Would Ronaldo have been so adored if he played football in this current era

[jm99]

Portugal had a strong NT in 2010 and they also had one in 2014. They didn't have a worse team than Ghana or Uruguay, on paper they arguably had the best defense, they had the best or second best player in the World and a solid midfield that probably lacked top level creativtiy though someone like Danny was a pretty good creator. The 2014 squad was in a similar ball park but with better options in midfield since Tiago had improved and Moutinho was added.

NT are rarely better than that with some exceptions and worse players than Ronaldo don't get the same level of excuses.

In 2014 Ronaldo had a bad knee injury that basically changed the way he played afterwards. In 2010 they got knocked out by one of the best international sides there's ever been, and probably the hardest for an attacker to play against, because you'd usually have 30% possession against them. Fair enough 2018 he should have done better against Uruguay, he did also score a hat trick against Spain though.

For me the issue with judging based on a world cup is its every 4 years and it takes place in thr space of a month, so an injury that might cause you to lose form for a month of the season affects your entire world cup

 

[Andrade]

Well it is disingenuous to include tournaments when he's 37 and clearly past it as a chance to win it for his country when he struggled to score agaisnt teams from cyprus. He was also playing for Portugal, so in 2018 he scored 3 goals in 4 games which is pretty good and if playing for a team that had a chance of progressing further a good chance of a golden boot.

I'm saying r9 isn't as good because I'm not obsessed with international football like you, I have this weird thing where you judge players off the 900 games or so they played for their club at a much higher level against much better opposition than 7 games every 4 years

More excuses. He failed. Simple as that. That's why he's not top 2 all time and never will be.

The World Cup is the true test. Always has been, always will be.

 

[jm99]

More excuses. He failed. Simple as that. That's why he's not top 2 all time and never will be.

The World Cup is the true test. Always has been, always will be.

R9 failed in the champions league. The true test. The highest level

He could go and be the best player in the world cup even after his injuries because its a lower level but he couldn't replicate that at Madrid in the champions league, the team that won 2 of the 3 previous champions leagues

 

[Zehner]

But he did join the team that had won 2 champions leagues in 3 years and had just been the best player at the world cup in 2002, which plenty of people in this thread say is the highest level of foot all, far harder than a champions league, so if he was able to knock goals past China and Costa Rica and dominate a world cup, the best level of football apparently, why did he struggle in the champions league?

First, I explicitly said "in his prime". He was half the player he used to be when he joined Madrid.

Second, this constant distracting of you is extremely frustrating. Honestly, stop this please. There's no point in discussing with you this way.

 

[jm99]

First, I explicitly said "in his prime". He was half the player he used to be when he joined Madrid.

Second, this constant distracting of you is extremely frustrating. Honestly, stop this please. There's no point in discussing with you this way.

But he was still able to be the best player in the world cup when he was half the player he was. How can that be if the world cup is so much harder? How could he dominate the world cup but struggle in the champions league?

 

[JPRouve]

R9 failed in the champions league. The true test. The highest level

He could go and be the best player in the world cup even after his injuries because its a lower level but he couldn't replicate that at Madrid in the champions league, the team that won 2 of the 3 previous champions leagues

The Champions League isn't an individual test and has never been. If you put CR7 CL success into context you would realize that it took Real Madrid five years and nearly two rebuilt to be successful in the CL, they didn't win these trophies because they had CR7, they won it because they built an incredible team around him, which brings us back to the original point. For most of Ronaldo's career super teams weren't really a thing, top players were spread around and not really teaming up to beat smaller clubs.

Now Ronaldo did take part to a superteam attempt with Perez Galacticos but it was an unbalanced mess, especially in midfield and defense which had nothing to do with the attackers.

 

[jm99]

The Champions League isn't an individual test and has never been. If you put CR7 CL success into context you would realize that it took Real Madrid five years and nearly two rebuilt to be successful in the CL, they didn't win these trophies because they had CR7, they won it because they built an incredible team around him, which brings us back to the original point. For most of Ronaldo's career super teams weren't really a thing, top players were spread around and not really teaming up to beat smaller clubs.

Now Ronaldo did take part to a superteam attempt with Perez Galacticos but it was an unbalanced mess, especially in midfield and defense which had nothing to do with the attackers.

Before cr7 joined madrid hadn't reached a semi final in 7 years, apart from his first year they then reached 8 in a row (and for him 11 in the last 12) as well as winning 4 titles. As soon as he left they got knocked in the last 16 again the following 2 years, feels as though he had quite a lot to do with it

 

[Zehner]

But he was still able to be the best player in the world cup when he was half the player he was. How can that be if the world cup is so much harder? How could he dominate the world cup but struggle in the champions league?

I wasn't the one arguing that. Nor am I the one who thinks knockout goals in the UCL are the most important metric for whatever. I'm only pointing out your double standards and how you constantly contradict yourself.

So please explain to me, how does R9's goal record in the UCL work against him when Cristiano would have 80% less games and goals in the UCL if he faced the same qualifcation conditions as R9?

And secondly, if you believe a "serious knee injury" voids Cristiano from any blame regarding his subpar world cup performance, why don't you even mention the horror injury that ruined R9's agility and explosiveness and sidelined him for almost two years even once?

 

[JPRouve]

Before cr7 joined madrid hadn't reached a semi final in 7 years, apart from his first year they then reached 8 in a row (and for him 11 in the last 12) as well as winning 4 titles. As soon as he left they got knocked in the last 16 again the following 2 years, feels as though he had quite a lot to do with it

Was Ronaldo the only signing and only reason?

 

[RedBanker]

I feel sad for the people taking potshots at R9.

 

[jm99]

I wasn't the one arguing that. Nor am I the one who thinks knockout goals in the UCL are the most important metric for whatever. I'm only pointing out your double standards and how you constantly contradict yourself.

So please explain to me, how does R9's goal record in the UCL work against him when Cristiano would have 80% less games and goals in the UCL if he faced the same qualifcation conditions as R9?

And secondly, if you believe a "serious knee injury" voids Cristiano from any blame regarding his subpar world cup performance, why don't you even mention the horror injury that ruined R9's agility and explosiveness and sidelined him for almost two years even once?

Well we don't need to look at absolute numbers. We can look at ratios. R9 managed 14 goals in 40 champions league games. Cr7 managed 14 in 23 at juventus by the time he was 33 and would have played in all champions leagues for juventus. So even a 33-35 year old crisitano was performing better.

I do account for r9s knee injury. That's why I've not been bringing up his time at Madrid, but when you have posters brining up ronaldo's world cup at 37 as a mark against him, and ignoring the context of his knee injury, then why is it fair to only judge r9 on his good seasons?

 

[jm99]

Was Ronaldo the only signing and only reason?

Well he was the only major departure in 2018, when their run of8 straight semi finals stopped and they went back to last 16 exits after 3 wins a row.

 

[jm99]

I feel sad for the people taking potshots at R9.

No ones taking potshots at him, im saying he would have been quite a bit behind Ronaldo and Messi had he played in 2010s. That's not a pot shot

 

[JPRouve]

Well he was the only major departure in 2018, when their run of8 straight semi finals stopped and they went back to last 16 exits after 3 wins a row.

That's not the question.

And they won the league twice, which is as much as they did with Ronaldo, and they won the CL without him after 2018 with roughly the same core of players.

 

[adexkola]

I do get the impression that regarding Ronaldo the First, a lot of people are stuck in their childhood discussing him.

 

[jm99]

That's not the question.

And they won the league twice, which is as much as they did with Ronaldo, and they won the CL without him after 2018 with roughly the same core of players.

They won the champions league about 5 years later. Also while Ronaldo was at Real, you might have heard about Barca paying the refs that stopped in 2018. Most seasons real outscored Barca, so it was the defense letting them down.

It just seems really weird that you're trying to say,the top champions league scorer ever. With 67 knockout goals, joined Madrid when they had 6 consecutive last 16 exits stayed there for 9 years they won 4 titles, reached 8 consecutive semi finals, with him scoring 105 goals for real in Europe in that time, in 101 games, and as soon as he left they went back to 2 consecutive last 16 knockouts despite having just won 3 in a row

But he didn't have that much to do with their champions league success

That's quite a stretch

 

[JPRouve]

They won the champions league about 5 years later. Also while Ronaldo was at Real, you might have heard about Barca paying the refs that stopped in 2018. Most seasons real outscored Barca, so it was the defense letting them down.

It just seems really weird that you're trying to say,the top champions league scorer ever. With 67 knockout goals, joined Madrid when they had 6 consecutive last 16 exits stayed there for 9 years they won 4 titles, reached 8 consecutive semi finals, with him scoring 105 goals for real in Europe in that time, in 101 games, and as soon as he left they went back to 2 consecutive last 16 knockouts despite having just won 3 in a row

But he didn't have that much to do with their champions league success

That's quite a stretch

It's not what I said and you are somehow dodging the question.

 

[jm99]

It's not what I said and you are somehow dodging the question.

Well he wasn't the only signing but Kaka, alonso and albiol didn't have much to do with it, and benzema wasn't that great early on either.

Why does he have to be only reason though?

R9 wasn't the only reason Brazil won the world cup, they had an incredible side in 2002

 

[El Jefe]

That's not the question.

And they won the league twice, which is as much as they did with Ronaldo, and they won the CL without him after 2018 with roughly the same core of players.

Funny thing is Real did better in the CL without Ronaldo than he did without them. But cherrypicking statman would never mention that.

CL success is and has always been about team strength. You get the odd magical campaigns where one man carries but other than that it's a team thing.

The truth is how many R9 teams were built to win the CL? Probably only his Madrid team in 02/03 after that the rest had no real chance.

 

[JPRouve]

Well he wasn't the only signing but Kaka, alonso and albiol didn't have much to do with it, and benzema wasn't that great early on either.

Why does he have to be only reason though?

R9 wasn't the only reason Brazil won the world cup, they had an incredible side in 2002

Because that's what you suggested when you brought the CL wins into the conversation. He was far from the only reason which is shown by two things, it took 5 years for Real Madrid to win the CL with Cristiano Ronaldo and the same core won it without him while being away from their prime.

Logic should tell you that those CL wins were a typical example of team success, Ronaldo was part of it and without a doubt their best player but he wasn't the reason they won.

 

[JPRouve]

Funny thing is Real did better in the CL without Ronaldo than he did without them. But cherrypicking statman would never mention that.

CL success is and has always been about team strength. You get the odd magical campaigns where one man carries but other than that it's a team thing.

The truth is how many R9 teams were built to win the CL? Probably only his Madrid team in 02/03 after that the rest had no real chance.

I didn't even think about that and while people will talk about Ronaldo's age, Real Madrid best player between 18-23 was largely Modric who is as old as Ronaldo.

 

[jm99]

Funny thing is Real did better in the CL without Ronaldo than he did without them. But cherrypicking statman would never mention that.

CL success is and has always been about team strength. You get the odd magical campaigns where one man carries but other than that it's a team thing.

The truth is how many R9 teams were built to win the CL? Probably only his Madrid team in 02/03 after that the rest had no real chance.

Well no they didn't actually, Ronaldo reached 3 semi finals in a row, 2 finals in a row and 1 win in the 3 years before he joined Madrid. The 33 year old Ronaldo who left to join juventus did actually do better than real the first year he'd left, the 34 yesr old Ronaldo got as far as Madrid did. But you're right when he turned 35 Madrid finally managed to progress a bit further.

And how many Ronaldo international sides were built to win the WC the way Brazil were in 2002? I'm not having a go at r9, I'm using the same arguments for Ronaldo's lack of world cup success, to look at r9s lack of CL success

 

[jm99]

I didn't even think about that and while people will talk about Ronaldo's age, Real Madrid best player between 18-23 was largely Modric who is as old as Ronaldo.

It's because it isn't true, you'd expect United fans to remember what Ronaldo did with us.

 

[JPRouve]

It's because it isn't true, you'd expect United fans to remember what Ronaldo did with us.

That's actually an interesting point. What was the CL final in 10/11?

 

[Lay]

Well he wasn't the only signing but Kaka, alonso and albiol didn't have much to do with it, and benzema wasn't that great early on either.

Why does he have to be only reason though?

R9 wasn't the only reason Brazil won the world cup, they had an incredible side in 2002

This has been discussed before in this thread and this is not true. Brazil almost failed to qualify for that World Cup (Ronaldo played no part in the qualifiers iirc). They had lost to Bolivia which meant they had to win their last match against Venezuela to even make it. They had lost to Chile, Ecuador, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia and Uruguay and only beat Colombia at home thanks to an injury time winner by Roque fecking Junior They drew home games against Peru and Uruguay (late equaliser).

They entered the tournament with Scolari dropping Romario and picking Ronaldo who had barely played (16 games in 2 years) and the rest is history. He didn't win it by himself of course as Rivaldo was outstanding again but funny how a NT that was 'incredible' that they went through FIVE (Luxembergo, Candinho, Cantilli, Leao and finally Scolari) managers during qualifying and were expected to get pummelled in the KO's by France, again. So how were they built to win a World Cup with a qualifying campaign like that, which was without Ronaldo.

 

[El Jefe]

Well no they didn't actually, Ronaldo reached 3 semi finals in a row, 2 finals in a row and 1 win in the 3 years before he joined Madrid. The 33 year old Ronaldo who left to join juventus did actually do better than real the first year he'd left, the 34 yesr old Ronaldo got as far as Madrid did. But you're right when he turned 35 Madrid finally managed to progress a bit further.

And how many Ronaldo international sides were built to win the WC the way Brazil were in 2002? I'm not having a go at r9, I'm using the same arguments for Ronaldo's lack of world cup success, to look at r9s lack of CL success

You're something else. Obviously I meant after he left Real Madrid, that's what the whole discussion was about. That was pretty clear as even @JPRouve mentioned the period 18-23 in response to my post.

 

[jm99]

You're something else. Obviously I meant after he left Real Madrid, that's what the whole discussion was about. That was pretty clear as even @JPRouve mentioned the period 18-23 in response to my post.

Why would you only include after he left Madrid at the age of 33 to prove anything? That would be really weird to include that but exclude his 3 semi finals, 2 finals and 1 victory in the 3 years before he joined. Over the last 20 years, Ronaldo has been more successful than any individual club in the champions league , he's scored more goals than half of them as well.

 

[jm99]

This has been discussed before in this thread and this is not true. Brazil almost failed to qualify for that World Cup (Ronaldo played no part in the qualifiers iirc). They had lost to Bolivia which meant they had to win their last match against Venezuela to even make it. They had lost to Chile, Ecuador, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia and Uruguay and only beat Colombia at home thanks to an injury time winner by Roque fecking Junior They drew home games against Peru and Uruguay (late equaliser).

They entered the tournament with Scolari dropping Romario and picking Ronaldo who had barely played (16 games in 2 years) and the rest is history. He didn't win it by himself of course as Rivaldo was outstanding again but funny how a NT that was 'incredible' that they went through FIVE (Luxembergo, Candinho, Cantilli, Leao and finally Scolari) managers during qualifying and were expected to get pummelled in the KO's by France, again. So how were they built to win a World Cup with a qualifying campaign like that, which was without Ronaldo.

Look at the team they had, Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Roberto Carlos, cafu, ronaldo. It's not often you have a team like that in international football.

France would have done some job eliminating them in the knockouts when they got put out in the group stage. Ronaldo won the first of the threepeat with Madrid sacking their manager half way through the season ffs

 

[Lay]

Look at the team they had, Ronaldinho, Rivaldo, Roberto Carlos, cafu, ronaldo. It's not often you have a team like that in international football.

France would have done some job eliminating them in the knockouts when they got put out in the group stage. Ronaldo won the first of the threepeat with Madrid sacking their manager half way through the season ffs

Debating with you is extremely tedious. Let me ask, why did a team almost fail to qualify with that team minus Ronaldo but all of a sudden became incredible when he was in the team? Pure luck? Did they purposely only win 9 games out of 18 during qualifying?

Also, seeing as you're not understanding, the expectation BEFORE the tournament was that they'd make the quarter finals at best where they would play France (if going by form and predictions).

Not sure why you are mentioning CR7 when I wasn't mentioning him.

 

[El Jefe]

Why would you only include after he left Madrid at the age of 33 to prove anything? That would be really weird to include that but exclude his 3 semi finals, 2 finals and 1 victory in the 3 years before he joined. Over the last 20 years, Ronaldo has been more successful than any individual club in the champions league , he's scored more goals than half of them as well.

Because we are talking about his impact with Madrid...duh

Before he joined Madrid it was a completely different team but since he left they still had a big part of the core that was there when he won his four CLs there.

He won the CL alongside the spine of Kroos, Benzema, Casemiro, Modric, Carvajal and they managed to win it with him after he left. The Real Madrid team before Ronaldo joined and the Madrid during their CL dynasty from 2014-2018 couldn't be more different.

Its also funny how being 33 and over didn't affect Modric nor Benzema in winning and staring in CL wins. You might be the most agenda driven poster I've ever come across on the caf.

 

[jm99]

Debating with you is extremely tedious. Let me ask, why did a team almost fail to qualify with that team minus Ronaldo but all of a sudden became incredible when he was in the team? Pure luck? Did they purposely only win 9 games out of 18 during qualifying?

Also, seeing as you're not understanding, the expectation BEFORE the tournament was that they'd make the quarter finals at best where they would play France (if going by form and predictions).

Not sure why you are mentioning CR7 when I wasn't mentioning him.

So what? The expectation in the 2008 euros were that Germany would win, but looking back Spain were clearly the best side in the tournament.

 

[Zehner]

So what? The expectation in the 2008 euros were that Germany would win, but looking back Spain were clearly the best side in the tournament.

I'm sorry but this post really had me laughing What kind of comparison is this?

 

[Lay]

So what? The expectation in the 2008 euros were that Germany would win, but looking back Spain were clearly the best side in the tournament.

So what, are you this stubborn in real life too?

Anyway because they had a terrible qualifying campaign where they ran through managers more than Chelsea and only won half their games. I'm asking going by how you've posted about Real Madrid being better or worse without CR7, why you're not taking into account where Brazil were without Ronaldo and where they were after. How can a NT be incredible but struggle to qualify and be criticised during the tournament itself (https://www.theguardian.com/football/2002/jun/19/worldcupfootball2002.sport12).

 

[jm99]

Because we are talking about his impact with Madrid...duh

Before he joined Madrid it was a completely different team but since he left they still had a big part of the core that was there when he won his four CLs there.

He won the CL alongside the spine of Kroos, Benzema, Casemiro, Modric, Carvajal and they managed to win it with him after he left. The Real Madrid team before Ronaldo joined and their first CL with CR7 in 2013/14 couldn't be more different.

Its also funny how being 33 and over didn't affect Modric nor Benzema in winning and staring in CL wins. You might be the most agenda driven poster I've ever come across on the caf.

Right and his impact with Madrid was 105 champions league goals in 9 seasons. Age affects different players differently, Rooney was burnt out by the time he hit 30.

Also modric and benzema wouldn't have won any champions leagues if they joined juventus then united either. It is incredibly strange to act as though Ronaldo wasn't the key man in that champions league side

 

[jm99]

I'm sorry but this post really had me laughing What kind of comparison is this?

Brazil in 2002 were very clearly the best side, no matter what the pre tournament odds were.

Spain in 2008 were very clearly the best side, no matter what the pre tournament odds were

Although technically, you are right. It's not a perfect comparison becusse Spain actually beat the pre tournament favourites whereas Brazil got lucky and didn't have to play France, Italy or Argentina who were more favoured than them

 

[El Jefe]

Right and his impact with Madrid was 105 champions league goals in 9 seasons. Age affects different players differently, Rooney was burnt out by the time he hit 30.

Also modric and benzema wouldn't have won any champions leagues if they joined juventus then united either. It is incredibly strange to act as though Ronaldo wasn't the key man in that champions league side

Didn't say he wasn't the key man he obviously was but you keep saying that RM hadn't reached whatever round in 8yrs and were on a drought before he got there and that they reached the Semi's or won in consecutive years he was there. While this is true you're the one now making it seem like he did this alone.

He had an absolutely star studded lineup which you seem to keep ignoring. He pretty much had 3 finals where he might as well have been a passenger and his teams got him those wins. Again he was the star of the show but Real Madrid were far more than a Ronaldo carry job, which they proved after he left.

R9s CL drought is one brought about by circumstances and bad luck which has been repeated here so many times. Anyone with an ounce of objectivity will see this. By the end of 2004, R9 had lost so much of the physical attributes he retained after returning from his 2 year injury. It's not like he was in a position like Ibrahimovic who had many legitimate chances of winning a CL. R9 had a very limited window.

 

[Andrade]

R9 failed in the champions league. The true test. The highest level

He could go and be the best player in the world cup even after his injuries because its a lower level but he couldn't replicate that at Madrid in the champions league, the team that won 2 of the 3 previous champions leagues

This makes no sense. If the World Cup is a lower level then why is Cristiano Ronaldo so bad in it? Don't say because of Portugal because that didn't stop Eusebio from scoring more World Cup goals than CR7 even though he's played one tournament to CR7's five.

 

[jm99]

Didn't say he wasn't the key man he obviously was but you keep saying that RM hadn't reached whatever round in 8yrs and were on a drought before he got there and that they reached the Semi's or won in consecutive years he was there. While this is true you're the one now making it seem like he did this alone.

He had an absolutely star studded lineup which you seem to keep ignoring. He pretty much had 3 finals where he might as well have been a passenger and his teams got him those wins. Again he was the star of the show but Real Madrid were far more than a Ronaldo carry job, which they proved after he left.

R9s CL drought is one brought about by circumstances and bad luck which has been repeated here so many times. Anyone with an ounce of objectivity will see this. By the end of 2004, R9 had lost so much of the physical attributes he retained after returning from his 2 year injury. It's not like he was in a position like Ibrahimovic who had many legitimate chances of winning a CL. R9 had a very limited window.

Yes and cr7's wc failure was also circumstance and bad luck. He only played 3 where you'd consider him at his peak or near, in 2010 he came up against Spain which was one of the best international sides we've seen, 2014 he had a bad knee injury and 2018 he was at the end of his peak and beginning his decline.

The only reason I brought up r9 and the CL, is because the world cup was being used agaisnt cristiano, both underperformed in those respective competitions and both have various reasons for why this happened

 

[jm99]

This makes no sense. If the World Cup is a lower level then why is Cristiano Ronaldo so bad in it? Don't say because of Portugal because that didn't stop Eusebio from scoring more World Cup goals than CR7 even though he's played one tournament to CR7's five.

And if the champions league is a lower level why could r9 dominate the WC after his knee injury and yet had a 14 in 40 record in the champions league. Doesn't make any sense. How did he manage over a goal a game at the world cup after his knee injury but not even 1 in 2 in the champions league if the world cup is harder?

 

[Andrade]

And if the champions league is a lower level why could r9 dominate the WC after his knee injury and yet had a 14 in 40 record in the champions league. Doesn't make any sense. How did he manage over a goal a game at the world cup after his knee injury but not even 1 in 2 in the champions league if the world cup is harder?

You haven't answered my question. You can't admit the truth to yourself. It's sad to see.