Have to agree with most of that, and think your reasoning is fair.I actually almost entirely agree with this point. I cynically think the players of today are being curled and that attacking players in general are more protected than ever, which is why I always tend to rate players from the past higher than those of today. And it is actually not a secret that football has gone to this directon, to protect the attackers. But - I do believe some of the players of today wouldn't be able to reach the same heights if playing in previous eras. However, I cannot ever prove this, it just my own perception. And I do realise that my notion will only remain hypothetical, which doesn't even pass as rational, but it is my stand. You have a much more valid point in the sense that players from different eras are really - by the end of the day - impossible to compare.
That was kind of what I was implying too, concerning Zidane. And Iniesta is the closest thing we ever get to Zidane, they certainly fall in the same category. Zidane is my favourite of all time, but I rate Ronaldo's impact higher.
I don't think (and hope not) anyone will forget Messi's impact to the game, and that he has performed against every opponent there were (unless that football fan have lived under a rock and been in a coma).
But you could also turn it around - what if Internet was established as it is today, with the social media and the accessability of information, in Ronaldo's era? Would his reputation - as well as other players of that era - been even more amplified? (...Hm..or what if we did not have Internet, social media, and such today, would Messi's reputation been bigger because of the absence of accessing information?).
I do agree with this though - that stats argument are not always valid. Zidane's (as well as Iniesta's) stats are not that good, but both have had their impact to the game, especially for us who lived to see them in their primes. Ronaldo is the greatest for me, because yet to this day I have not experienced any player to master his combination oof technique, pace, acceleration and strength. He could look like a cannon ball or a lightning cutting through defences. For me, his impact to the game is incredible, in the sense of when he broke through, that combination of skills made him certainly look like a phenomenon. Still to this day, we can see some skills that are directly copied from him, as the flip-flop.
How good was Ronaldo #9?
- Thread starter VorZakone
- Start date
Please, dont compare me to him
. I am not a Messi fanboy, I have nothing with Barcelona/Argentina or even Messi outside that I think he is a great player of the game.You have to know he calls posters like me nostalgicPlease, dont compare me to him
Suarez hit 59 goals in 2015/2016. When you put things into context Fenomeno is at least a level above him(if not two). He's the best #9 in history but he's much more than that.
Yes injuries took him out in terms of being the greatest ever or participating in that discussion, but bossing some of the best defenders in the game in Seria A heyday was one helluva sight to see.
Ronaldo in that Barca side with Xavi/Iniesta as creators would absolutely rip apart La Liga defences. Of course it is all subjective, but an injury free Ronaldo, playing most games like he did in 96/97 could absolutely reach those figures.
He could reach that yes, but if you were to look at goal output the discussion wouldnt favour Ronaldo much. He never finished top scorer in the Serie A , while players like Bierhoff, Amareso, Crespo, Schevchenko did, and they were good but not one of the bests of all time good. In terms of goal output, Messi and Ronaldo stand out more than the other bests of strikers than Ronaldo did in his age.
He won the Pichichi trophy with Barca with good 9 goals advantage over the next best scorer. Failing to win the goalscorer prize at Inter I think was more due to having only one good season due to being injured in the rest(or coming back from injury) and also a dysfunctional Inter side. He was the one man attack - main creator, main goalscorer, he even took the corners. He dropped deep, went on the wings, usually marked by 2-3-4 defenders. Stopping him in attack guaranteed neutralizing the entire Inter attack, because... well he was the one man show. In his only
With Ronaldo's Real and Messi's Barca is not the case. Sure they both are the best attacking output and their quality is not questioned, but the attacking force behind them was truly fantastic.
In the 90's in Italy there weren't many cannon fodder sides as well. Lower ranked teams had great managers and also pretty distributed quality all over the park, not to mention great defences and with less teams in Seria A you couldn't really boost the goalscoring numbers to the same extend.
Nostalgia may be a factor, but definitely no more than the hype machine around current players. Everywhere you look you're told how great the current crop are.
Everything is also based around stats now and football is very different than it was even 15-20 years ago.
The one who racked up 90 goals in a calendar year. Put 1997 Ronnie on that barcelona team and he'd have scored 70 goals a season. Barca as a whole would have scored the same, and maybe they even wouldn't have been quite as unplayable as a team, but he'd have have put up goalscoring numbers to make messi and cristiano blush
Remember the Keane vs Vieira match? The pinnacle of that Arsenal-United rivalry and it's the first thing that comes to mind when I think of aggressive and physical football. It was a certain 19 year old Cristiano Ronaldo who scored 2 and turned the match around. When Cristiano played in the Premier League he was getting the shit kicked out of him too and he's had plenty of problems with injuries ever since so it's not like he has had it that easy. Anyway my point is that you should judge players on what they did and not on what they didn't do. Messi and Cristiano can't go back 30 years and play in a different era so just assuming they wouldn't be able to do this well in a different era isn't really fair.This
What is needed to be emphasised is the context of the time, of when he was the greatest. Football was more of a contact sport back then, compared to the football climate of today. Attacking players may have been protected back then, but not as much as they are today, not even close.
You could always have legitimate arguments of why either of Beckenbauer, Mattheus, Maradona, Pele, Zidane, Cristiano or Messi (and so forth, as the list continues..) are the greatest; but what stands out for the players before Cristiano&Messi is that football was more of a contact sport, even as late as in the 90's. Even if you look at the classic battles between Arsenal and United in the befinning of the 21st century, you'll notice that we will probably never see a physical rivalry such as that ever again (which Henry also mentioned in the Premier League 25 anniversary segment).
Another important aspect to emphasise is that there were no galacticos or super teams back then. The football landscape was quite even across Europe. Dynamo Kiev could win a CL group with Real Madrid, and later also with Barcelona in it (when Shevshenko and Rebrov made their breakthrough in the lime light). Even IFK Gothenbourg won their Champions League group, ahead of Manchester United, Barcelona and Galatasaray, and were sometimes outsiders to go far. Rosenborg eliminated AC Milan from CL, and so forth. And Ronaldo, in a league that subscribed all kinds of European finals and trophies (Milan, Juventus, Lazio, Roma, Fiorentina, Parma..), stood out in the same manner Messi and Cristiano stands out today, except that Ronaldo's era had far more tough circumstances and competition.Imagine the likes of Cristiano, Messi, Neymar, in a team that does not contain 70% of ballon d'or competition, and yet having the pressure to perform and carry the team as they do. It still needs to be point out that both Messi and Cristiano are phenomenal, and definitely players to tell your grandchildren about, but I can't imagine them be as consistent as they are, in the older eras.
So...to be able to dance past defenders, in such pace, with that technique, with that vision, in a time were defenders had license to kick the sh*t out of you, and in a time when there were potentially ballon d'or winners in every rival team, as there were at least 5-6 domestical rivals, and lots more across Europe... That is why I will always rate players from older era higher than the stars of today, because I seriously doubt any of today's stars would be able to perform at their top in that era, with such intensity and consistency.
You say there was no galacticos or super teams back then but Ronaldo Fenomeno was part of the galacticos. He had his chances to shine in the Champions League and his record there is subpar in comparison to Cristiano and Messi. Cristiano scored more Champions League goals in the La Decima year than Ronaldo Fenomeno in his entire career. Injuries played their part but injuries are part of football. I'd take someone who puts 7/10 performances for a full season than someone who puts 8/10 performances for half a season.
Greatness is judged on both performances and achievements and I get why people love to romanticize about Ronaldo Fenomeno but the truth is his achievements pale in comparison to both Messi and Cristiano regardless of how their primes match up against eachother. It's one thing to be on top of football for 4 or 5 years and it's another to do it for 11 or 12. At 32 Cristiano is deciding Champions League finals and semifinals while at the same age Fenomeno was enjoying the bundas and feijoadas in Brazil. Also for all the mentions of Cristiano and Messi having played in better club teams there are few mentions of their respective national teams. How much did that brazilian national team do for Fenomeno's legacy?
Just my 2 cents
Thanks for sharing the vid!With the risk of repeating myself, I'd like to refer to my last post on the matter, on the answer to @Sammyjunn, especially concerning the comparison of players of different decades.Remember the Keane vs Vieira match? The pinnacle of that Arsenal-United rivalry and it's the first thing that comes to mind when I think of aggressive and physical football. It was a certain 19 year old Cristiano Ronaldo who scored 2 and turned the match around. When Cristiano played in the Premier League he was getting the shit kicked out of him too and he's had plenty of problems with injuries ever since so it's not like he has had it that easy. Anyway my point is that you should judge players on what they did and not on what they didn't do. Messi and Cristiano can't go back 30 years and play in a different era so just assuming they wouldn't be able to do this well in a different era isn't really fair.
You say there was no galacticos or super teams back then but Ronaldo Fenomeno was part of the galacticos. He had his chances to shine in the Champions League and his record there is subpar in comparison to Cristiano and Messi. Cristiano scored more Champions League goals in the La Decima year than Ronaldo Fenomeno in his entire career. Injuries played their part but injuries are part of football. I'd take someone who puts 7/10 performances for a full season than someone who puts 8/10 performances for half a season.
Greatness is judged on both performances and achievements and I get why people love to romanticize about Ronaldo Fenomeno but the truth is his achievements pale in comparison to both Messi and Cristiano regardless of how their primes match up against eachother. It's one thing to be on top of football for 4 or 5 years and it's another to do it for 11 or 12. At 32 Cristiano is deciding Champions League finals and semifinals while at the same age Fenomeno was enjoying the bundas and feijoadas in Brazil. Also for all the mentions of Cristiano and Messi having played in better club teams there are few mentions of their respective national teams. How much did that brazilian national team do for Fenomeno's legacy?
Just my 2 cents
There, I admitted to be biased in my arguments, with the premise of me thinking the players of today are curled when it comes to the refereeing. In the last (of many) physical battle between Arsenal and United Cristiano did score, but for me it was United who as a team impacted the game, and turned it around and winded up the Arsenal players. I am not rational in the sense that it is impossble to prove how players would perform in different eras; but I do hold Ronaldo's impact as the best (hence him as the best). But... for instance, it is completely unfair to everybody involved to compare Puskas of the 50s with Messi of the 21st century, because of thousands of reasons that needs to be taken into account.
Happy you enjoyed the vid !
Last edited:
He made getting around the keeper to score an open net really easy, the best I've seen by far.
A monster of a player, probably the most complete number 9, shame about his injury's and fitness problems, he could have been playing even longer.
I would love to see a thread on him on the ''Classic Players'' thing.
I wish he had stayed at Barcelona to see how well he'd of done after that amazing season he had.
I read an interview once with Christian Vieri and he said Ronaldo would stay out all night partying until 6am and make training for 9, the interviewer asked Vieri why did he do that...he said 'He was the best player in the world, he could do what he wanted'
I read an interview once with Christian Vieri and he said Ronaldo would stay out all night partying until 6am and make training for 9, the interviewer asked Vieri why did he do that...he said 'He was the best player in the world, he could do what he wanted'
Messi and CRonaldo wouldn't be the best players if they played in the 90's and they wouldn't have the teams setup around them.
The most dynamic and explosive striker ever to play the game imo. Absolutely unstoppable in those first 5 years. Injury robbed the football world of the opportunity to witness this jaw dropping talent from getting anywhere near his prime. People should remember that his performances and goal record came when he was still a youngster, and still developing his game.
Aged 16 scored 44 goals in 47 games for first club Cruzeiro.
Aged 17 moved to PSV and scored 54 goals in 58 games, despite being hampered by a knee injury for much of his second season.
Aged 19 moved to Barcelona and scored 47 goals in 49 games.
Aged 20 moved to Inter and scored 39 league goals in 51 games before his injury. In the toughest, most defensive and cynical league in world football at that time.
Scored over 200 goals for club and country in his first 5 years as a professional. He managed this incredible feat of goalscoring consistency, despite the obvious disadvantages of being such a young player and without ever being properly settled anywhere, considering he played for 4 different clubs in 4 different countries in his first 5 seasons.
Those comparing Messi and CR to him should note that neither of those 2 were anywhere even close to that level at a similar age. They have also had much more settled careers, (Messi has only played for 1 club, CR for 3 clubs) and much of their legacies have been cemented throughout their prime years, and were achieved during the most favorable and protective conditions ever for such skillful players to flourish.
In 1998 the tackle from behind was outlawed, and changes to the offside rule have resulted in a vast drop in the general standard of defending, and many of the standard defensive methods for containment used by defenders 20 years ago are now either outlawed, punishable or simply redundant in today's game. While i am not attempting to downplay the achievements of Messi and CR7 in the modern game, it simply has to be pointed out that they have been able to take full advantage of these modern conditions to achieve levels of consistency and goal-scoring feats that would simply not have been possible 20 years ago.
The fact that Ronaldo did what he did without having any of these modern benefits (that have allowed Messi and CR to flourish) should provide some perspective as to how incredibly difficult it was -in an age when hard, physical defending was an art- to rack up such figures.
Messi and CR are clearly the best of this modern era, but could they still have racked up such figures had they played 20 years ago? Probably not, simply because we know for a fact it would have been much, much more difficult for them.
Yet we know one thing for certain, Ronaldo still managed it. He racked up modern day Messi/CR type figures at a time when it should have been almost impossible to do so. That's why he was considered such a phenomenon, and in my opinion, that is what makes him undoubtedly the best of the best.
Aged 16 scored 44 goals in 47 games for first club Cruzeiro.
Aged 17 moved to PSV and scored 54 goals in 58 games, despite being hampered by a knee injury for much of his second season.
Aged 19 moved to Barcelona and scored 47 goals in 49 games.
Aged 20 moved to Inter and scored 39 league goals in 51 games before his injury. In the toughest, most defensive and cynical league in world football at that time.
Scored over 200 goals for club and country in his first 5 years as a professional. He managed this incredible feat of goalscoring consistency, despite the obvious disadvantages of being such a young player and without ever being properly settled anywhere, considering he played for 4 different clubs in 4 different countries in his first 5 seasons.
Those comparing Messi and CR to him should note that neither of those 2 were anywhere even close to that level at a similar age. They have also had much more settled careers, (Messi has only played for 1 club, CR for 3 clubs) and much of their legacies have been cemented throughout their prime years, and were achieved during the most favorable and protective conditions ever for such skillful players to flourish.
In 1998 the tackle from behind was outlawed, and changes to the offside rule have resulted in a vast drop in the general standard of defending, and many of the standard defensive methods for containment used by defenders 20 years ago are now either outlawed, punishable or simply redundant in today's game. While i am not attempting to downplay the achievements of Messi and CR7 in the modern game, it simply has to be pointed out that they have been able to take full advantage of these modern conditions to achieve levels of consistency and goal-scoring feats that would simply not have been possible 20 years ago.
The fact that Ronaldo did what he did without having any of these modern benefits (that have allowed Messi and CR to flourish) should provide some perspective as to how incredibly difficult it was -in an age when hard, physical defending was an art- to rack up such figures.
Messi and CR are clearly the best of this modern era, but could they still have racked up such figures had they played 20 years ago? Probably not, simply because we know for a fact it would have been much, much more difficult for them.
Yet we know one thing for certain, Ronaldo still managed it. He racked up modern day Messi/CR type figures at a time when it should have been almost impossible to do so. That's why he was considered such a phenomenon, and in my opinion, that is what makes him undoubtedly the best of the best.
Last edited:
Just as a point of reference, Ronaldo Fenomeno played 342 matches in Europe. Cristiano Ronaldo has played 719 and counting. That's how big of a difference we're talking about, that's how many games Ronaldo Fenomeno missed and how short his career was.
He didn't put up Cristiano or Messi numbers either. He did in the Netherlands and in Brazil but at the top level, other than that Barcelona season it is not even close. For all the talk of the defensive Serie A here are the Serie A's goal averages of the 2 years where he shined there with Inter:
1997/98 - 2.77 goals per game;
1998/99 - 2.75 goals per game;
Was it really any more defensive than when Cristiano was tearing the Premier League apart or even La Liga? Teams may have set up more cautiously in Italy but the truth is there were less goals in the Premier League.
Premier League
2006/07 - 2.45 goals per game;
2007/08 - 2.64 goals per game;
2008/09 - 2.48 goals per game;
Even La Liga in the last couple of years has had goal per game averages lower than Serie A in 1997/98 and 1998/99.
2009/10 - 2.71 goals per game;
2010/11 - 2.74 goals per game;
2011/12 - 2.76 goals per game;
2012/13 - 2.87 goals per game;
2013/14 - 2.75 goals per game;
2014/15 - 2.66 goals per game;
2015/16 - 2.74 goals per game;
2016/17 - 2.94 goals per game;
Then people talk about the benefits Cristiano and Messi had at club level whilst ignoring the benefits Fenomeno had national team wise. If it wasn't for the 2002 World Cup, playing alongside Ronaldinho and Rivaldo everyone would look back at Fenomeno's career as a huge disappointment trophy wise. People like him because he was a joy to watch and he's geniunely a nice guy, but he's not better than Messi or Cristiano. If he didn't have those injuries and he didn't like to party so much then it would have been close.
He didn't put up Cristiano or Messi numbers either. He did in the Netherlands and in Brazil but at the top level, other than that Barcelona season it is not even close. For all the talk of the defensive Serie A here are the Serie A's goal averages of the 2 years where he shined there with Inter:
1997/98 - 2.77 goals per game;
1998/99 - 2.75 goals per game;
Was it really any more defensive than when Cristiano was tearing the Premier League apart or even La Liga? Teams may have set up more cautiously in Italy but the truth is there were less goals in the Premier League.
Premier League
2006/07 - 2.45 goals per game;
2007/08 - 2.64 goals per game;
2008/09 - 2.48 goals per game;
Even La Liga in the last couple of years has had goal per game averages lower than Serie A in 1997/98 and 1998/99.
2009/10 - 2.71 goals per game;
2010/11 - 2.74 goals per game;
2011/12 - 2.76 goals per game;
2012/13 - 2.87 goals per game;
2013/14 - 2.75 goals per game;
2014/15 - 2.66 goals per game;
2015/16 - 2.74 goals per game;
2016/17 - 2.94 goals per game;
Then people talk about the benefits Cristiano and Messi had at club level whilst ignoring the benefits Fenomeno had national team wise. If it wasn't for the 2002 World Cup, playing alongside Ronaldinho and Rivaldo everyone would look back at Fenomeno's career as a huge disappointment trophy wise. People like him because he was a joy to watch and he's geniunely a nice guy, but he's not better than Messi or Cristiano. If he didn't have those injuries and he didn't like to party so much then it would have been close.
Last edited:
cal? has been replaced by peyroteo
He was brilliant. Such a shame that injuries ruined his career in the end. Always remembering copying his step overs in the street with my mates while the 98 World Cup was on.
I'm just offering a different perspective since I'm shocked at what most people here are saying, especially when it comes to downplaying achievements of Messi and Cristiano when they've been so far ahead of everyone else in this generation for so long.cal? has been replaced by peyroteo
It was a joke.
We can all agree on a top 10 or 15 and everybody will have his personal preference: messi, cr7, maradona, pele, puskas, di stefano...
The goals per game is far from telling the whole story tho.
First of all Seria A at the time was 18 teams league - meaning less of a cannon fodders to score against.
In 98 Milan for example finished 10th - being the 2nd best team in Seria A at the time, all things considered.
The top three in 98 were Juve, Inter, Udinese.
97 - Juventus, Parma, Inter.
96 - Milan, Juve, Lazio
95 - Juve, Lazio, Parma
Then after Ronaldo's first season 99 an onward:
top 3 in 99 - Milan, Lazio, Fiorentina
00 - Lazio, Juve, Milan.
01 - Roma, Juve, Lazio.
02 - Juve, Roma, Inter.
To summarize we had 4 different teams winning the league from 95 - 02 (8 seasons).
7 different teams being top three in 8 seasons.
The most consistent and best team in the league during the 90's - Juve was #7 in 99'. That shows how crazy competitive was Seria A at the time.
In 98 Juve for example had the best GD in the league and won only 13 of their games with 2 goal difference or more. Only 6 games with 3 goals or more.
Now compare La Liga in the last 10 years:
2007–08 Real Madrid Villarreal Barcelona
2008–09 Barcelona Real Madrid Sevilla
2009–10 Barcelona Real Madrid Valencia
2010–11 Barcelona Real Madrid Valencia
2011–12 Real Madrid Barcelona Valencia
2012–13 Barcelona Real Madrid Atlético Madrid
2013–14 Atlético Madrid Barcelona Real Madrid
2014–15 Barcelona Real Madrid Atlético Madrid
2015–16 Barcelonadagger Real Madrid Atlético Madrid
2016–17 Real Madrid† Barcelona Atlético Madrid
- Real and Barca never out of the top three. 3 different champions in 10 years. 6 different teams top three. Lowest Barca/Real were in those years were 3rd.
Take 11-12 for example:
Barca won 23 out of their 38 games with 2 goals or more. 15 with 3 goals or more.
Real won 24 out of their 38 games with 2 goals or more. 20 with 3 goals or more.
You can easily see how less competitive La Liga is compared to Seria A and how much more likely is Real and Barca to drub another side week in and week out.
Great post, and that is exactly why everyone watched Football Italia in those days. Highly competitive, unpredictable and jam packed with the world's best players at both ends of the pitch. The PL is probably the most comparable to that nowadays.
It's clear to anyone reasonable that La Liga has become little more a Barca/Real shootout with an almost insurmountable gulf in quality below those top 2. In years gone by a physical approach may have acted as somewhat of a leveller, but no more. Today, defending has been reduced to little more than a minor annoyance for attacking players. Tbh, almost any physicality is now viewed as a fantastic opportunity to roll around screaming in an attempt to get an opponent sent off, which is why we don't really see any defenders who can actually defend anymore. Instead we now have 'ball playing centre halves' instead of ball busting ones.
Just nitpicking but the best team of the 90s in italy was milan. Juventus were slightly more consistent, but milan were the best team in the league more times than juventus
Top posts though
Top posts though
Peak Ronaldo (BCN) is the only player that I could put against peak Messi (2012) and take him.
That's how good he was.
That's how good he was.
Great post @Enigma_87
Ronaldinho was a great player and (for me) better than M/R/R#9 I do remember when he destroyed RM on a magic game, he was great but he completely destroyed his career with his off field antics.
Now a question for our Brazilians caftards... what happened to Brazil? Always had the best players in the world and now they have Neymar who probably couldn't made the bench in the 70's team?
People that put Messi over the Fenómeno clearly never played football seriously in their lives. These days and especially in England, there's too much fuss with stats. Do people analysis capacibilies decreased so much that they need to hold on some mathematical figure to help form an opinion?
There's no need to overcomplicate, Ronaldo and Maradona, probably even Ronaldinho were much more talented than Messi. The later is one of the best surely but if it wasn't for his outstanding tally and his sheltered career he would be like Rivaldo, great player with some special moments but not in the same league as true greats.
Finesse and style is an important part of football that stats don't say. And it's when you can take on a single team with style that you are, really, a football genius.
When will Messi hype end? When will we have a true magic player again?
There's no need to overcomplicate, Ronaldo and Maradona, probably even Ronaldinho were much more talented than Messi. The later is one of the best surely but if it wasn't for his outstanding tally and his sheltered career he would be like Rivaldo, great player with some special moments but not in the same league as true greats.
Finesse and style is an important part of football that stats don't say. And it's when you can take on a single team with style that you are, really, a football genius.
When will Messi hype end? When will we have a true magic player again?
They would absolutely love Neymar in the 70's teams, absolutely loved him and he is easily good enough to have played in those teams.
Yeah... No it's not.Great post, and that is exactly why everyone watched Football Italia in those days. Highly competitive, unpredictable and jam packed with the world's best players at both ends of the pitch. The PL is probably the most comparable to that nowadays.
It's clear to anyone reasonable that La Liga has become little more a Barca/Real shootout with an almost insurmountable gulf in quality below those top 2. In years gone by a physical approach may have acted as somewhat of a leveller, but no more. Today, defending has been reduced to little more than a minor annoyance for attacking players. Tbh, almost any physicality is now viewed as a fantastic opportunity to roll around screaming in an attempt to get an opponent sent off, which is why we don't really see any defenders who can actually defend anymore. Instead we now have 'ball playing centre halves' instead of ball busting ones.
Neymar's a really, really good player who would always have made a Brazil squad and almost all Brazil starting 11s.
Sorry for the late reply. I missed it in notifications and only saw it now.
I do agree that it's easier for Cristiano and Messi to get those numbers because Madrid and Barça are ahead of the rest of the league in a way Inter wasn't but it's also true Cristiano and Messi's numbers are a lot better than Ronaldo Fenomeno's in Italy. In my post above I was just disagreeing with people that say it was tougher to score goals because it's a defensive league. It's true it was tougher for Fenomeno to score but it's not because of how defensive the game was there. I still think both Cristiano and Messi wouldn't have any problem matching Fenomeno's numbers in Italy as even Bierhoff at Udinese was doing just as well in that regard.
Outside of Italy, when Fenomeno was in Barcelona and had his best goalscoring season Madrid hit 92 points and Barça 90 points and scored 102 goals which is perfectly in line with the numbers of today.
How do we base maths on Messi? Do you actually watch Messi play? In any case, people tend to use numbers to compare Cristiano Ronaldo and Messi, which is actually unfair to Messi.
Watch the goal Messi scored against Madrid in the UCL SEMI FINALS and tell me how numbers explain that?
How do you explain Jordi Alba's supercup goal with a 50-yard pass from Messi which falls perfectly for Alba to score?
finesse and style? I'm laughuing. How do you explain his goal against Bayern munich without that?
If you don't see the magic in Messi then it's clear that you're biased. Messi needs no numbers.
He was entertaining but noway better than those 3, at all. In my opinion of course.
He was the only player of the past 20 years who had a ceiling as high as Messi.
Too bad he didn't achieve it though.
Too bad he didn't achieve it though.
Thanks for that, very informative. So whose would be closest to it then? Considering every other league has only 2 genuine contenders for the league each season, and the EPL has at least twice that.