This thread would be dead without Cal? to be honest.
Messi v Ronaldo | Contains double your daily salt allowance
- Thread starter Rado_N
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
- Status
That's harsh on Peyroteo
I guess I'll have to use my last remaining post for this:
Aside from stats comparison, I actually think Ronaldo has bigger big game impact over Messi, which is also a plus point.
Personally, I admire Ronaldo, in the way he is so determined and always push himself over the limit, against all odds, and in such a great success. Messi, on the other hand, is simply a better footballer with better footballing. But I don’t agree Messi is in any sense greater than Ronaldo. I thought what Ronaldo has achieved, has greater merit than Messi over their career so far.
I agree with this. I think Messi is a better football player, but Ronaldo's achievements are greater. Can't make a definitive conclusion until both retire though.
I've been wondering this....how many people can their possibly be who want to debate Messi v Ronaldo, and yet they're all here, with their 24 posts.
My own opinion -- I used to love to watch Barcelona play, but that was before they became a religion. That and Ray Hudson.
Ron has won 1 more CL, but Messi has won 4 more league titles (at the end of this season). Albeit Ron has won an international trophy.
They have won the same amount of individual awards even though Ronaldo is older.
Messi has 2 treble wins, Ronaldo has 0.
I understand this opinion but I also think here is a little recency bias at work. If Ronaldo had these CL performance 6-7 years ago while Messi was currently on his CL run and playing in the best team in history, this could look differently. Because objectively, both have quite similar records. Personally, I don't think you should judge a player individually based on his team's performances but if you do, then Cristiano has the EC and the back to back CL medal speaking for him while Messi has the individually best season/calendar year there has ever been from a player as well as more triples I think. Indeed leans more towards CR7, currently.
But it depends on what you define as legacy and achievements. I mean, Cruyff is probably one of the footballers with the greatest legacy and it is mainly down to the romantics around the voetbal totaal of the Netherlands and Ajax. I can imagine that Messi and his teams will be looked back upon in a similar light but I cannot quite imagine it with Ronaldo and Zidane's Real Madrid because to me they seem less revolutionary/inspirational - both the player Cristiano individually and his team collectively.
And this is actually huge, I think. Maradona is not remembered for his achievements but the way he achieved them. I mean, from an objective point of view, Messi and Cristiano had already passed him long ago but he is still widely considered as the best player alongside Pele because of the way he played. The same is true for Cruyff who never won an international tournament but is yet considered greater than many players who lead their teams to win one.
I think when it comes to these discussions, you only need a great trophy as a ticket to bring you into the debate and then people decide based on your performance/flair. In a way, it is not important if you won one, two or even three international tournaments. Otherwise we would not even have comparisons between Pele and other players. For instance, I think this is what kept Zico from being mentioned alongside Maradona, Pele and Cruyff at his time. And in my opinion, this is also why Messi isn't considered the GOAT currently. He doesn't have this "door opener" in form of a WC or even a Copa title but he is so good that people still include him.
@Zehner @The holy trinity 68
Don't really disagree with either of you, but winning the CL with both United and Real, plus winning both La Liga and the premier league and that Euro trophy on top, edges it slightly for me.
Also the fact that Ronaldo's done it with less natural talent, makes it all the more impressive. Achievements wise there's little between the two. Talent wise, Messi is ahead, but that's not really the debate I think.
On the Cruijff bit, I think the way he lead Holland to that final in 74 is infinitely more impressive than what Ronaldo and Messi have done on the international stage. Losing that final to west Germany is still the biggest bottle job in the history of football if you ask me. I can't completely deny
Don't really disagree with either of you, but winning the CL with both United and Real, plus winning both La Liga and the premier league and that Euro trophy on top, edges it slightly for me.
Also the fact that Ronaldo's done it with less natural talent, makes it all the more impressive. Achievements wise there's little between the two. Talent wise, Messi is ahead, but that's not really the debate I think.
On the Cruijff bit, I think the way he lead Holland to that final in 74 is infinitely more impressive than what Ronaldo and Messi have done on the international stage. Losing that final to west Germany is still the biggest bottle job in the history of football if you ask me. I can't completely deny
A Barca fan sticking up for this fellow Messi worshipper.The Messi brigade constantly going on about how there's no question whatsoever is frankly laughable. This very poll has about 200 people who disagree with them, there are online polls with closer to 500,000 votes where about 40% disagree with them.
Yet somehow, everyone who disagree with them are Real fans, United fans, or Ronaldo fans. But everyone who agree with them are neutral.
I berate others for no reason? As supposed to the Messi brigade and their holier than thou attitude about their "eyes" being so much more knowledgeable than everyone else?
10 more? Ronaldo has about 20 more CL knockout goals.
What's the obsession with dribbles? I honestly just don't get you Messi fans. You can argue about passes, assists, etc, yet you go on and on about dribbles?
Trebles?
Ronaldo has retained the CL, Messi has failed miserably.
Now let's take a time to think about how many finals Messi has won being the man of the match, how many times Messi has beaten Ronaldo and United/Madrid itself...to say that. How many goals Messi has against La Liga top5 teams, or against big clubs from England/Italy.
In fact, I think Messi has way more impact than Ronaldo for both Barcelona and Argentina. But can't deny Ronaldo is a big game guy despite not being there that much vs Barcelona. I just can't understand how he's a bigger game impact, at the very least they are equal.
It seem he has loss quite a few big finals from my memory.
I thought he didn’t has a great record against English team, until his recent goal vs Chelsea.
Not saying Messi isn’t great player in big moment, but Ronaldo has simply outshone him in recent years.
10 more vital goals, how many of his goals were scored when they were already 2-0 up etc. He scored a penalty vs Athletico when it was already 3-0 for example. There are a few other examples as well.10 more? Ronaldo has about 20 more CL knockout goals.
What's the obsession with dribbles? I honestly just don't get you Messi fans. You can argue about passes, assists, etc, yet you go on and on about dribbles?
Trebles?
Ronaldo has retained the CL, Messi has failed miserably.
And successful dribbles matter when they have similar goal tallies and similar individual and team awards.
Using successful dribbles, successful passes, successful key passes, they all matter when discussing who is better after deducting the similarities between them. It isn't difficult to comprehend.
Ronaldo has retained the CL yes but it is arguably harder to win a treble than retain the CL.
In the history of the European Cup, 8 teams have retained it. We can't just use data from when the CL was established because football began long before then.
Only 7 teams have managed to win the treble of the European Cup, Domestic Cup and the League.
It is also more demanding to win the treble. As teams have to be at their best all season, not for 10 games in a tournament. For me the treble is better than retaining the CL.
Messi has 9 goals vs Arsenal, 6 vs Man City, 2 vs United and 3 vs Chelsea.
To compare, Ronaldo has 6 vs Arsenal, 5 vs City (some of them goals were before they won a league title), 2 vs United and 1 vs Chelsea.
20 for Messi.
14 for Ronaldo.
We have to remember Ronaldo played against them teams twice a year when in the PL as well. Messi only played them when they were drawn.
Stats are all well and good and should be used to compare them but I don't understand the belittling of the 'eye test' from some of you who think Ronaldo is better.
For the most part football is a simple enough game. You can tell the best player on the pitch a majority of the time without needing stats. Messi is a player who you can watch in almost any 90min performance of his and witness his greatness. Like many others have said, the ease and consistency he's able to do many things other footballers can never even think of is incredible.
Their performances in El classicos shouldn't be the all defining decider but its the only chance we get to see both on the pitch together in a direct comparison. Messi has consistently far outperformed Ronaldo in these meetings. In these games there are 22 world class players on the pitch however Messi is the one who always looks a level or 2 above everyone else including Ronaldo.
Ronaldo is an unbelievable player and has defied logic as the years have gone on but Messi is just better.
For the most part football is a simple enough game. You can tell the best player on the pitch a majority of the time without needing stats. Messi is a player who you can watch in almost any 90min performance of his and witness his greatness. Like many others have said, the ease and consistency he's able to do many things other footballers can never even think of is incredible.
Their performances in El classicos shouldn't be the all defining decider but its the only chance we get to see both on the pitch together in a direct comparison. Messi has consistently far outperformed Ronaldo in these meetings. In these games there are 22 world class players on the pitch however Messi is the one who always looks a level or 2 above everyone else including Ronaldo.
Ronaldo is an unbelievable player and has defied logic as the years have gone on but Messi is just better.
@Cal? stop using the term messi brigade. Your points lose substance when you resort to stuff like that. Other than that, as you were.
Would a newbie be kind to pull up the messi v ronaldo stats in terms of games they’ve actually played against each other?
and every single goal Messi scored was a winner or equalizer.
Dribbles do not matter because it doesn't do anything, you could dribble from the right hand side to the left hand side of the pitch and be counted as "successful dribbles", but that doesn't actually improve your team's position at all.
With the increased difficulty to win the CL, retaining it has become much more difficult than winning the Treble - it hasn't been done for almost 30 years until Ronaldo led Real to it last season.
The Treble was done once every decade in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. But it was done 4 times in the last decade alone.
I dug up classico stats (Guess I'm a newbie):
Matches
Messi: played 37, won 17, drawn 8, lost 12
Ronaldo: played 29, won 8, drawn 7, lost 14
Goals
Messi: 25
Ronaldo: 17
Assists
Messi: 14
Ronaldo: 1
Created chances
Messi: 65
Ronaldo: 15
Would you prefer Messi ****?
There has only been 7 trebles of European Cup, Domestic Cup and League.and every single goal Messi scored was a winner or equalizer.
Dribbles do not matter because it doesn't do anything, you could dribble from the right hand side to the left hand side of the pitch and be counted as "successful dribbles", but that doesn't actually improve your team's position at all.
With the increased difficulty to win the CL, retaining it has become much more difficult than winning the Treble - it hasn't been done for almost 30 years until Ronaldo led Real to it last season.
The Treble was done once every decade in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. But it was done 4 times in the last decade alone.
If Ronaldo helped Real retain the CL and it is more difficult than the Treble then why has he not helped Real do it in 10 years?
The fact is that a CL win is much less demanding than the Treble. Which is the reason why both Chelsea and Liverpool were able to win it whilst both finishing 5th in the league.
Ronaldo and Messi play similar roles for their teams - scoring / assisting goals is their main task. It is therefore obvious that people prioritize these numbers when discussing the players, particularly those that support Ronaldo, as he's ahead on these. I'd always (as a manager) pick the player that directly contributes to a win every time, over a player that "passes the eye test" in terms of being aesthetically pleasing.
Ronaldo scores more, assists more and delivers more on the biggest stage. He has single-handedly demolished the likes of Juve, Bayern and PSG (in just the last 3 seasons alone) and is just a level above anyone when it comes to the CL and the latter stages in particular. This is no slight on Messi but just something that is obvious if you look at the numbers. As a consultant, I let the numbers (data) do the talking - as this is the best way to ensure that bias and emotion doesn't colour things. If you add subjective details, you could also say that Messi's only period of being better on statistics (head to head in particular) coincided with the period when Ronaldo's Real team was far inferior to Messi's Barca.
In summary, the 'eye test' is frankly meaningless when looking at the scorers. It may be one way of assessing players in different positions or when looking at DMs / CBs, but you just can't make a case for placing it above hard numbers when looking at forwards.
Yes, indeed, 1 each in the 60s, 70s, 80s & 90s. 4 in the last decade with the top clubs increasingly dominating everything.
We've already been over Real Madrid not paying much attention to the CDR.
No one is denying the Treble is much harder than one CL.
If retaining the CL was easy, how come Messi hasn't been able to do it? Not even under St Pep with Xaviesta at their peak in the bestest team ever ever?Compared to cold hard numbers in business, these numbers in football are fickle to be honest.
That amazing Berbatov skill that lead to his assist on Ronaldo counts for just as many assists as someone completely messing up a shot which is deflected into the net by his teammates. Ronaldo having more assists insinuates he's better at creating chances than Messi and even the staunchest Ronaldo fan can surely not argue this.
Yeh well I remember Messi used to have poor record against English team, fail to score in his first 10 games, then went on the scored 20 goals in 18 games. So his record is like 20 goals in 28 games in total. But these are all CL goals, where Ronaldo has lead most records anyway.
Less natural talent, but he's had a significant physical advantage. Messi achieving what he has with the body of a shaved Ewok is equally as impressive.
On the contrary, the quality of an assist is meaningless in my opinion. Berba showed astounding skill and that will live in the mind - but did he do it game after game with the relentlessness of a Ronaldo? I'd take a player providing relentless but simple assists any day over a mercurial player who delivers absolutely majestic beauty once in a while.
As for chance creation, again, not buying it. Fact: Ronaldo has more assists to his name. Counter: Messi creates more "chances". Ummm. Chances don't win games, but goals do. You could argue that Ronaldo, when he creates a chance just makes it easier for it to be converted. Not that I am arguing it, but the data is clear. It's not even like Messi has poorer forwards for company. Suarez and Neymar can't be considered inferior strike options to Benzema and Bale.
Cold hard data isn't fickle when looked at over such a length of time - specially when it's concurrent. It starts becoming fickle only when people add useless constraints and factors like "in this limited period" or "under these specific circumstances" as you start restricting the data set OR when you look at data in different periods of time (like comparing the metrics of these two to say, a Pele or di Stefano who played in a completely different era or in a different continent in the case of Pele). Over a decade, the exceptions even out and you're looking at very representative numbers. That's why the aggregate data doesn't allow a third player into the discussion.
Over the decade, they had a roughly equal and very large number of games against sides of the same quality on average. Hence, the number is instantly comparable and also representative. That's just how numbers work! You only start denying it and relying on 'eye tests' and subjectivity when the numbers don't support your hypothesis and you still want to somehow prove you're right.
All good points, but don't you agree that in a lot of instances the pre assist can be just as important as the actual assist? Obviously someone who provides tonnes of simple assists is more valuable than a mercurial player, but I don't think Messi is a good definition of mercurial to be honest.
Football stats, in my opinion, do not tell the entire story. The same works in Ronaldo's favour. Whilst Messi may have scored more goals per game in the CL, you can't argue that Ronaldo has scored in the more important stages, meaning his contribution is greater even if it isn't so just looking at the stats.
On the point of chances created, I don't know whether a goal is also counted towards that? Or is it just an assist that isn't converted?
And on the eye test thing, I'm not among the people saying it. I think Messi is a better football player, but tend to think Ronaldo is more successful. Thought you can't make a meaningful conclusion until they retire, it being rather close and all.
This is a weird argument. I understand Messi is great footballer, but I never heard "significant physical advantage" being a thing in football, especially when you look at all the past greats, and all the past winners of Ballon D'or (other than Ronaldo), almost none of them has "significant physical advantage"...
In fact Messi body height is perfect for his style as it gives him low centre of gravity, which is a big advantage in dribbling/running with ball.
I'd disagree with that:
Stanley Matthews, Di Stefano, Eusebio, Pele, Gullit, Fenomeno just off the top of my head
Gullit is the only one over 6' on that list.
Honestly think being a lot taller would make Messi a worse player. On the other hand, being a lot shorter would make Ronaldo worse as well.
Different players benefit from different statures. Otherwise this thread would be Messi vs Ronaldo vs Adebayo Akinfenwa.
Different players benefit from different statures. Otherwise this thread would be Messi vs Ronaldo vs Adebayo Akinfenwa.
Height is not the only 'significant physical advantage' that exists.
significant physical advantages can be : strength, speed, endurance, vertical leap, agility, balance and center of gravity
Agreed, however Messi has developed the style he has because that was his only option, whereas Ronaldo can score headed goals due to his height and leap, has far greater ability to generate power in his shots etc, so the fact that Messi matches him for output I think is even more impressive. Not to mention the fact that Messi is jsut an all round better footballer then Ronaldo.
Has anyone mentioned to Cal? in this thread yet that Messi is better at passing, dribbling, general contribution to the game? I'm sure if we pointed this out to him he'd come around to our way of thinking.
Man, I haven't get to watch a lot from Gullit, but the little I've seen it just looks unfair, he had a yard of pace on smaller players, 2 yards on his height equals, was strong, tall and good technically. Watching him destroy the standard 80's player feels like Milan were using a cheat code.
The Messi **** and dribbling again. It's incredible.
It's not just cal it's a lot of the experts that also think Ronaldo is better that wont change their stance on this. Reason being Messi is a playmaker and Ronaldo is not. Ronaldo is simply the GOAT
I always thought he is dribbling wizard, didn't realize he was a physical beast too.
Yeh Eusebio and Gullit did look strong though. Pele and Di Stefano were more like a complete player rather than a physical beast?
FIFA 18 only gives Pele 73~76 Physical btw (lower than Ronaldinho)
You will see that I did not say that the eye test alone should be used in making a comparison. It should be used in conjunction with stats.
Firstly you are incorrect regarding their stats. Messi has many more assists in less games so you can strike that off your list. Since Ronaldo joined RM he has the better scoring ratio but Messi is close enough. An extra 18 goals in the 400+ games and the ratio is level. My point is Ronaldo shades goal scoring, I can’t be bothered to do the analysis but you could probably say the difference in the goals to games ratio is down to Ronaldo taking better and/or more penalties.
The big game argument really has become hilarious lately. There is no doubt Ronaldo is unrivalled at present in rising to the big game occasions, however, Messi was by far and away the best at this earlier in their careers. Ronaldo’s achievements now don’t wipe away what Messi has done. Hattrick in the El Classico at 19, Demolishing United as the False 9 in the 2009 UCL Final, torching Pep’s Bayern en route to winning the 2015 UCL. The list goes on.
Saying the eye test is meaningless is something only Ronaldo supporters would say. We’re talking about football here not sales of rival computer hardware brands. A square pass in the box for a tap-in and a defence splitting pass both count as an assist, the eye test however allows us to see what is more impressive.
Your attempt at limiting the comparison to scoring is also completely wrong.
Matthews and Di Stefano I put there because they were legendary fitness nuts just like CR. Basically Matthews was a prototype for a modern athlete's lifestyle. Pele to me was an all-around athlete, quick, powerful with outstanding leaping ability. He was only 5'8 but seemed like he was over 6 feet when he was going up for headers. I know people usually think "tall" but physical advantages are more than just tall and strong.
Oh yeah, Gullit just had everything and when he was on his game looked dominating. Love that player!
- Status