Well the ones who did things or were class in both halves. Thus players as Laudrup, Gullit, Zidane, Ronaldo do not count. Hagi with his continental finals in the 80s and 00s might qualify for top 20. The 1990, 1994 World Cup is a pinnacle of his career and the 1999-00 campaign is too, as inconsistent as he was...
Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler Daily Mail Top 50 players ever Best football players of all time This posts just a few weeks apart are really confusing me. Could you explain why you changed you opinion so much on all those players (Ronaldo, Platini, Zidane, Garrincha, Best, Didi, Facchetti, Maldini)?
Ill try my best to answer R9 vs platini I don't see a contradiction here frankly Both were in the top 10-15 range just failing to crack the top echelon The difference between them is negligible(if not non existent) I think the success of R9 at international is comparable to what platini achieved at club R9 may or may not get a slight bonus for his flair depending on what mood im feeling Platini may or may not get a bonus for his 9 goals in 5 matches in 84 To be frank I don't have a concrete methodology for ranking players 11-50 (particularly 25-50) Top 10 for me is a definitive list and so is the particular order of players Beyond that it is extremely subjective I'm a fan at the end of the day My views can be amended with the discovery of different footage and information I will probably reach the point someday where my views become set in stone and unwavering Not as a dig against Zidane but you did mention him so I will address If I cannot reconcile verifiable facts with my own natural biases then I won't insist I have increasingly moved away from my previous position of him as a top 20 all timer Zidane wasnt anything more than a generational talent IMHO with world class end product but not otherwordly at any stage of his career The kind of talent that is produced 5-6 times every single generation. I grew up in a Italian family and I vividly remember watching the 06 world cup final and I was relatively young When Zidane was sent off I was in bits,I was literally in so much awe of the player that I had forgotten that Italy was even playing in a world cup final With hindsight it is easy to say what a despicable character matterazi was What he did though was calculated and extremely effective France with Zidane,his talent, mentality and his super human aura could beat any opponent that faced them Such was the psychological lift he provided that he was in 06 as indispensable as a NT player has ever been France went into the penalty shoot out already as losers I don't think there was any fan except the most ardent and hopeful French supporter who believed they stood a chance in the penalty shoot However I cannot reconcile certain verifiable and undeniable facts with objective realities Zidane won the ballon dor once in his career In a year he was thoroughly and demonstrably outclassed by Ronaldo nazario in serie A ,the copa italia and the world cup Literally his only ballon dor was fraudulent won on the basis of a brace against a apparently "demoralised" Brazil Even if they werent it is still a brace and there is no way in fact absolutely no way Zidane was conceivably even close to R9 in 97/98 Zidane was never voted by dbs calcio as the best of any league campaign Not even once He was never even in the top 3 rated players in a single campaign In his prime he also lost the ballon dor against Micheal Owen Again it isn't conceivable that a top 15 all timer in his prime could lose the ballon dor to a limited poacher as Micheal owen There is more but this isn't a shit throwing contest At the end of the day my knowledge is a work in progress and particularly when it comes to all time lists 11-50 is extremely subjective and at times I gravitate towards players I watched extensively. At other times I try to be more inclusive and show respect to previous legends who made their historical mark on the game (even if the level of professionalism was nowhere near the same)
Don't know where to do it, but when Van Hanegem turned 75 he took the time and effort to list his "favorites" for each decade. He has his own distinct view (Maradona is for him #1 overall, as a footballer) but it was a good read, with some good and/or interesting comments. He was surprised at all the positive attention for him, but suspected the death of previous sports/pop/culture stars played a role, with many people then saying "why all the criticism, why couldn't we say 'thank you' more often?". Despite me with some things clearly not agreeing (e.g. Romario), I liked it he has his own distinct views, experiences and dissection. 1960s: 1. Sivori 2. Garrincha 3. Best 4. Pelé 4. Didi 6. Corso 7. Di Stefano 8. Charlton 9. Gerson 10. Puskas 11. Eusebio 12. Rivera 13. Onega 14. Asparukhov 15. Moulijn On Pelé: "Is for almost everyone the best from this period. He is for me always stuck in memory because I was thirteen years old when I saw him playing for the first time, and he was seventeen. At the 1958 World Cup he was raw but made some incredible goals, including the final. You could already say he was an outstanding athlete with a good technique. And he made more than 1000 goals, that is at whichever level of a special class. Later I was fortunate to play with him in a world eleven. Then I thought: irritating man. He thought himself as very important, surrounding himself with 'yes men'. Maybe it is not realistic but therefore I don't put him at top, still. If I have to make a choice between Cruijff and Pele I would always prefer Cruijff. I can put Pelé at number nine as well. He's just not my type." On Garrincha he says though that "most likely he wouldn't be a first division player today". 1970s: 1. Cruijff 2. Beckenbauer 3. Rivelino 4. Muller 5. Rensenbrink 6. Cubillas 7. Jansen 8. Keizer 9. Bonev 10. Bajevic 11. Krol 12. Israel "Cruijff was the best and most complete of that time. Really an unique person in the history of sport. [...] Later, when he grew older, he played more and more from midfield. Then you saw what a fine passer he was with which he split open the finest defenses. [...] Despite his quirks and individualistic side, he cared very much about the overall performance of a team and must have about as many assists as goals in his career. Didn't mind to play in defense and take the backseat if it helped his side." "Cubillas is not so enormously famous but I don't care. I played a few times against the guy and he was fabulously good. Technically great, quick, could score with ease. That some people don't know him well is maybe because he played for Peru, but they had a good team in 1970 and in 1978 he was also there. He was a nice player to see, he shares some traits with Eusebio. He is a must in my list." 1980s: 1. Maradona 2. Socrates 3. Van Basten 4. Valderrama 5. Baresi 6. Falcao 7. Gullit 8. Di Bartolomei 9. Rijkaard 10. Zico 11. Scirea 12. Michael Laudrup 13. Platini "I have already spoken extensively about Maradona ["I saw a glimpse of him when he was sixteen"]. We can't go on forever. It wasn't always effective but for me he is the best there was." "Let's round off with Platini. Nice player, but in many respects a malicious man. Never had a warm feeling for him. Many of my former team mates see this very different." 1990s: 1. Ronaldo 2. Romario 3. Zidane 3. Bergkamp 5. Maldini 6. Henry 7. Giggs 8. Ronaldinho 9. Cantona 10. Gascoigne 11. Roberto Carlos 12. Davids He says Henry and Ronaldinho don't belong here, but Ronaldinho is contrasted with Rivaldo (who he doesn't like and rate: "he only wanted to play on 10, while his qualities were better served from the left. Ronaldinho wasn't making his side tick either, but could pass and move by opponents very swiftly and make the difference in that way") and Henry gets toe-poked in because of having his national team trophies in this decade. 2000s and further: 1. Messi 2. Cristiano Ronaldo 3. Iniesta 4. Ibrahimovic 5. Xavi Hernandez 6. Neymar 7. Van Nistelrooij 8. Robben 9. Pirlo 10. Alexis Sanchez 11. Dani Alves 12. Busquets Favorite goalkeepers: 1. Van Beveren 2. Yashin 3. Buffon 4. Maier 5. De Munck 6. Higuita 7. Banks Again: I especially like/liked his commentary. His long commentary on Maradona is intriguing as well, and not that far off from reality (imho), he just gives a different weight to it.
Extensive compilation on Maradona at boca juniors,his dribbling runs, building plays, goals and overall technique Bearing in mind he was 20-21 years old for the duration of this period. A phenomenon in the purest sense of the word
Re: Hagi having his struggles to complete 90 minutes. I read today Gascoigne at Lazio only did this in 17 of his 47 games for the club
What's the prove that Cruyff was a superior athlete compared with Ronaldinho? A superior ball distributor? Creator? Goalscorer? Dribbler? or Defender? and still more how can you prove that Cruyff was tracking back all matches for Barcelona? In that Hercules vs Barcelona match in 1976, for example, he wasn't. He waits for the ball on the left side to rush out and break into the opposing area, he played as Left Winger/Forward there. Btw, not all chances created (passes that lead to a shot) had the same quality, and the chances that Ronaldinho created seemed very clear on his day, that's the same as looking at Hazard's "odds" numbers and saying he's a superior playmaker than Ronaldinho (he just isn't, simply as that). It is also worth remembering that both Cruyff in 1974 and Ronaldinho in 2006 had the same non-shot xG, and that Cruyff had more actions than Ronaldinho (and I suspect he was more involved than in his average match for Barcelona).
Some of these are just retarded questions Cruyff scored 400 career goals with 10 penalties At least 30-40% of Ronaldinhos Barcelona goals were penalties Still he didn't exceed 300 career goals Does this have to be expanded on further? The onus isn't on me to prove Cruyff was great defensively in every single match. The onus is on you to prove ronaldinho was great defensively in even a single match in his career. The fact was Cruyff 74 had the greatest defensive stats by any forward in world cup history Ronaldinho was nowhere to be found The fact was Cruyff averaged more assists per match for Barcelona than Ronaldinho More open play goals Ronaldinho was a final third playmaker(the real playmaker of Barcelona who made things tick was deco) The domain of Cruyff was the entire opposition half He covered and dominated that area courtesy of his athleticism, dribble, vision and was a general on the pitch You can delude yourself into thinking whatever you want Ronaldinho was nowhere I repeat nowhere near Johan Cruyff in his ballon dor years Can't really comment on his post 74 career There is some substantive evidence pointing towards him still being a elite world class performer As good and as devastating as before -I highly doubt it What matters in this (non) comparison is Cruyff his last 2 seasons for ajax and his first for Barcelona Compared to Ronaldinho 2005/06 with 16 non penalty goals+24 assists and abject failure in the 2 biggest showdowns of the season Arsenal France Ronaldinho in his supposedly godly prime was schooled by a 34 year old Zidane-who came out of retirement Remember this always Cruyff in his prime( and on the big stage )destroyed the 2 heavyweights of South American football Argentina and Brazil Completely destroyed inter Milan one of the standout european clubs of that era. Destroyed real Madrid in their own backyard Etc All the while functioning (simultaneously) in 2-3 different roles
In fact they are not, they are needed, your comment on the hand.... talking out of your ass as usual. and Josef Bican scored 5000 Goals + 1000 assists. So what? Anyway, it's easy for you to have a huge amount of goals when you have license to shot several times to goal, like Cristiano Ronaldo shooting 7 times per match on average with Real Madrid. You have no data about xG expected for them for example. His shooting accuracy in the WC74 for example was really great, but he did not really outperformed his chances according 538. Btw, Cruyff had ~400 Goals and all his teams scored ~1850, so it is ~20% of all his teams goals (not that impresive imo) still more when he played more upfront than Ronaldinho many times in his carrer. You said he was tracking back all the time for Barcelona without any proof, you are just projecting those 1974 numbers, numbers that you probably don't even know what they are but that is another case. Fact is that you rushed. Nothing guarantees that he was tracking back all the team for Barcelona. In that video against Hercules he didn't for example. Ronaldinho had 65 Non-PK Goals and 71 Assists out of 397 Barcelona Goals Cruyff had 51 Non-PK Goals and 69 Assists out of 370 Barcelona Goals Where is the prove. Passes per match, touches on the ball. You probably never watched a Ronaldinho game with Barcelona and you're assuming Cruyff was always the guy of that WC, that he replicated that level of performance in every game. Cruyff 74 (arguably his best version) for example had less passes and progressive passes per match than Ronaldinho 06 (arguably his worst version) and had like 5 times more touches on the opposite box. Cruyff at Barcelona was still at his peak years and his achivements with Barcelona are shy compared to the Brazilian. And well, Ronaldinho played in the strongest league of his time (very different than Cruyff¹), and won everything he could with Barcelona being decisive against most top rated opponents. ¹ The Spanish league according to Elo ranking was only the 7th league of Europe. Who cares about someone in Europe's 7th league today? The Portuguese league or the Dutch? The rest of your comment is totally stupid because we are comparing what each one did for Barcelona (and not for other teams) and based only at Barcelona. Btw, You claim things you can't prove, buddy... and that is your typical pattern here. You are always creating controversy with false and polemical statements fishing for reactions. In the troll section you would be better considered, that's for sure.
You are again lying and cheating. Go check their Ballon d'Or rankings for a start. Then also how often Don Balon selected them as best player of the league (note: four major tournament MVPs were playing there in 70s). Then compare the upward results generated for the team, how often they scored/assisted against the eventual finalist in Europe. Ronaldinho has some European seasons where he didn't produce to sufficient standards. They are perfectly comparable. Don Balon thought the same in 2007.
What is the correct number then? Ronaldinho's number from Transfermarkt plus data from Playmakerstats.com
So you use transfermarkt for the one (very wide assists, includes rebounds and penalties won) and then some fictitious narrow assist count for the other (one which is by miles incorrect). When you say 51 non-penalty goals then you are clearly lying, deceiving and twisting. He scored 60 of which 2 were penalties. By no means the figure is 51. You don't deserve (and don't want) a correct number.
So he scored 60 Goals (58 Non-PK Goals) and had 81+ Assists (including PK caused) of 370 Barcelona Goals? Ronaldinho had 94 Goals and 71 Assists or 65 Non-PK Goals and 71 Assists more the PKs he earned (not sure if Transfermarkt counts rebounds assists, are they? if then how many?) out of 397 Barcelona Goals. That's the table with 54 Goals for Cruyff btw, Whatsoever, the difference is minor. And not really that important compared to achievements of each player. Anyway, both were likely better than Barcelona's Maradona, at this point we both agree, can I be right about that?
Did Johan Cruyff shoot on goal as much as Cristiano Ronaldo? Did Cristiano Ronaldo play for 1960s ajax? Are you retarded or just trolling? What relevance does this statement have (it is completely redundant as is your presence on this forum) You are slowly getting nasty and when I attack you it is only your rhetoric not you personally Again you are attacking the man and not the ball Shameful You are proving to be a chameleon constantly changing your skins. In one breadth CR and Cruyff are the 2 greatest footballers in European history Demonstrably superior to Maradona Top 5 all time Voted for Cristiano having a greater prime than Ronaldinho Etc In the next breadth Cristiano is more limited than Luis suarez A Portuguese robotic fraud Only a great scorer because of superteam edge and other privileges Ronaldinho 05/06 is otherworldly compared to cruyffs "best version" 73/74(not even his best version but heck if you say it its most definitely true)
To set the record straight for Ronaldinho: 103 - Ronaldinho is the third Brazilian player with the most goals+assists in La Liga in the 21st century (69 goals and 34 assists), after Dani Alves (25 and 101) and Neymar (68 and 38). Smile. pic.twitter.com/OSmUkFeJmk— OptaJose (@OptaJose) January 17, 2018 145 league games, 22 penalties. https://www.bdfutbol.com/es/j/j2399.html?p=stats
Ronaldinho Goals and Assists https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/ronaldinho/leistungsdatenverein/spieler/3373 Ronaldinho PK Goals https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/ronaldinho/elfmetertore/spieler/3373
I will be kind for now; The comparison is not even handed. Ronaldinho his wide assists count (and yes, transfermarkt does that) is compared with a narrow count. Which is, at a conservative and low estimate, more like this. It does not count the penalties won, let alone rebounds. The table itself is almost correct and complete, but this are the games played against those countries. They are not for Barcelona. Thus it are 7 games against Scottish teams. That is the table. He certainly didn't play 167 official games for Barcelona, he played 180 official games. Not even when one juggles with the cup games or continental games one will end up at 167 matches. Those 167 matches also include matches he played for other teams against Spanish opponents, just as that he for Barcelona played against teams of the other countries (and he really produced goals/assists against Leeds, Liverpool, Bilbao, PSV in Europe - all later finalists and/or winners in the same season). I think they are perfectly comparable.
Without repeating myself all over again, I think the five years spell of both for Barcelona are comparable (as hard as it is to compare very different eras; in the 70s of the big clubs only Barcelona managed to have stability in the league). As a player on the pitch they have both not the legacy of a Messi (if only for longevity) but they should be placed ahead of what a Rivaldo, Maradona, Romario, Ronaldo brought to the club - in my perception. Of course, Cruijff also had a legacy for Barcelona in other capacities (as someone who established 'La Masia' in 1979, as a manager, as someone who wrote letters to political prisoners as a player) but this is purely trying to see it as a player, which Don Balon also tried. Ronaldinho his Ballon d'Or position as a Barcelona registered player was 22nd, 3rd, 1st, 4th and 12th. Cruijff his positions were 1st, 1st, 3rd, 7th and 5th. Now, in the 1970s South Americans were not eligible but it is certainly doubtful whether someone would get ahead - maybe in one year. Both were widely seen as the best player in the world for multiple years as a Barcelona player, and not only on their home continent. Don Balon (and Marca!) rated Cruijff as the best player of the league in three seasons, Ronaldinho in two seasons. Possibly 'La Liga' was stronger in Ronaldinho's days, but Cruijff was 'battling' it out against four major tournament MVPs - the quality players were there. Furthermore, because of those imports the league eventually rose to 3rd in the coefficients, and because of Barcelona's steady European results they rose to #3 in the club ranking too. It is not Barcelona's fault they are the only one in Spain to be a steady semi finalist from 1973 onward. Ronaldinho his league finishes were 2nd, 1st, 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Cruijff finished 1st, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd and 2nd. Here we can see Ronaldinho finished once 2nd because of inferior head-to-head, but with a goal difference that was 19 goals better. Meanwhile, Cruijff had most likely won three championships - given the demonstrably huge difference with him on the field (will not dwell over this again; but here and here is a start, and it is backed up by the naked numbers) - if he had just played all games, and was not controversially suspended or kicked to the hospital in those days. In the Copa del Rey the Brazilian never reached higher than the semis while Cruijff won it in his only try. Ronaldinho does have the distinction to win the Champions League as a star performer (a career best 7 goals, including 2 penalties, in a UEFA tournament and a career best 4 assists in a UEFA tournament). That is a big plus, but he also has seasons where he doesn't produce much (2 non-penalty goals, 1 assist in 2004-05; 2 goals and 2 assists in 2006-07) and in other seasons his record is round of 16, round of 16, round of 16 and a semi final 2007-08, where he didn't play beyond the round of 16. Cruijff produced well in every season (1974-75 sticks out with 0 goals, but he did have 8 or 9 assists, including vs favorites Feyenoord and Leeds) and a record of three semi finals and quarter final is not too bad (he was ineligible in 1973-74, where Barca went out in the first round). Furthermore, he created goals against each of the later finalist, softening the blame that can be attributed to him. Ronaldinho has a fine record against Real Madrid (3 non-penalty goals, 3 assists in 8 games) but Cruijff has with 3 and 4 in 8 games a good one too (including that 1974 game, but also a solo dribble in 1976). So I don't think it is blasphemy or ridiculous to compare in either way. Ronaldinho has one really great Champions League campaign (except for the final) while for Cruijff it is possible to say he was so vital for the team that his raw numbers became naturally blunted as a result (those numbers are still okay anyway, with only very few penalties). It is a logical consequence of not having too much help. I hope I'm fair here.
That Spanish journalist @Vegan10 talked about (Julio Maldonado, born 1967 in Madrid, nicknamed 'Maldini') placed Cruijff at #4 all-time for Barcelona as a player (Iniesta, Xavi and Messi the top three) and Ronaldinho at #7 (just one place ahead of Koeman). Looking at the trophies that might look strange (1 champions and 1 cup vs 2 championships and a Champions League), but in a nutshell it can be easily argued 'El Flaco' was more important for the fortune of his team, and gained overall more regular results too, a more regular goals+assists production through the years while at times playing in defense (see the 1978 CdR final). Plus the league was very rough, and he nevertheless he had the highest winning percentage of all 70s players (only bettered when Quinta del Buitre came along, 2nd half of the 1980s, and he himself became coach). Him producing goals against each of the later continental finalists/winners tells a representative part of this story... My personal take is more in line with Don Balon in 2007 than Maldonado his conclusion, who sees more of a difference between the two players (again: this is purely as a player in a Barcelona shirt). Ronaldinho has some things going for him too, even if put alongside Xavi and such.
Don't get me wrong, Xavi is ahead if only for longevity at the club, and I agree with many of your critical points by you (see here for confirmation for one of your major points). But the three main points in favor of Ronaldinho are: 1) His 'magic' or perceived magic. Related to that performances against the biggest rivals as Real Madrid for which he received a standing ovation. Xavi Hernandez, in part because of his style and paradoxically because of his consistency, never got that. 2) Ronaldinho as on-field symbol of the resurgence. As is well-known, Barcelona came from a fallow period (with prima donnas as Riquelme and Rivaldo demanding all luxuries while in truth never being the most productive player of their team, excluding penalties, and Rivaldo underperforming next to his team-mates in the advanced stages); and Ronaldinho made his debut against Sevilla with a thunderous long distance goal. He is the main symbol, with then Edgar Davids a long way behind (who was there for only half a season, but had in Xavi's words a profound influence on him reaching a next level). This is a big plus. 3) The counter-point to Ronaldinho his underwhelming goals and assists numbers (next to deeper playing Xavi) is the difference in performance without them on the field. Now, it is harder to have that effect in a better and more dominant team (see the case of Messi's with/without numbers) so the GI numbers of Xavi and Ronaldinho still end up in a comparable range but we can see a difference here: Ronaldinho for Barcelona had a win percentage of 62.8% and a loss percentage of 16.4%. As opposed to 58.8% and 18.0% for all games of Barcelona between 2003-2008 (46.2% win and 23.0% loss percentage without him). Xavi on the other hand is at 63.7% and 15.5% loss percentage. Over all the games between 1998 and 2015 however - and note this also includes some 'weak' Barcelona years - it is still 63.3% and 16.8% loss percentage (63.8% win percentage without him, 19.8% loss percentage). Ronaldinho his effect is still not nearly as big as the one by e.g. Cruijff (especially when factoring in the more steady competitive results at all fronts; i.e. the near-wins like 2nd places and semi finals at all levels), but this is a strong counter-point against whatever set of numbers Xavi can show.