Ronaldo vs Ronaldo

[MrEleson]

C.Ronaldo could do just about everything at his peak. Dribbling, blistering pace, audacious skill, long-range shooting, finishing, weak foot, creative passing, heading, free kicks, crossing, etc. At the zenith of his powers, he arguably had more up his sleeve than R9 as the latter couldn’t head, shoot from long-range or take FKs like prime CR (even though he was subjectively more aesthetically pleasing). But CR was THE perfect forward.

And this is just talking about peak level. When you bring other parameters into play, the argument becomes pretty lopsided.

 

[Cal?]

Only people who never saw the young Luis Ronaldo play would say that. You can make an argument for Cristiano, but there’s no way he is ‘miles ahead’ of a guy who actually managed to play well in international tournaments

Miroslav Klose managed to play well in international tournaments too, your point is?

 

[NasirTimothy]

I have seen both, but admittedly Maradona in videos of full matches. What makes you think either was as good as the other 2 because, as good as they were, I just can't see it at all.

For me Maradona was a slightly inferior version of Messi and highly inferior in output (which is what ultimately matters in football). He was stronger but dribbling, passing and scoring go to Messi, whose only black spot is not dragging a shite Argentina to a World Cup (well done Higuain).

Cristiano is the best goal scorer ever while playing as a winger for the most part. Before he became that he was an incredible dribbler and overall he is actually a very good and creative passer of the ball. I think he eclipses anything that R9 was capable of.

When you say ‘highly inferior in output’, do you mean goals? Obviously, Maradona played deeper and was not a goalscorer (except for early on in his career when he was actually very prolific). I’d say in terms of pure skill he was arguably the most talented player ever and an incredible creator. That is ‘output’.

I think what you’re missing though is the advantage that Messi and Ronaldo have playing in the superclub era. Nowadays, a handful of clubs have bought up all the best talent from around the world and paid them fortunes. The best players in Europe, South America, Asia and Africa are all playing for about 3 European clubs (I exaggerate, but you get the point).

Accordingly, when Messi and Ronaldo play international football, they look much more human. If you look just at the national teams, there’s probably 10 or 20 players that have been better than them.

Messi has got to a few finals but not won anything (and hasn’t really put in performances on the same level as his absolute best for Barca), and CR7 has scored lots of goals in Euro qualifying against the likes of Latvia, but has never been deemed the best player at an international tournament (golden ball) or won a golden boot. Neither of them have scored a single goal in the knockout rounds of the World Cup. So you guys will have to forgive me if I push back against the notion that they’re somehow miles ahead of all the other greats that have played this sport. It’s just not true

 

[NasirTimothy]

Miroslav Klose managed to play well in international tournaments too, your point is?

You confuse ‘playing well’ with ‘scoring goals’. Luis Ronaldo was deemed the best player of the entire tournament at the 1997 Copa America, and the best player of the entire tournament at the 1998 FIFA World Cup. I must have missed the times when Klose was similarly recognised for his performances in the Euros or the WC. Please be serious.....

 

[bosnian_red]

Cristiano wins and is a level above for me. Brazilian Ronaldo was of course amazing, but I just get the feeling everything about him is romanticized about what could've been, more so than what actually has been. In a similar way to how Messi is both praised as arguably the greatest of all time and also often underrated over the past 10 years, because he just does it all the time. The same happens to Cristiano. What he's achieved, year after year, for 15 years, is fecking incredible. People will underrate Ronaldo and Messi because they managed to keep such a high level for so long and claim that brazilian Ronaldo or Ronaldinho had the higher peak but it was short lived. Not the case. Cristiano and Messi pretty much had the highest peaks and managed to sustain them for over a decade. In this day and age, Cristiano was the key part in winning 5 CL titles, Messi won 4 of them. All the Ballon D'Ors between them, all the ridiculous scoring titles, the team honors, etc. Whatever way you look at it, they're both incredible and the only 2 players that can be listed on the same level are Pele and Maradona.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Cristiano wins and is a level above for me. Brazilian Ronaldo was of course amazing, but I just get the feeling everything about him is romanticized about what could've been, more so than what actually has been. In a similar way to how Messi is both praised as arguably the greatest of all time and also often underrated over the past 10 years, because he just does it all the time. The same happens to Cristiano. What he's achieved, year after year, for 15 years, is fecking incredible. People will underrate Ronaldo and Messi because they managed to keep such a high level for so long and claim that brazilian Ronaldo or Ronaldinho had the higher peak but it was short lived. Not the case. Cristiano and Messi pretty much had the highest peaks and managed to sustain them for over a decade. In this day and age, Cristiano was the key part in winning 5 CL titles, Messi won 4 of them. All the Ballon D'Ors between them, all the ridiculous scoring titles, the team honors, etc. Whatever way you look at it, they're both incredible and the only 2 players that can be listed on the same level are Pele and Maradona.

Both Messi and Ronaldo are all time great players obviously, true legends of the game, but there’s literally nothing either of them has achieved that has not been done before. I’d be very grateful if someone could come up with an achievement that is (contextually) unique to them, because I haven’t seen any

 

[RedRonaldo]

Honestly, I just think this is romanticism but I respect your opinion. For me Maradona is possibly the greatest example of a 'what if' player because his stats are pretty average and so his legend is living off his exceptional highlight reel and moments of magic rather than sustained brilliance over a career.

I think that’s a bit unfair to say his stats are pretty average. First of all he played in Serie A during 80s against the toughest teams to score throughout the history. Secondly back in those time there no official record of no. of assists, I’ve heard he has at least around 300+ assists throughout this career, which isn’t average stats by all means. But yeh Maradona didn’t have the longetivity, mainly due to his drugs abuse. He was playing at worldclass level for at least around 8 years though, which isn’t too bad at all.

 

[bosnian_red]

Both Messi and Ronaldo are all time great players obviously, true legends of the game, but there’s literally nothing either of them has achieved that has not been done before. I’d be very grateful if someone could come up with an achievement that is (contextually) unique to them, because I haven’t seen any

Such is the nature of football that the extent of records your are capable of holding is "most goals in 1 game", "most goals in 1 season", "most goals in a competition", "most goals in a season", "most of a certain trophy team or individual", etc. How many of these do Ronaldo and or Messi hold? Quite a bit of them. Or just read this. You can't compare any player in the modern era to them. You just can't. Everyone else is a romanticized version of "what if", and that "what if" doesn't apply to Ronaldo and Messi because they overcame those hardships to become the GOAT's that they are.
https://www.espn.com/football/story...-separate-cristiano-ronaldo-lionel-messi-rest

 

[darko]

Only people who never saw the young Luis Ronaldo play would say that. You can make an argument for Cristiano, but there’s no way he is ‘miles ahead’ of a guy who actually managed to play well in international tournaments

Except for the time he couldn't play in 1998 final because of his panic attack. Imagine if the happened to Cristano Ronaldo.

 

[Zehner]

Would you consider Delle Alli to be one of the best number 10 in PL history? Because if going off one season peaks he is.

Edit: longevity doesn't matter in this anyway because Cristiano is clearly better in both peak and career.

I don't think so. I'd take prime R9 even ahead of prime Messi. Incredible player.

Also, I said more than a season. I'd also doubt there has never been a season in which an attacking midfielder had a better season than Dele Alli.

That logic means peak Darren Bent is better than peak Michael Owen.

How so? I have to admit, I don't really followed the EPL at that time but I struggle to see how this could be in line with the criteria I specified.

 

[gulli_G]

For me R9 was the better player,, Obviously R7 had the better career. But R9 was a beast against not only World class but some legendary Defender's like Maldini, Nesta, Cannavarro etc. He made them look ordinary. When fat Ronaldo ran at a player they crapped it but also equally you expected some sparks

 

[NasirTimothy]

Such is the nature of football that the extent of records your are capable of holding is "most goals in 1 game", "most goals in 1 season", "most goals in a competition", "most goals in a season", "most of a certain trophy team or individual", etc. How many of these do Ronaldo and or Messi hold? Quite a bit of them. Or just read this. You can't compare any player in the modern era to them. You just can't. Everyone else is a romanticized version of "what if", and that "what if" doesn't apply to Ronaldo and Messi because they overcame those hardships to become the GOAT's that they are.
https://www.espn.com/football/story...-separate-cristiano-ronaldo-lionel-messi-rest

I didn’t say anything about just the modern era, nor was I just talking about European club football (which most of the records in your article are restricted to). I mean, in a broad sense, what have they done that is unique? Most of it seems to come back to ‘they’ve scored a lot of goals’. Well plenty of players have scored a lot of goals, many at a better GTG rate. Muller, Pele and Puskas come to mind immediately. As I’ve said before, Gerd Muller has scored in the European Cup final, the Euros final and the World Cup final. He also has the best goal to game ratio in the history of the European Cup. Ronaldo has played over a thousand games and is still 500 odd goals short of Pele, according to the Guinness Book of Records. Even if you go by ‘official’ goals, they have about the same number but Pele got his tally in 250 less games. I mean, come on.....

‘They’ve won 4 or 5 champions leagues’. Well Gento has 6 and DiStefano has 5. And they played when you actually had to win your league (or be the defending European Cup Champions) to qualify. Real Madrid won 3 in a row in the last few years but they would not have even qualified to play in the first 2 tournaments under the old rules.

‘They’ve scored a lot of goals in the champions league’. Again, it’s easier to do this when you play for superclubs and you‘re in the champions league every single year for 15 years playing dozens and dozens of games. Look at the goal record of someone like Alfredo DiStefano, who is still top 10 all time despite playing under the old qualification rules.

‘They’ve won a lot of Ballon D’Ors’. Now everyone knows that the BDO was only open to European players until the 90s. (France Football did a retrospective thing where they awarded seven golden balls to Pele in the 60s). But what a lot of people don’t know is that when the BDO was first instituted, you were not allowed to win it 2 years in a row. This is why DiStefano did not get it in 1958. So he really should have 3 or 4 straight wins. There’s lots of little vagaries like this with awards over the years that make them a poor reflection of who is great and who is less great

Apologies for the lengthy essay, but the point I’m trying to make is that people always want the stars of their own era to be far superior to any other era. But logically, that can’t always be true

 

[paraguayo]

Cristiano wins and is a level above for me. Brazilian Ronaldo was of course amazing, but I just get the feeling everything about him is romanticized about what could've been, more so than what actually has been. In a similar way to how Messi is both praised as arguably the greatest of all time and also often underrated over the past 10 years, because he just does it all the time. The same happens to Cristiano. What he's achieved, year after year, for 15 years, is fecking incredible. People will underrate Ronaldo and Messi because they managed to keep such a high level for so long and claim that brazilian Ronaldo or Ronaldinho had the higher peak but it was short lived. Not the case. Cristiano and Messi pretty much had the highest peaks and managed to sustain them for over a decade. In this day and age, Cristiano was the key part in winning 5 CL titles, Messi won 4 of them. All the Ballon D'Ors between them, all the ridiculous scoring titles, the team honors, etc. Whatever way you look at it, they're both incredible and the only 2 players that can be listed on the same level are Pele and Maradona.

I always wondered this. Luis Ronaldo gets discredited because of his stats, yet Maradona is always single handedly called the GOAT? What are Maradona's great stats? L.Ronaldo also carried his coutnry to a world cup, and another WC final at age 21...

So are stats how we should judge players from 80s and 90s or not?

 

[Red Stone]

Both Messi and Ronaldo are all time great players obviously, true legends of the game, but there’s literally nothing either of them has achieved that has not been done before. I’d be very grateful if someone could come up with an achievement that is (contextually) unique to them, because I haven’t seen any

Please find an example of a player that has performed at the very top level with the consistency and longevity that Messi and Ronaldo have. Playing that many games a season for almost 20 years and never seeming to hit a patch of truly bad form has literally never been done before.

Ronaldo has over 1,000 games combined for United, Real, Juve and Portugal and is going to be the leading goalscorer of all time when he retires, apart from a couple of obscure players who scored bucketloads in backyard leagues or during world wars. Messi will almost certainly reach 1,000 games at the very top level before he retires. The only other forwards that have more than 1,000 recorded professional games are Raúl (who would have less than 1,000 games if you remove games played in lesser leagues in the US and Qatar, as well as for underage national teams and Real Madrid's reserve teams) and Rivaldo, who spent a considerable amount of his career puttering about in the likes of Angola and Uzbekistan. So, to summarise, that's going to be the most amount of games EVER for a forward and the most amount of goals EVER for anyone in the case of Ronaldo, with the possibility of Messi overtaking him in future if he plays long enough. But they hasn't achieved anything unique. Gotcha.

I don't know why people refuse to realise how unique their achievements actually are. History is literally being made before our very eyes and some of you are desperate to downplay it instead of just appreciating the fact that you get to watch it unfold live. I can't imagine anyone in the 60's and 70's looking at Pelé and saying "Nah, this guy's not that good, really. He's not doing anything Di Stefano hasn't already done before." Maybe they did, though. Maybe it wasn't until after he retired that people suddenly unanimously agreed he was the best. If that's the case Ronaldo and Messi will have their time at the top of the pile, as they very well deserve.

 

[RedRonaldo]

I’ll sum it up in a simple way after numerous revisit:

Better talent: L.Ronaldo
Greater impact: Cristiano

Better peak performance: L.Ronaldo
Better peak season: Cristiano

Better career: Cristiano
Better GOAT in historical standing: Cristiano

In short, L.Ronaldo is arguably better player in his shorter peak, Cristiano is easily greater player throughout their respective career.

 

[NasirTimothy]

Please find an example of a player that has performed at the very top level with the consistency and longevity that Messi and Ronaldo have. Playing that many games a season for almost 20 years and never seeming to hit a patch of truly bad form has literally never been done before.

Ronaldo has over 1,000 games combined for United, Real, Juve and Portugal and is going to be the leading goalscorer of all time when he retires, apart from a couple of obscure players who scored bucketloads in backyard leagues or during world wars. Messi will almost certainly reach 1,000 games at the very top level before he retires. The only other forwards that have more than 1,000 recorded professional games are Raúl (who would have less than 1,000 games if you remove games played in lesser leagues in the US and Qatar, as well as for underage national teams and Real Madrid's reserve teams) and Rivaldo, who spent a considerable amount of his career puttering about in the likes of Angola and Uzbekistan. So, to summarise, that's going to be the most amount of games EVER for a forward and the most amount of goals EVER for anyone in the case of Ronaldo, with the possibility of Messi overtaking him in future if he plays long enough. But they hasn't achieved anything unique. Gotcha.

I don't know why people refuse to realise how unique their achievements actually are. History is literally being made before our very eyes and some of you are desperate to downplay it instead of just appreciating the fact that you get to watch it unfold live. I can't imagine anyone in the 60's and 70's looking at Pelé and saying "Nah, this guy's not that good, really. He's not doing anything Di Stefano hasn't already done before." Maybe they did, though. Maybe it wasn't until after he retired that people suddenly unanimously agreed he was the best. If that's the case Ronaldo and Messi will have their time at the top of the pile, as they very well deserve.

Everyone did acknowledge Pele was great at the time. Same with Maradona. What they didn’t do (I would guess) was talk about DiStefano, Sindelaar or Leonidas being ‘frauds’, who ‘stat padded’ against ‘farmers’. There was always respect for legends of the past.

DiStefano and Pele were in fact contemporaries, though at the opposite ends of the scale. They played against eachother in 1959 (Real Madrid v Santos at a packed Bernabeu) when Madrid were the European champions and a teenage Pele had won the 58 World Cup.

Madrid won. Pele scored and ADS didn’t but ADS got a couple of assists and generally ran the game. The verdict of the Spanish press and fans was that ADS was still the best player in the world, though Pele was an electrifying talent.

Messi and Ronaldo playing for a long time is admirable of course, but there’s context to that as well. First of all, a lot of performers across several sports seem to be playing well into their late 30s and 40s. I’m pretty suspicious as to the reasons why this is so, but let’s be charitable and call it the ‘avocado ice cream’ era, indicative of, ahem, ‘advances’ in conditioning and sports science.

What’s notable about the AIC era is that most contact sports have greatly reduced the punishment that defenders can inflict on attackers, which leads to longer careers. Tom Brady is still winning super bowls at age 43. Lebron is still arguably the best player in the world at 36, etc etc. What they are doing would not have been possible with the violence of earlier eras, and it’s the same for football (soccer). So again, it’s impressive but you have to add context when comparing to the past

 

[balaks]

I’ll sum it up in a simple way after numerous revisit:

Better talent: L.Ronaldo
Greater impact: Cristiano

Better peak performance: L.Ronaldo
Better peak season: Cristiano

Better career: Cristiano
Better GOAT in historical standing: Cristiano

In short, L.Ronaldo is arguably better player in his shorter peak, Cristiano is easily greater player throughout their respective career.

I'd agree with that.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Cristiano wins and is a level above for me. Brazilian Ronaldo was of course amazing, but I just get the feeling everything about him is romanticized about what could've been, more so than what actually has been. In a similar way to how Messi is both praised as arguably the greatest of all time and also often underrated over the past 10 years, because he just does it all the time. The same happens to Cristiano. What he's achieved, year after year, for 15 years, is fecking incredible. People will underrate Ronaldo and Messi because they managed to keep such a high level for so long and claim that brazilian Ronaldo or Ronaldinho had the higher peak but it was short lived. Not the case. Cristiano and Messi pretty much had the highest peaks and managed to sustain them for over a decade. In this day and age, Cristiano was the key part in winning 5 CL titles, Messi won 4 of them. All the Ballon D'Ors between them, all the ridiculous scoring titles, the team honors, etc. Whatever way you look at it, they're both incredible and the only 2 players that can be listed on the same level are Pele and Maradona.

agree with everything you say here.

the perspective will likely change when they have both retired. Players do get remembered more fondly when they are no longer playing.

we have never seen two players like this at the same time, fighting it out for so long and most likely never will again.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Everyone did acknowledge Pele was great at the time. Same with Maradona. What they didn’t do (I would guess) was talk about DiStefano, Sindelaar or Leonidas being ‘frauds’, who ‘stat padded’ against ‘farmers’. There was always respect for legends of the past.

DiStefano and Pele were in fact contemporaries, though at the opposite ends of the scale. They played against eachother in 1959 (Real Madrid v Santos at a packed Bernabeu) when Madrid were the European champions and a teenage Pele had won the 58 World Cup.

Madrid won. Pele scored and ADS didn’t but ADS got a couple of assists and generally ran the game. The verdict of the Spanish press and fans was that ADS was still the best player in the world, though Pele was an electrifying talent.

Messi and Ronaldo playing for a long time is admirable of course, but there’s context to that as well. First of all, a lot of performers across several sports seem to be playing well into their late 30s and 40s. I’m pretty suspicious as to the reasons why this is so, but let’s be charitable and call it the ‘avocado ice cream’ era, indicative of, ahem, ‘advances’ in conditioning and sports science.

What’s notable about the AIC era is that most contact sports have greatly reduced the punishment that defenders can inflict on attackers, which leads to longer careers. Tom Brady is still winning super bowls at age 43. Lebron is still arguably the best player in the world at 36, etc etc. What they are doing would not have been possible with the violence of earlier eras, and it’s the same for football (soccer). So again, it’s impressive but you have to add context when comparing to the past

Stanley Matthew’s played top level professional football until his mid-40s during 1930s-1960s, and won Ballon D’or when he was 41. Whereas Rooney is done in top level at age 32-33 and retired at 35 in 2000s-2020s.

Yeh advance in conditioning and sports science definitely plays a huge part...

 

[Gehrman]

Stanley Matthew’s played top level professional football until his mid-40s during 1930s-1960s, and won Ballon D’or when he was 41. Whereas Rooney is done in top level at age 32-33 and retired at 35 in 2000s-2020s.

Yeh advance in conditioning and sports science definitely plays a huge part...

Fair play to Stanley but the pace of the game was probably also a lot slower than it is now. If Ronaldo doesn't get seriously injured I can see him playing till he's 40 though. If Zlatan at 39 can do as well as he's doing in Seria A then Ronaldo can too.

 

[RUCK4444]

The way some are talking down peak R9 is incredible really.

I’m a massive Cristiano fanboy, probably my favourite player of all time. That said peak R9 was an absolute force of nature.

I’m not saying he was better than Cristiano overall but we can’t be definitely sure of the opposite either.

R9 had everything and was definitely the more naturally gifted player, Cristiano more than made up for that with desire and application to be the best.

R9 though, when everything clicked I would say is the most devastating, pure striker, ever.

Below taken from an article on fourfourtwo:
“He was six-foot, could run 100 metres in 10.3 seconds and had more tricks up his sleeve than a magician. By the age of 23, he’d broken the world transfer record twice following moves to Barcelona and Inter, scored over 200 goals for club and country and was a two-time World Player of the Year.”

The same physio that managed his knee condition at Milan said his muscle tissues were so powerful that they effectively ripped his tendons weakening them especially due to how incredibly balanced and coordinated he was which allowed him to divert side to side putting extra strain on the tendons in the knees.

You have to think if it were not for the injuries that R9 would have had a greater peak than he did.

Think of it like this, if your a centre back who would you least like to face on their best day... I have to say I would least like to face R9.
You would have a chance at containing Ronnie and pushing him wide (assuming he’s playing off the wing as a wide forward.) Theres no containing a peak R9 on his best day, there just isn’t.

 

[TsuWave]

How is this even a conversation? Cristiano is is just better. Better peak, better career, better everything and no amounts of “most naturally gifted” nonsense is going to change that.

 

[RedRonaldo]

The way some are talking down peak R9 is incredible really.

I’m a massive Cristiano fanboy, probably my favourite player of all time. That said peak R9 was an absolute force of nature.

I’m not saying he was better than Cristiano overall but we can’t be definitely sure of the opposite either.

R9 had everything and was definitely the more naturally gifted player, Cristiano more than made up for that with desire and application to be the best.

R9 though, when everything clicked I would say is the most devastating, pure striker, ever.

Below taken from an article on fourfourtwo:
“He was six-foot, could run 100 metres in 10.3 seconds and had more tricks up his sleeve than a magician. By the age of 23, he’d broken the world transfer record twice following moves to Barcelona and Inter, scored over 200 goals for club and country and was a two-time World Player of the Year.”

The same physio that managed his knee condition at Milan said his muscle tissues were so powerful that they effectively ripped his tendons weakening them especially due to how incredibly balanced and coordinated he was which allowed him to divert side to side putting extra strain on the tendons in the knees.

You have to think if it were not for the injuries that R9 would have had a greater peak than he did.

Think of it like this, if your a centre back who would you least like to face on their best day... I have to say I would least like to face R9.
You would have a chance at containing Ronnie and pushing him wide (assuming he’s playing off the wing as a wide forward.) Theres no containing a peak R9 on his best day, there just isn’t.

L.Ronaldo is definitely one of the most talented footballer ever. But to be fair, a lot of people romanticize “what could have been” scenario on him if not for the injuries. For example, if he is half as disciplined/focus/hardwork as Cristiano, he wouldn’t turn so fat and no longer able to compete in top level anymore in his early 30s, regardless of his injuries.

But to be fair, peak L.Ronaldo at around age 22 is easily one of the most unstoppable center forward I have ever seen, if not the most. If not the injuries, he could still likely loss his extra yard of pace, explosiveness, motivation and form, like all other top Brazilians before and after him during same era (ie Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano etc)

 

[Patchbeard]

Honestly, I just think this is romanticism but I respect your opinion. For me Maradona is possibly the greatest example of a 'what if' player because his stats are pretty average and so his legend is living off his exceptional highlight reel and moments of magic rather than sustained brilliance over a career.

Here's Maradona's pretty average club stats...

As a youngster in Argentina:
206 games, 154 goals, 83 assists
So 1.15 G+A per game

Barcelona:
58 games, 38 goals, 24 assists
So 1.05 G+A per game

Napoli:
259 games, 115 goals, 79 assists
So 0.75 G+A per game

Spanning 15 seasons (so much for him having no longevity.. that's much better longevity than most top players)

Then, when you also consider the nature of the game in the 80s in Europe it was much more defensive than nowadays:
- Barcelona averaged 61 goals a season in the league whilst Maradona was there
- Napoli averaged 44 goals a season in the league whilst Maradona was there (which was a lot for the league, they won 2 titles and were top 3 in 6/7 seasons)
- Whereas Real Madrid averaged 107 goals in the league during Ronaldo's time...

So to put that in context:
- Maradona contributed to 41.4148% of Napoli's Serie A goals in winning them 2 titles in 7 seasons.
- Ronaldo contributed to 41.4146% of Real Madrid's La Liga goals in winning them 2 titles in 9 seasons.

Remarkably similar impacts on their teams.

Tl;dr
- C.Ronaldo has incredible stats for the current era.
- Maradona also had incredible stats for the era he played in.
- Stats at face value are not a fair comparison across eras.
- Maradona/R9/C.Ronaldo were all incredible players. Who was better? Matter of opinion.

 

[tomaldinho1]

How so? I have to admit, I don't really followed the EPL at that time but I struggle to see how this could be in line with the criteria I specified.

Your video game example basically means the best 'score' wins. Bent once hit 24 PL goals in a season, Owen never broke 20 in a season and was consistently in the high teens. GOAT is not about who showed up for a season or even a few seasons it is about who was the best overall of all time. CR7 and Messi are the standout candidates, they have the best one off seasons and also best overall careers. What makes it even more incredible is you'd assume R9 and the out and out strikers would have the best 'stats' for goals but they don't. It's not downplaying R9 as he was phenomenal but it seems completely illogical, unless this is a 'what could have been' thread (which there's nothing wrong with) and then it's just guesswork, to compare him to CR7.

I think that’s a bit unfair to say his stats are pretty average. First of all he played in Serie A during 80s against the toughest teams to score throughout the history. Secondly back in those time there no official record of no. of assists, I’ve heard he has at least around 300+ assists throughout this career, which isn’t average stats by all means. But yeh Maradona didn’t have the longetivity, mainly due to his drugs abuse. He was playing at worldclass level for at least around 8 years though, which isn’t too bad at all.

Average when you are talking about the GOAT conversation. Put it this way, his direct comparison is Messi and that comparison is one sided. From the glimpses I have seen of Maradona in his pomp I have no doubt if he'd had a better mindset and work ethic that he'd be right up there, but he didn't and he's not.

 

[Pocho]

M

Here's Maradona's pretty average club stats...

As a youngster in Argentina:
206 games, 154 goals, 83 assists
So 1.15 G+A per game

Barcelona:
58 games, 38 goals, 24 assists
So 1.05 G+A per game

Napoli:
259 games, 115 goals, 79 assists
So 0.75 G+A per game

Spanning 15 seasons (so much for him having no longevity.. that's much better longevity than most top players)

Then, when you also consider the nature of the game in the 80s in Europe it was much more defensive than nowadays:
- Barcelona averaged 61 goals a season in the league whilst Maradona was there
- Napoli averaged 44 goals a season in the league whilst Maradona was there (which was a lot for the league, they won 2 titles and were top 3 in 6/7 seasons)
- Whereas Real Madrid averaged 107 goals in the league during Ronaldo's time...

So to put that in context:
- Maradona contributed to 41.4148% of Napoli's Serie A goals in winning them 2 titles in 7 seasons.
- Ronaldo contributed to 41.4146% of Real Madrid's La Liga goals in winning them 2 titles in 9 seasons.

Remarkably similar impacts on their teams.

Tl;dr
- C.Ronaldo has incredible stats for the current era.
- Maradona also had incredible stats for the era he played in.
- Stats at face value are not a fair comparison across eras.
- Maradona/R9/C.Ronaldo were all incredible players. Who was better? Matter of opinion.

Messi

 

[tomaldinho1]

Here's Maradona's pretty average club stats...

As a youngster in Argentina:
206 games, 154 goals, 83 assists
So 1.15 G+A per game

Barcelona:
58 games, 38 goals, 24 assists
So 1.05 G+A per game

Napoli:
259 games, 115 goals, 79 assists
So 0.75 G+A per game

Spanning 15 seasons (so much for him having no longevity.. that's much better longevity than most top players)

Then, when you also consider the nature of the game in the 80s in Europe it was much more defensive than nowadays:
- Barcelona averaged 61 goals a season in the league whilst Maradona was there
- Napoli averaged 44 goals a season in the league whilst Maradona was there (which was a lot for the league, they won 2 titles and were top 3 in 6/7 seasons)
- Whereas Real Madrid averaged 107 goals in the league during Ronaldo's time...

So to put that in context:
- Maradona contributed to 41.4148% of Napoli's Serie A goals in winning them 2 titles in 7 seasons.
- Ronaldo contributed to 41.4146% of Real Madrid's La Liga goals in winning them 2 titles in 9 seasons.

Remarkably similar impacts on their teams.

Tl;dr
- C.Ronaldo has incredible stats for the current era.
- Maradona also had incredible stats for the era he played in.
- Stats at face value are not a fair comparison across eras.
- Maradona/R9/C.Ronaldo were all incredible players. Who was better? Matter of opinion.

See above

 

[Gio]

Honestly, I just think this is romanticism but I respect your opinion. For me Maradona is possibly the greatest example of a 'what if' player because his stats are pretty average and so his legend is living off his exceptional highlight reel and moments of magic rather than sustained brilliance over a career.

We are not comparing like with like though:

• Position - Maradona played deeper, as the team's playmaker and creator.
• Quality of team-mates - Maradona would almost always pick the ball up deeper, not just because he played as the 10, but because his teams did not dominate territory and possession like the elite clubs of the last 15 years have done. He was always further away from goal with fewer options ahead of him. Today forwards are breaking records everywhere because they have such high calibre service from a stacked squad around them.
• Tactics - Maradona played in the most defensive era of all time. Today's forwards enjoy the most attacking era in the last half century. For example, Napoli scored 40 goals in 35 games in 1985/86, while Real Madrid scored 160 goals in 60 games in 2013/14. So that's an average of 1.1 goals per game for Napoli and 2.7 goals per game for Real.

• Refereeing - there has been a huge tightening up in the last 30 years as FIFA recognised the commercial value of keeping its star attackers on the field for as long as possible. In the 1986 World Cup Maradona was fouled 53 times, almost double anyone else in World Cup history. In the all-time most fouled list, he is 1st, 2nd and 3rd. That's the World Cup, Serie A would have been even more cynical. How many goals and assists might he have got had he not been chopped down just about every time he started running with the ball? What was unlikely to even get a yellow then, would be a routine red card today, which is why defenders could get away with it. It's why he had to play with two boots of different sizes, because one ankle was ballooned up. It's why man-to-man marking of superstars is almost extinct in the modern game, because it's almost impossible to get tight without the referee blowing up.

• Fewer games - the Serie A season, European competitions and the international game all had fewer games. For example in 1985/86 Napoli played 35 games, while in 2013/14 Real Madrid played 60 games. That's almost double as many. Same for international football - Argentina played 83 games in the 1980s, Portugal had 128 in the 2010s - more than 50% extra.

When you factor in the context Maradona's stats were anything but average.

 

[Zehner]

Your video game example basically means the best 'score' wins. Bent once hit 24 PL goals in a season, Owen never broke 20 in a season and was consistently in the high teens. GOAT is not about who showed up for a season or even a few seasons it is about who was the best overall of all time. CR7 and Messi are the standout candidates, they have the best one off seasons and also best overall careers. What makes it even more incredible is you'd assume R9 and the out and out strikers would have the best 'stats' for goals but they don't. It's not downplaying R9 as he was phenomenal but it seems completely illogical, unless this is a 'what could have been' thread (which there's nothing wrong with) and then it's just guesswork, to compare him to CR7.


Average when you are talking about the GOAT conversation. Put it this way, his direct comparison is Messi and that comparison is one sided. From the glimpses I have seen of Maradona in his pomp I have no doubt if he'd had a better mindset and work ethic that he'd be right up there, but he didn't and he's not.

Ah, I see. To make it clear, the analogy with the video game was more to highlight that the one who achieved the highest level is the one who's generally considered the best, even if there are others who did over a longer period of time as long as they didn't hit the same heights. Football performance is obviously incredibly more difficult to quantify compared to the score of a video game. I don't think you can measure it in goal and assist stats, there are far too many variables for that. I for example think R9 in the Real Madrid and Barca sides Messi had built around them would just score as much as they did if not more.

Also, I don't think that one season is enough to prove one's worth. However, R9 had three to four absolute top class seasons and the level he proved in those to me is up there or even higher than anybody else in history. And he did it over a sustained period of time, showing that he's not a flash in the pan.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Ah, I see. To make it clear, the analogy with the video game was more to highlight that the one who achieved the highest level is the one who's generally considered the best, even if there are others who did over a longer period of time as long as they didn't hit the same heights. Football performance is obviously incredibly more difficult to quantify compared to the score of a video game. I don't think you can measure it in goal and assist stats, there are far too many variables for that. I for example think R9 in the Real Madrid and Barca sides Messi had built around them would just score as much as they did if not more.

Also, I don't think that one season is enough to prove one's worth. However, R9 had three to four absolute top class seasons and the level he proved in those to me is up there or even higher than anybody else in history. And he did it over a sustained period of time, showing that he's not a flash in the pan.

Yep - and again that's why this forum is great and football is subjective, there's no right answer and obviously we agree we're talking about two of the best ever attacking players here. I'm just of the opinion that we've grown a bit used to Messi/CR7 and maybe only in the future once they've been retired a while will sit back and realise just how other worldly they have been.

Weirdly, the more I think about the video game analogy, the more I actually agree but I guess there is too much variance in the leagues, different eras, different national teams etc.

 

[RUCK4444]

L.Ronaldo is definitely one of the most talented footballer ever. But to be fair, a lot of people romanticize “what could have been” scenario on him if not for the injuries. For example, if he is half as disciplined/focus/hardwork as Cristiano, he wouldn’t turn so fat and no longer able to compete in top level anymore in his early 30s, regardless of his injuries.

But to be fair, peak L.Ronaldo at around age 22 is easily one of the most unstoppable center forward I have ever seen, if not the most. If not the injuries, he could still likely loss his extra yard of pace, explosiveness, motivation and form, like all other top Brazilians before and after him during same era (ie Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano etc)

Yes I'm sure all fans romanticize certain players but speaking for myself it's the opposite in this case, taking into consideration that Cristiano is my favourite player, I've had to try and think as fairly and as balanced as I can on this comparison.

There's no doubt that Cristiano is the better overall player career-wise when you consider their peaks and the length of those peaks, also for goalscoring alone Ronnie is imo the best ever.

It's really tricky whenever your doing a comparison like this because it depends in what exact context your comparing them. What I'm factoring in here is the overall abilities of both players and assessing which would be the most effective on their 'best' day. When you do that, I think I personally lean very slightly towards R9, with him being the most complete package at his very best.
What I mean by that is I think at his absolutely best R9 is:

• Quicker. Full speed R9 is faster and more explosive.
• Better dribbler. Especially at full speed with close control.
• More skilful. Ronnie is/was super skilful in his prime but most of his skills were entertaining more than effective, a no-look pass, a back heel, step overs etc. R9 is possibly the best ever at effective skills especially while running at players (which is what tends to make them effective.)

To summarise in a nutshell, in a one-off game I would choose R9 on his best day. Over the course of a season I would pick Ronnie every time. That's where I'm at with this one.

 

[tomaldinho1]

We are not comparing like with like though:

• Position - Maradona played deeper, as the team's playmaker and creator.
• Quality of team-mates - Maradona would almost always pick the ball up deeper, not just because he played as the 10, but because his teams did not dominate territory and possession like the elite clubs of the last 15 years have done. He was always further away from goal with fewer options ahead of him. Today forwards are breaking records everywhere because they have such high calibre service from a stacked squad around them.
• Tactics - Maradona played in the most defensive era of all time. Today's forwards enjoy the most attacking era in the last half century. For example, Napoli scored 40 goals in 35 games in 1985/86, while Real Madrid scored 160 goals in 60 games in 2013/14. So that's an average of 1.1 goals per game for Napoli and 2.7 goals per game for Real.

• Refereeing - there has been a huge tightening up in the last 30 years as FIFA recognised the commercial value of keeping its star attackers on the field for as long as possible. In the 1986 World Cup Maradona was fouled 53 times, almost double anyone else in World Cup history. In the all-time most fouled list, he is 1st, 2nd and 3rd. That's the World Cup, Serie A would have been even more cynical. How many goals and assists might he have got had he not been chopped down just about every time he started running with the ball? What was unlikely to even get a yellow then, would be a routine red card today, which is why defenders could get away with it. It's why he had to play with two boots of different sizes, because one ankle was ballooned up. It's why man-to-man marking of superstars is almost extinct in the modern game, because it's almost impossible to get tight without the referee blowing up.

• Fewer games - the Serie A season, European competitions and the international game all had fewer games. For example in 1985/86 Napoli played 35 games, while in 2013/14 Real Madrid played 60 games. That's almost double as many. Same for international football - Argentina played 83 games in the 1980s, Portugal had 128 in the 2010s - more than 50% extra.

When you factor in the context Maradona's stats were anything but average.

See above post re Maradona. Obviously not average but just nowhere near Messi/CR7 levels

 

[mancan92]

The way some are talking down peak R9 is incredible really.

I’m a massive Cristiano fanboy, probably my favourite player of all time. That said peak R9 was an absolute force of nature.

I’m not saying he was better than Cristiano overall but we can’t be definitely sure of the opposite either.

R9 had everything and was definitely the more naturally gifted player, Cristiano more than made up for that with desire and application to be the best.

R9 though, when everything clicked I would say is the most devastating, pure striker, ever.

Below taken from an article on fourfourtwo:
“He was six-foot, could run 100 metres in 10.3 seconds and had more tricks up his sleeve than a magician. By the age of 23, he’d broken the world transfer record twice following moves to Barcelona and Inter, scored over 200 goals for club and country and was a two-time World Player of the Year.”

The same physio that managed his knee condition at Milan said his muscle tissues were so powerful that they effectively ripped his tendons weakening them especially due to how incredibly balanced and coordinated he was which allowed him to divert side to side putting extra strain on the tendons in the knees.

You have to think if it were not for the injuries that R9 would have had a greater peak than he did.

Think of it like this, if your a centre back who would you least like to face on their best day... I have to say I would least like to face R9.
You would have a chance at containing Ronnie and pushing him wide (assuming he’s playing off the wing as a wide forward.) Theres no containing a peak R9 on his best day, there just isn’t.

What you are saying is absolutely the same for Cristiano though. At his absolute peak your talking about a player that simply had more tools than R9. He is unstoppable.

Shut down his dribbling - You still have probably the best header of a ball in the history of the game
Don't offer him a chance through on goal? - At his peak you still had a player who was extremely deadly from free kicks
Don't let him anywhere near the goal - Well he'll just slam one top corner from 40 years out

The guy is absolutely unstoppable R9 had simply less tools at his disposal

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Honestly, I just think this is romanticism but I respect your opinion. For me Maradona is possibly the greatest example of a 'what if' player because his stats are pretty average and so his legend is living off his exceptional highlight reel and moments of magic rather than sustained brilliance over a career.

Everything wrong with football fans in the here and now.

People trotting out stats as if that’s the single biggest indicator of something. Reducing a pure Number 10 from the 80’s/90’s to ‘His stats were pretty average’ is obtuse, or wilfully ignorant.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Everything wrong with football fans in the here and now.

People trotting out stats as if that’s the single biggest indicator of something. Reducing a pure Number 10 from the 80’s/90’s to ‘His stats were pretty average’ is obtuse, or wilfully ignorant.

Ironically, I'd say it were more ignorant to not read a chain fully before insulting someone but each to their own.

 

[RUCK4444]

What you are saying is absolutely the same for Cristiano though. At his absolute peak your talking about a player that simply had more tools than R9. He is unstoppable.

Shut down his dribbling - You still have probably the best header of a ball in the history of the game
Don't offer him a chance through on goal? - At his peak you still had a player who was extremely deadly from free kicks
Don't let him anywhere near the goal - Well he'll just slam one top corner from 40 years out

The guy is absolutely unstoppable R9 had simply less tools at his disposal

What your describing though with each of those points is Cristiano's superior finishing ability. Which I've acknowledged in my comparison (and granted it's a major point in this comparison.)

Aside from finishing alone, I just feel that R9 edges it with overall ability as a 'complete forward'. I'm talking about pace, strength, power, incredible dribbling and balance, more direct. A player that could at his best run through midfield opposition and defence by himself, no linkup required. Pure ability and power.

Again, if you solely compare them on finishing over the course of their careers, which fair enough some might consider that the overriding factor, then Ronnie wins. I'm just trying to imagine both at their absolute pinnacle on the pitch and aside from finishing I think R9 makes a very strong argument.

 

[VorZakone]

While technically true, I don't think it's fair to call R9's early years his peak, as if he was never gonna become better even without injuries. We don't know that for sure.

What we do know is that from an early age R9 was already doing amazing stuff, more than CR7 at the age of 18-22.

 

[Gehrman]

Everything wrong with football fans in the here and now.

People trotting out stats as if that’s the single biggest indicator of something. Reducing a pure Number 10 from the 80’s/90’s to ‘His stats were pretty average’ is obtuse, or wilfully ignorant.

It's like judging Iniesta on his goals and assists. Everyone could admire him by seeing him play, but just looks at his goals and assists you'd think he was miles behind Frank Lampard.

 

[Gehrman]

While technically true, I don't think it's fair to call R9's early years his peak, as if he was never gonna become better even without injuries. We don't know that for sure.

What we do know is that from an early age R9 was already doing amazing stuff, more than CR7 at the age of 18-22.

You could say it was his prime since they were his best years. Perhaps apart from Pelé, I'd say he was the best young player ever. He had an instant impact in every club he moved to and didn't seem to have any weakness to his game at all.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Average when you are talking about the GOAT conversation. Put it this way, his direct comparison is Messi and that comparison is one sided. From the glimpses I have seen of Maradona in his pomp I have no doubt if he'd had a better mindset and work ethic that he'd be right up there, but he didn't and he's not.

Maradona had an exceptional work ethic. The fella lived for football. He’s always spoken About as a phenomenal trainer. He served as an example for players around him.

It feels as though you’ve watched one documentary that spoke of Diego’s drug abuse or party lifestyle and applied those across his whole career.

I’m sure he indulged in some marching powder and partying across the best years of his career. But he was a committed professional. Not a drunken, drug addled mess that shone little and often. He was a dominant force on a football pitch for over a decade.

He dominated against the best teams and defences at a truly unfashionable club. He did that in an era where people would watch football for enjoyment. Not one where people hate-watch Messi to post about Ronaldo when the final whistle blows if he missed a sitter.

Rivalries were more intense, but more respectful in the late 80’s and 90’s. There was a totality of support for your team. That’s not a Rose-tinted view. Supporters nowadays want to boil down every discussion to a binary. To do that they’ll reduce it to numbers on a page. It’s so silly.

If you’re a football fan, there are worse things you could do than to just let yourself drown in old Maradona footage. Some stories from his ex team mates. There’s so much out there. I don’t believe anyone that’s done that, ever arrives at the end of the deep dive, shrugs and goes “He didn’t have it, he’s not up there”.