- Joined
- Jul 17, 2021
- Messages
- 396
Agree. That's why stats are often meaningless. Especially if we are talking about about legends.I feel this bit require a little more context…
Agree. That's why stats are often meaningless. Especially if we are talking about about legends.I feel this bit require a little more context…
Nuance and context is everything.Agree. That's why stats are often meaningless. Especially if we are talking about about legends.
Nadal also has an incredible PR, as do all the biggest figures of sport, we aren't talking about mediocre athletes that nobody cares about.l o l at federer hes PR machine like Ronaldo. Nadal and mostly Djokovic are clearly better players with better resumes, better h2h etc
The argument always had to do with Argentina; Messi would never be seen the same way as Maradona if he didn't also win them a World Cup.However it's a shame that people think great players need to win a world cup now to he considered the GOAT as international football is not on the same level as club football and players like Haaland have no chance to win a world cup with their country so they can't be considered a GOAT according to so many people's views on the game.
It is really hard for a player to get in the level of Messi/Pele/Maradona without international success and has been so forever. The only reason why Di Stefano is not on that tier (or that Maradona is rated higher than him) is his lack of international success.The argument always had to do with Argentina; Messi would never be seen the same way as Maradona if he didn't also win them a World Cup.
It's not really the same compared to Haaland.
Yeah, WUM master.No ban for Sporting, not a chance, keep him for comedy sake.
Nations league more competitive than Copa.
If Ronaldo was Brazilian and won the Copa he'd dish NL like a worst competiton ever but the fact Ronaldo won it makes it far bigger.
You have no argument, you've just repeated yourself.Ridiculous argument.
Consider other sports. In basketball, Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain would dominate the NBA today. In American football, Jim Brown would dominate the NFL. In baseball, Mickey Mantle and Bob Gibson would dominate MLB. Going back even further, Babe Ruth and Joe DiMaggio would be as dominant today as they were back in the 1920s and 1930s.
Pele himself was no alcoholic cripple who preyed on other alcoholic cripples. He was dominant both in Brazil and on the international stage. Take nothing away from Messi whatsoever, as his dominance over the last decade is indisputable, and anyone who elevates him over Pele has a case. But Pele was of a completely different class relative to his peers, which includes Cruyff, Beckenbauer, Eusebio, Charlton and Best, all of whom would walk into any Real or Barcelona side today as well as any WC winning team since 1970.
Awesome post. Add to that, the pool of players is now much higher, and players start training when they are younger, in turn making them better/more refined years earlier than in Pele’s generation.You have no argument, you've just repeated yourself.
I am not a yank so I don't care about those other sports, however you're just asserting that these people can compete in the modern day without any evidence nor a methodology. Why would I take your word for it when my eyes tell me that football was slower and far lower quality back in the 60s, as evidenced by the video I showed Garrincha's best ever performance in 1962, where the standard is terrible.
Furthermore, I assert that as we no longer see alcoholics with physical handicaps make it professionally, let alone the pinnacle of the sport, then the standard must be much higher. It's basic stuff but people like to be pretentious and believe championing old players is a higher value opinion.
You're going to have to actually buttress your argument with some evidence, because at the moment there's nothing to engage with.
I’m going to have to call you out here if you’re saying that.People are actually saying Ronaldo is absolute crap and not even top 10 or whatever, I mean in this forum![]()
The whole idea is a bit silly and just subjective but if Brady shouldn't be there then whoever the heck Hamilton is shouldn't be there either (no idea what sport that even is). Football is the only worldwide team sport. Sports like tennis and the Olympic sports are played around the world. Modern UFC and MMA is more worldwide than boxing too.I do not mean offense but I don't think Brady should be in this conversation(i had to look him up). This isn't to say Brady isn't great, but the vast majority of the World do not watch NFL and cannot make an accurate assessement of his greatness. This might be hard for Americans to believe but none of my friends in Italy have even heard of Brady or any NFL teams. NFL players are not popular globally(look at social media following and even Gareth Bale have more followers than any NFL guy) and Europeans/South American pundits do not know enough about NFL to compare sports.
Jordan and Ali I also don't find it fair. Most of the world just recently started playing basketball and is still decades behind the only country that takes it super seriously (usa)
Heavyweight Boxing the Eastern Bloc was always 'fenced off' from America's heavyweight scene and it wasn't until the mid to late 90's that they were able to join the party. Once that happened the heavyweight champions became Eastern Europeans.. I just find it funny the only sports Americans take seriously are usually overwhelmingly played by Americans only.
Let's put this into perspective.. imagine ONLY England and the English played soccer and the rest of the World didn't care or played. Harry Kane will be the 'World's best striker', pretty hollow title .. The greatest ever will be like Frank Lampard or something
Mind you I'm not saying American sports don't matter, I'm saying it doesn't matter in relation to a global sport like football.
I read one post calling him a fraud and now it’s become a “thing” on here. Unless I’ve missed many others?I’m going to have to call you out here if you’re saying that.
Find me two “people” who have said Ronaldo isn’t in top 10. People have slammed him (more so because of his disrespect to our club) but let’s not exaggerate things.
People may have stupidly labelled him a fraud, which he absolutely is not, but I don’t think I’ve read a comment here stating that he doesn’t squeeze into the top 10 somewhere.
Depends on the criteria. If we are talking peak only, then Cristiano might not make my top 10 depending on what mood I'm in for defenders like Baresi and Maldini. For career (since I take into account the structural advantages Cristiano and Messi both had - that players in the 80s and earlier did not) I'd say Cristiano squeaks in around 7-10.I’m going to have to call you out here if you’re saying that.
Find me two “people” who have said Ronaldo isn’t in top 10. People have slammed him (more so because of his disrespect to our club) but let’s not exaggerate things.
People may have stupidly labelled him a fraud, which he absolutely is not, but I don’t think I’ve read a comment here stating that he doesn’t squeeze into the top 10 somewhere.
Exactly, that's why it's more remarkable that Messi has dominated for 15 years in this era rather than in previous ones. To add to Garrincha's alcoholism, spine and leg deformities, and losing his virginity to a goat, he also only started playing professionally at 19-years-old - even someone with Messi's talent wouldn't have been able to perform in a top league, let alone dominate a World Cup in modern times with those conditions (it took him several attempts without those disadvantages).Awesome post. Add to that, the pool of players is now much higher, and players start training when they are younger, in turn making them better/more refined years earlier than in Pele’s generation.
Honestly, checking web footage from back then, the quality is Sunday-league football.
we can easily compare nadal/federer/djokovic because they played against each other a lot and federer has got worse h2h against both. he doesnt really hold any big records anymore either.Nadal also has an incredible PR, as do all the biggest figures of sport, we aren't talking about mediocre athletes that nobody cares about.
And measuring talent in Tennis is more difficult, so it all comes to personal preferences at the end, I've heard tennis connoisseurs say that Nadal is more hard work and Federer more pure talent, and also in vice versa too.
The problem with these ridiculous sports debates is that people just straight diminish one athlete to praise the other.
Ronaldo or Messi? "Messi, Penaldo is a tap-in merchant"
Jordan or Lebron? "Jordan overrated, wouldn't hack it in modern NBA"
Messi or Maradona? "Diego obviously, Messi wouldn't be playing football without the hormones"
Seriously, people need to learn to just enjoy top athletes instead of diminishing their accomplishments to praise others.
Maradona's '86 WC campaign is the highest a footballer has peaked for me. I'm aware of the relatively small sample size though.Has he? Why? Please explain.
A strange argument to make when Ronaldo has played more games than any outfielder in history, going back since records began. Ronaldo has played 400 more games than Matthews.Exactly, that's why it's more remarkable that Messi has dominated for 15 years in this era rather than in previous ones. To add to Garrincha's alcoholism, spine and leg deformities, and losing his virginity to a goat, he also only started playing professionally at 19-years-old - even someone with Messi's talent wouldn't have been able to perform in a top league, let alone dominate a World Cup in modern times with those conditions (it took him several attempts without those disadvantages).
Players like Stanley Matthews could compete in the 60s until he was 50 years old because he was dedicated to the sport. Cristiano Ronaldo, for all his Patrick Bateman style dedication with a whole team optimising his health using modern science, will not be able to because the standard is higher now.
I'd say it's stranger to conflate appearances with age.A strange argument to make when Ronaldo has played more games than any outfielder in history, going back since records began. Ronaldo has played 400 more games than Matthews.
Ian Callaghan for example played from 1960 to 1982 and Ronaldo has surpassed him for games played. By that logic it’s easier to keep going in the modern day than it used to be.
Enjoyed reading that, cheers.I wrote this in response to a post (Pre semi final I think) asking would Messi be recognized as Maradonas equal (or higher) if he were to win the world cup but I think it applies here.
I think he will be a lot closer (especially with the younger generations who are more critical of Maradonas flaws) but ultimately most will favor Diego due to reasons that are hard for non Argentines to understand.
I wasn't born in Argentina, I just reside here (for my sins) so it took me awhile to appreciate what Maradona means to the Argentine people.
I'd frequently get into "debates" with friends and family who would ignore pretty much any stat I could give that would show Messi's superiority over Maradona etc but year on year I grew to appreciate the fact that while you can attempt to quantify their rationale (The world cup) the love/ appreciation they have for Diego Maradona is unquantifiable.
It's emotional and spiritual and although he was one of the finest footballers In the history of world football it's nearly secondary to the feelings of hope that he gave an entire nation in bleak times.
Had Maradona died when I first arrived I wouldn't have understood the significance of the event, after some years here I could empathise with my friends and family members who wept tears of sadness that he was finally gone while crying tears of joy when talking about the impact he had on their lives.
Messi can't do that.
He can't recreate the feeling around Argentina around the fall of the Military Junta and the Malvinas (Falklands) War.
Diego fought for them at their lowest point and won.
Argentina is a beautiful country with a proud people but in many ways the beauty is only skin deep and superficial while the pride is rooted in events that move further away as time passes.
Spend enough time here and you feel the profound sadness, the country feels like an ageing supermodel/movie star desperately clinging onto their youth when they were the best thing around and are now struggling to come to terms with their wrinkles and weight gain.
They long for years gone by.
You see the collapse of a great nation in its older buildings, built to the highest standards years ago during prosperous times but falling into disrepair nowadays alongside signs on stores (abandoned now) when the dollar and peso had parity (it's around 300/1 now).
This country is in desperate need of a hero and I really hope that Messi can do it for all of us here.
If he does he will be second only to Diego IMO but he won't replace him as God around these parts (but to be honest no body could).
He made his first team debut nearly 20 years ago though, he’s gone on way longer than 95% of elite players at a higher level with more high intensity games than anyone, it’s just a weird example to pick for it to show the strength of the modern game that Ronaldo can’t hack it at almost 38 as a sign of strength, when 40 years ago it would have been even stranger to see a player that age to not have retired well before that. Modric, Thiago Silva, Pepe played at the World Cup too. A great player is a great player no matter what era.I'd say it's stranger to conflate appearances with age.
By your logic, if Ronaldo decided to only play 15 games a season then he would be able to perform at the top level until he was 80 years old
That's because footballers are far better athletes in this day and age and need to take care of themselves or they cannot compete at the elite level. They also have the benefit of modern nutrition and sports science which has really developed since the turn of the century.He made his first team debut nearly 20 years ago though, he’s gone on way longer than 95% of elite players at a higher level with more high intensity games than anyone, it’s just a weird example to pick for it to show the strength of the modern game that Ronaldo can’t hack it at almost 38 as a sign of strength, when 40 years ago it would have been even stranger to see a player that age to not have retired well before that. Modric, Thiago Silva, Pepe played at the World Cup too. A great player is a great player no matter what era.
Stanley Matthews though was a one-off though and wasn't standard for the time or any time of football. The oldest outfield internationals for England are Matthews in 1957, Compton in 1950, Pearce in 1999, Pennington in 1920, Finney in 1958, Sheringham in 2002, Lampard in 2014, Keown in 2002. I.e. they're all spread out, doesn't suggest it's any easier or harder to play at the top level nowadays than it was.Stanley Matthews was an example of a footballer from the 50/60s who also took better care of himself than his peers and it allowed him to compete at 50 years old. Even with all the marvels of modern sports science; Modric, Pepe, Thiago Silva and Ronaldo will not be competing at 50 years old.
I get it if you think CL is the highest level of football, which BTW messi is not a scrub there either.For me, Ronaldo's record in the cl knockouts is why I have him as the best, it's by some distance the highest level of football in the world, and Ronaldo is miles ahead of anyone else in it, with that difference getting more pronounced if you take out the last 16. Messi was definitely a better league player and while neither ever replicated their club level at international, this tournament for Messi was enough to make him a better international player. But I think the performances in the later rounds of the champions League hold more weight personally.
But Ronaldo looks like he's done and Messi could have another few years at PSG so that's still possible. I realise this opinion isnt shared by everyone but it's the same way I've felt for years and why messi is far clear of maradona and Pele, because what you do over 15 years of your career is a better indicator of ability than 7 games every 4 years
By the eyes of all close observers of the game, Pele (1960s), Cruyff (1970s), Maradona (1980s), Matthaus (1990s), and Ronaldo I (2000s) would be as dominant today as they were in their eras -- eras so long ago in your eyes.You have no argument, you've just repeated yourself.
I am not a yank so I don't care about those other sports, however you're just asserting that these people can compete in the modern day without any evidence nor a methodology. Why would I take your word for it when my eyes tell me that football was slower and far lower quality back in the 60s, as evidenced by the video I showed Garrincha's best ever performance in 1962, where the standard is terrible.
Furthermore, I assert that as we no longer see alcoholics with physical handicaps make it professionally, let alone the pinnacle of the sport, then the standard must be much higher. It's basic stuff but people like to be pretentious and believe championing old players is a higher value opinion.
You're going to have to actually buttress your argument with some evidence, because at the moment there's nothing to engage with.
Muhamad ali says hi!Jordan, Messi, Brady, Federer, Hamilton
Mount Rushmore
you’re right, my bad.Muhamad ali says hi!
(Or Joe Luis for that matter)
It's because it's relative. Messi and Ronaldo have mostly played with average teams especially compared to their super clubs so for them it's a huge challenge. On the other hand for Spanish, French and German footballers their NT is usually every bit as good if not better than clubs and sometimes it's an easier stage than club football too.I get it if you think CL is the highest level of football, which BTW messi is not a scrub there either.
But let me put this question to you. If it was so much harder to perform in the UCL, why has in your opinion the best UCL player in CR7 never scored or assisted in any knockouts in a weaker and lower level competition aka the world cup?
It is as if somehow magically, the GOAT of UCL became actual shit in a weaker competition. Perhaps, maybe, that weaker level competition is actually tougher to perform in eh?
Exactly! This is why it is not correct to say UCL is a bigger achievement than WC in football. Higher level yes, but it is also extremely luck dependant on the group of players you play with and your coach.It's because it's relative. Messi and Ronaldo have mostly played with average teams especially compared to their super clubs so for them it's a huge challenge. On the other hand for Spanish, French and German footballers their NT is usually every bit as good if not better than clubs and sometimes it's an easier stage than club football too.
You mean training at a professional club from younger which you could argue, takes out the individualism from some players, football though is an easy cheap sport to play most greats of any era would be playing from young ages, even if it wasn’t with an actual football, don’t think there’s much change in that.Awesome post. Add to that, the pool of players is now much higher, and players start training when they are younger, in turn making them better/more refined years earlier than in Pele’s generation.
Honestly, checking web footage from back then, the quality is Sunday-league football.
He's a great poster and very insightful aside from his obvious bias in favor of Ronaldo. He's been baited in this thread and couldn't help himself but to take it.To be fair to the Sporting fellow, from whatever little I have followed the caf, he has been a polite nuanced poster for the most of it. I haven’t seen him downplay Messi’s achievements too often. Never seen him act snobbish either about Ronaldo’s supposed supremacy.
That said, the last few days have really brought out the worst in him (and a lot of others admittedly). I can slightly empathise, as I used to myself harbour delusional levels of obsession about Rooney at one point that would often kill my powers to be objective and fair. Probably when the dust settles, he would warm up to the fact it is still an exceptional achievement for CR to be in the discussion for the top 5 all time players. Anyone denying this is also being unfair and has a fair amount of recency bias. Just like our Wazza, people may slightly look past the red mist a few years from now when thinking about Ronnie. Probably forgive his indiscretions and stupidity with the interview etc. Or may be I will get pelters for saying this
For the record, Messi is the best player I have seen, by a mile at that.
Yes and it will always be. But I also think that Messi will ascend to true godhood when he retires and the next greats will be compared to him, just like Maradona and Pelé did.Him and Maradona are neck and neck ability wise. Messi did it for longer at the highest level. Maradona played in a much rougher era when the pitches were shit and he could get kicked to pieces. So, yeah it's hard to pick between them.
I've seen so little of Pele but by all accounts he was equal to them.
In other words, it's a toss up.
There's a reason why playmakers are so highly valued and considered essential to a team, even more than strikers. Why there're so often found in the GOAT discussions. While I agree with a lot of what you say, without supply there's simply no goal or even a chance to score one, no matter how good a striker's movement or abilities are. The latter is the tip of the spear not the hand that throws it. The intelligence and ability to see and make a decisive pass, it doesn't even have to be an assist, is something that only few possess. That's the reality of the game and has always been, be it in a counter-attacking team or a possession based one. If you want something else, watch another sport.The system of measure that you have all put in place is designed purposely so that Messi can literally never fail. Ronaldo's strengths are given no weight what-so-ever. Ronaldo making a run is using his vision to read the game, timing to create the opportunity and skills to control the pass. Why is the passer automatically doing more? It's bullshit. Without creative and skillful off the ball movement there would be no pass to begin with. In the analysis of a game Ronaldo's movement, placement and timing isn't valued or statistically tracked. Even though this is a shared proposition. This is just one example of how judging a player is skewed towards Messi and the list goes on.
Have you seen Ronaldo operate in a crowded midfield? There is a plethora of examples where he drops back, plays short concise passes, links up, penetrates with his dribbling, makes outlet passes to the wing, side-steps defenders, etc. There is no skill or ability he lacks to operate in deeper areas. He looks just as natural or accomplished as any true midfielder when he moves to the center. He has dominated the wings his entire career. These attributes which makes him successful do not diminish in the middle of the field.
But what you do is overvalue Messi's contributions in a possession based team compared to Ronaldo's contributions in a direct/counter-attacking team. I don't believe Messi has the speed, stamina or strength to run or move off the ball like Ronaldo chasing down balls and sprinting down the flanks an entire game.
Messi’s playmaking is where the gap really grows. And Ronaldo has been abysmal in world cups, messi on the other hand redeeming himself this year. Ronaldo is the second best player of his generation but the gap between him and Messi was bigger than you might think. And it was long before Messi won this World Cup.I've said it before, and I will say it again...
Messi is the greatest ever La Liga player and CR7 is the greatest ever Champions League player. If you want to compare their international careers, Ronaldo has 118 goals, Messi has 98 goals, but Messi has a world cup and Ronaldo only has a Euro. Truth is there really isn't a whole lot between them. Sure, they're different players, but if you are more worried about proving which one is better then you probably missed out on just enjoying the fact that for 15 years we got to watch the 2 greatest players of all time (yes, of all time) play each week and go head to head on several occasions...
But its not just about goals. No one thought Raul was the greatest ever when he held the cl scoring record. Its just about being the best at football.I've said it before, and I will say it again...
Messi is the greatest ever La Liga player and CR7 is the greatest ever Champions League player. If you want to compare their international careers, Ronaldo has 118 goals, Messi has 98 goals, but Messi has a world cup and Ronaldo only has a Euro. Truth is there really isn't a whole lot between them. Sure, they're different players, but if you are more worried about proving which one is better then you probably missed out on just enjoying the fact that for 15 years we got to watch the 2 greatest players of all time (yes, of all time) play each week and go head to head on several occasions...
Yeah, right.He did take growth hormones for years though which would have impacted for the better how he plays.
I'm not a hater, I just don't prescribe to reducing it to a GOAT or not GOAT because he won a World Cup final with a penalty and a tap in, wasn't even the best player on the pitch.
There's no debate to be had. They were the best of their respective generations. Three different eras, therefore impossible to compare them objectively. Once you enter their realm, it will always come down to a personal and subjective preference.I agree entirely, which is why I asked the question. However, it is all academic. As Henry Winter said, the three greatest players of all time are Pele, Maradona and Messi. The only thing up for debate is the order.