that why Portugal was eliminated by Morocco, Uruguay and mighty USA in the WCs?
Is that why Germany got eliminated twice in the group stage in the last two WCs losing to Japan, Mexico and South Korea?
Has England ever beaten the US in the WC on three occasions they met?

Below is how Europeans performed in 2022 WC:

Germany: lost to Japan, eliminated in the group stage
Belgium: eliminated by Morocco in the group stage
Denmark: lost to Australia, drew with Tunisia, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage
Netherlands: drew with Ecuador, lost to Argentina
Spain: lost to Japan, eliminated by Morocco in the 2nd round
Portugal: lost to South Korea, eliminated by Morocco in the QFs
Wales: lost to Iran, drew with the US, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage
England: drew with the US
Poland: lost to Argentina, drew with Mexico
Serbia: lost to Brazil, drew with Cameroon, eliminated as the worst team in the group stage

I mean, since '90 you have 6 European WC wins (4 different countries) and 3 South American wins (Brazil (2x) and Argentina) and these days you can argue that the only South American NT that has a proper chance of winning the WC and/or challenge the top European NT teams is Argentina. All WC finals either had 1 EU team or both were EU teams.
 
Last edited:
From some guy named Jafar about Goncalo Ramos:

This guy Replaced Cristiano Ronaldo yesterday in the 83rd minutes of the match in the UEFA NATIONS LEAGUE Final. He played 13 minutes of Normal time +33 minutes of Extra time.

During that 46 minutes he had 0 touches of the ball and was Just running up and down. He was so bad that even Diogo Jota that came in with 3 minutes left on the clock missed two chances before he could even touch the ball.
 
Also people don't know that historically Copa was won by Colombia, Bolivia, Paraguay, Peru and that even Mexico was a finalist two times.

Of course there are aspects, as simple as math related that make the Euros harder to win it:
. It's not played every two years, teams have to wait longer for the opportunity
. There are more teams involved and more possibilities of for instance more traditional teams to win it.

At the end of the day it looks like the fanatism with EPL makes people believe that teams from there walk on water and they only loose against other Continental rivals because they are more tired. Even if it's the best League, such huge gap does not exist, even in a world that has helped to create those diff in financial terms and it's not anymore a worldwide spread collection of very powerful and traditional Leagues like in the 40s and the 80s (yet even in those days, still had lots of snobism and prejudice coming from Europe).

It's football in a NT KO style competition that like WCs have shown every etidion anyone can beat anyone.

Every competition has its own tendencies, to play sometimes in altitude, with bad pitches, with fellas going after you 70 style, with studs on the chest and mostly a yellow and a siga siga even in a final, it's quite an enviroment. And at the same time as Brasil, Uruguay and Argentina are powers that would always have bigger chances, that also means that if some of them are on streak, sometimes it's like hitting a wall to knock them down and grab a title. Even with that aspect involved, still nor Diego, nor Pele and Brasil and Argentina for many reasons had to deal with lots of years not winning it.

Anyway leaving this silly suppose huge gaps aside, this comparisons only appeared when pushed by certain will or agenda to put the favorite player above another and like always ending devaluating sthg, in this case the NL, the Copa or whatever.

Also at the end of the day, more important than titles in NT KO competitions, or even stats, are perfomances, so it's not just a question of I was there when we won or got a second place, third or whatever, the main thing for me to evaluate, it's how the player in question played any of those tournaments.

And finally, few times it's talked that the records of any SA, African, Asian NTs against an Euro one, must be build in friendlies where hardly Euro teams ever travel to those places, almost always countries outside of Europe has to play as visitors and in WCs, all these areas tend to have way less representatives.

It's actually quite disrepectful to try always to demerit sthg in order to sustain any sort of idea, when not even between Elite players normally exists the suppose gaps in talent many people tend to believe are.
The Euros is levels above Copa America, especially when it had 16 teams instead of 24. With 24 NTs in the Euros, you have a couple of weaker teams but in the older format literally all of the teams in Euros were great and competitive.

Winning one European championship is like winning two or three Copa Americas in my opinion. Copa America is the second best continental competition and it's better than let's say AFCON or Gold Cup. That's not to disrespect Copa America but it's not comparable to the Euros.

The Euros is much closer to the World Cup than Copa in terms of sheer quality of the teams. All of these continental competitions are serious and I actually enjoying watching AFCON. And where does the Nations League rank? It certainly isn't comparable to Copa America in terms of prestige or importance, but it's a growing competition and we've seen that the vast majority of the players are taking it seriously.

In the beginning it semeed like a cash grab competition created by UEFA, but 7 years later it seems like they made an excellent decision. Instead of playing boring friendlies, now we are seeing the best NTs of Europe competiting for a silverware. We have seen that the matches in the knockouts were great and of high quality. Almost all of the teams were stacked and I don't think anyone should consider the Nations League to be the "glorified friendly" tournament anymore.

It's already a very serious competition and in 5 to 10 years it's going to have a lot more prestige and importance.
 
Winning one European championship is like winning two or three Copa Americas in my opinion.
So Portugal would have a way easier time facing a combination of Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay etc. than facing Austria, Hungary, Iceland, Poland, Wales, France as they did in 2016. and we should count their win as 2-3 Copas?

Their struggles against Americans (North Americans included) tell a very different story.. They already got eliminated by Chile, Uruguay and US in tournaments.

Your assumption is anytime a strong European team faces another team from other continents bar Brazil/Argentina, they will dominate. Easy to check how this worked out in WC 2014 & 2022 for many including Spain, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Belgium and England all of which were eliminated in the group stage.
 
Last edited:
The Euros is levels above Copa America, especially when it had 16 teams instead of 24. With 24 NTs in the Euros, you have a couple of weaker teams but in the older format literally all of the teams in Euros were great and competitive.

Winning one European championship is like winning two or three Copa Americas in my opinion. Copa America is the second best continental competition and it's better than let's say AFCON or Gold Cup. That's not to disrespect Copa America but it's not comparable to the Euros.

The Euros is much closer to the World Cup than Copa in terms of sheer quality of the teams. All of these continental competitions are serious and I actually enjoying watching AFCON. And where does the Nations League rank? It certainly isn't comparable to Copa America in terms of prestige or importance, but it's a growing competition and we've seen that the vast majority of the players are taking it seriously.

In the beginning it semeed like a cash grab competition created by UEFA, but 7 years later it seems like they made an excellent decision. Instead of playing boring friendlies, now we are seeing the best NTs of Europe competiting for a silverware. We have seen that the matches in the knockouts were great and of high quality. Almost all of the teams were stacked and I don't think anyone should consider the Nations League to be the "glorified friendly" tournament anymore.

It's already a very serious competition and in 5 to 10 years it's going to have a lot more prestige and importance.

Go figure, just yesterday England lost to Senegal, Argentina had a tough match againt Colombia that ended in a tie and prior to that England only beat Andorra by 1.
Football it's not played on a paper without being played in a pitch. The level of snobism and cockyness it's just too much for my taste.
Anyway I know you won't change your mind, less when you at times have a bit of an opinion in an agenda.


PD:
Frankly on the topic of NL, of if it's a valid context to evaluate the perfomance of any player, I trully believe so. Even if it does not have the prestige, in a strict football sense I have no issue to consider any of these last matches as proper competitoon on the same level of any KO NT no matter the Prestige of the Cup involved.
Just because that's my view on football: it's what happens in the pitch, being a friendly, a not that prestiguous Cup at the moment or whatever, it's the level of the match what attracts me and makes me ecvaluate how a player in particular performs in such context.
BTW, for me this is the apporach any team. nation and even player in particular should approach with every match, it's the only path to actually later won those that already have prestige involved. Yet in all of them it's the same fecking football of old.
 
Last edited:
I mean, since '90 you have 6 European WC wins (4 different countries) and 3 South American wins (Brazil (2x) and Argentina) and these days you can argue that the only South American NT that has a proper chance of winning the WC and/or challenge the top European NT teams is Argentina. All WC finals either had 1 EU team or both were EU teams.
People love to point to individual games as evidence of something but the wider statistical trends are overwhelmingly in favour of Europe. Last two world cups alone 6 of 8 and 5 of 8 QF teams have been European. The World cup alone before last all four semi finalists were European. There’s so much more data too, but it’s a tired debate. People take it as a slight and get defensive but it’s not even debatable how much better the Euros are and how much more strength in depth Europe has.
 
People love to point to individual games as evidence of something but the wider statistical trends are overwhelmingly in favour of Europe. Last two world cups alone 6 of 8 and 5 of 8 QF teams have been European. The World cup alone before last all four semi finalists were European. There’s so much more data too, but it’s a tired debate. People take it as a slight and get defensive but it’s not even debatable how much better the Euros are and how much more strength in depth Europe has.

I'll say there is a bigger tendency to simplify everything and later come with over the top conclusions and the same prejudice of old.
 
Ronaldo fan boys are annoying, anti Ronaldo fans are also annoying.

The guys won a cup and scored a goal, let him have it rather than downplaying it.
 
People love to point to individual games as evidence of something but the wider statistical trends are overwhelmingly in favour of Europe. Last two world cups alone 6 of 8 and 5 of 8 QF teams have been European. The World cup alone before last all four semi finalists were European. There’s so much more data too, but it’s a tired debate. People take it as a slight and get defensive but it’s not even debatable how much better the Euros are and how much more strength in depth Europe has.
That's normal because Europe has way more teams, having 5 teams out of 8 in QFs is not something exceptional when you have almost half the teams representing your continent in a WC, 3-4 times more than the next continent. South America punches way above its weight.

Greece, Denmark, Czech, Portugal all won Euros (also with teams like Turkey, Wales etc. playing semis), it's not a given that they would all be able to replicate that in Copa if they were a part of it beating Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, or do the same it in AFCON.

And, I agree Euros without a doubt is a stronger competition than Copa, but saying a Euro = 2 or 3 Copas involves too much bias.
 
Last edited:
That's normal because Europe has way more teams, having 5 teams out of 8 in QFs is not something exceptional when you have almost half the teams representing your continent in a WC, 3-4 times more than the next continent. South America punches way above its weight.

Greece, Denmark, Czech, Portugal all won Euros (also with teams like Turkey, Wales etc. playing semis), it's not a given that they would all be able to replicate that in Copa if they were a part of it beating Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, or do the same it in AFCON.

And, I agree Euros without a doubt is a stronger competition than Copa, but saying a Euro = 2 or 3 Copas involves too much bias.

I mean, in the last 20 or 30 years, only 2 South American NTs were at the same level as the top EU NTs, and at this point, only Argentina is at the same level imo.
Brazil is a shadow of what they once were, and as football evolved tactically, they didn't evolve at all (at least based on the games I saw).

In the case of EU NTs you could argue that France, Spain, Portugal, Germany and maybe to a lesser extent, England and Belgium are all WC contenders. Maybe Italy as well but honestly I don't even know how they are atm
 
Ronaldo fan boys are annoying, anti Ronaldo fans are also annoying.

The guys won a cup and scored a goal, let him have it rather than downplaying it.
Why are you posting about Ronaldo in the 'does Europe crap over all the other continents' thread?
 
This thread is always so bad, but always for a different reason.

I like it. Its like watching homeless people fight over scraps to feel better about yourself
 
Do you even name a squad for nations league like you would for Euros, Copa or WC, if England win it does it end 60 years of hurt etc or do you still need a Euros or WC? I’m thinking the latter.

Nations League isn’t a serious “tournament.” It’s small time to say it is. Fair play to Ronaldo still going at his age, but come on - dropping to his knees for the cameras at FT for this….pretty transparent.
 
This thread is always so bad, but always for a different reason.

I like it. Its like watching homeless people fight over scraps to feel better about yourself
That's just describing most threads on the site, and most of social media in general.
 
I mean, in the last 20 or 30 years, only 2 South American NTs were at the same level as the top EU NTs, and at this point, only Argentina is at the same level imo.
Brazil is a shadow of what they once were, and as football evolved tactically, they didn't evolve at all (at least based on the games I saw).
What's your explanation for Spain, Germany, Portugal and Belgium all going out early in the previous WC losing out to teams like Japan, Morocco etc.?
Were they stronger than Brazil?

or Euro 2012 finalists Italy, previous Euro-WC winners Spain and England all going out in the group stage in WC'2014 losing out to Costa Rica, Uruguay, Chile etc.. You'd expect when there's such a huge gap as you claim between Europe and other continents, Euro top teams would not struggle like this.

Again, nobody would deny Euros is a stronger competition than other continental ones.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Fortitude
I mean, if you base your opinions on Twitter bullshit and then extrapolate it to say 'that's what Barca fans think', you would find every single fanbase absolutely toxic and idiotic.
What fanbase isn’t toxic though? It’s a crowd of men wanting to see their group “wins”. The difference between fanbases is which group they choose to hate more than others (United-Liverpool or Real-Barca…)
 
So Portugal would have a way easier time facing a combination of Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay etc. than facing Austria, Hungary, Iceland, Poland, Wales, France as they did in 2016. and we should count their win as 2-3 Copas?

Their struggles against Americans (North Americans included) tell a very different story.. They already got eliminated by Chile, Uruguay and US in tournaments.

Your assumption is anytime a strong European team faces another team from other continents bar Brazil/Argentina, they will dominate. Easy to check how this worked out in WC 2014 & 2022 for many including Spain, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Belgium and England all of which were eliminated in the group stage.
I stand by all of my claims. European teams have been dominating the World Cup tournaments in the 21st century. Out of 12 WC finalists, 10 were European. From 2006 to 2018, all WC finalists were European (that's 4 in a row).

That's not to say that all European teams are gonna dominate all the time but it shows that UEFA has the most quality teams out of any continent or federation.
 
What's your explanation for Spain, Germany, Portugal and Belgium all going out early in the previous WC losing out to teams like Japan, Morocco etc.?
Were they stronger than Brazil?

or Euro 2012 finalists Italy, previous Euro-WC winners Spain and England all going out in the group stage in WC'2014 losing out to Costa Rica, Uruguay, Chile etc.. You'd expect when there's such a huge gap as you claim between Europe and other continents, Euro top teams would not struggle like this.

Again, nobody would deny Euros is a stronger competition than other continental ones.

I mean, stronger is not equal to guaranteed win. Any of those teams lost against smaller EU nations at some point as well.
England lost recently to Greece, Portugal lost to Croatia last year, Belgium lost to Israel, etc.

Just because Belgium would win against Israel 9 out of 10 times, doesn't mean there can't be the odd game where they lose. Maybe it's because of luck, bad mental, injuries, bad tactics, etc, but no win is guaranteed and sometimes the stronger teams lose.
 
Last edited:
I mean, stronger is not equal to guaranteed win. Any of those teams lost against smaller EU nations at some point as well.
England lost recently to Greece, Portugal lost to Croatia last year, Belgium lost to Israel, etc.

Just because Belgium would win against Israel 9 out of 10 times, doesn't mean there can't be the odd game where they lose. Maybe it's because of luck, bad mental, injuries, bad tactics, etc, but no win is guaranteed and sometimes the stronger teams lose.
I stand by all of my claims. European teams have been dominating the World Cup tournaments in the 21st century. Out of 12 WC finalists, 10 were European. From 2006 to 2018, all WC finalists were European (that's 4 in a row).

That's not to say that all European teams are gonna dominate all the time but it shows that UEFA has the most quality teams out of any continent or federation.

Basicly this is the issue in this thread:
To defend that having good perfomances, stats in the NL as a parameter of current better integration of Cristiano in the NT, there was, nor there is any need to overhype to an extreme the Euros, the NL and downplay to silly levels Copa (also making elevation shots against Messi, or plain shots against Cristiano by devaluating to an extreme this NL) .
Also as Mertens and I've said, just for being played less frequently and having more teams involved, with more traditional Powerhouses, obviously Euros will have more prestige and it's harder to win it more frequently.

Yet there isn't the silly gap you are implying AT ALL. It's not that any Euro team will cruise in it, nor is a walk in the park for any of the most traditional Powers in SA. And when we enter in such terrain, we always end in a silly demerit game just to enhace or not rate a certain player achievements and quite a silly quote of snobism, present even in days where Di Stefano or Pele payed in SA, not just now that SA leagues are constantly bleeding loosing players.

Since you just don't get the gist of what Mertens meant with those examples or plainly not agree at all, it would be futil to even continue to talk about this when at the end of the day it's a Cristiano thread, not a let's bash Copa in order to make Cris greater or bash NL in order to demerit Cristiano.
 
I stand by all of my claims. European teams have been dominating the World Cup tournaments in the 21st century. Out of 12 WC finalists, 10 were European. From 2006 to 2018, all WC finalists were European (that's 4 in a row).

That's not to say that all European teams are gonna dominate all the time but it shows that UEFA has the most quality teams out of any continent or federation.

It must be news to Argentina, World Cup finalists in 2014, that they are a European country.