Cristiano ronaldo vs alfredo di stefano who is the greatest Real Madrid player of all time

Discussion in 'The Beautiful Game' started by carlito86, Jul 10, 2018.

?

Who is the greatest player in real madrid's history

Poll closed Apr 5, 2021.
  1. Cristiano ronaldo

    6 vote(s)
    27.3%
  2. Alfredo di stefano

    16 vote(s)
    72.7%
  3. Raul

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. Pukas

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Zidane

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. Gento

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. ko242

    ko242 Member+

    Jul 9, 2015
    #76 ko242, Jul 17, 2018
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2018
    1) what the hell does prolonging careers have to do with increased standard of play. prolonging someone`s career does not make someone a better player. if he`s bad, he`s bad. if hes good then hes good.
    2) how in the world do you know about players commitment to the game in the 1950s??? are you seriously assuming that there were no players extremely committed to the game. i would love to see ronaldo get by in the 1950s given the same resources and knowledge as everone else. however, again, this has nothing to do with increased standard of play. this is merely playing longer.
    3) i am still completely confused by your assumption that if players played longer that they would magically be better players because of a 5 year extension. bad players and average players playing longer will not magically have their level of play raised because they play 5 more years.
    4) cristiano ronaldo is not a great player nor does he play at a high level because he is extremely fast or quick. its an asset but in no way does the level of play get raised because one has athleticism. crisitano ronaldo is a great player because of all the several other qualities that get overlooked that have faaaar more to do with football and improving one`s game than athleticism. at age 18 years old. there was nothing that seperated quaresma and cristiano ronaldo as far as skills or athleticism but look at how they both turned out.

    1) ok. you still are having problems understanding the difference between professional football at a serious level and street football. cristiano ronaldo had all the tricks at 18 years old. every trick in the book but his game didnt take him far. it was ONLY until he stopped doing ineffective and unneccesary tricks that his game began to improve!!!! it wasn`t until cristiano ronaldo became focused on the end result and the quickest way to get there that he took his game to an all time great level!!! apparently, quaresma lacked several things that cristiano was able to recognize. things that obviously had nothing to do with athleticism or the great inventiveness of tricks.

    2) look at players like robben and messi, and even ronaldo when he was at real madrid. look even at iniesta if you want to. how many of these players actually have these so called magical, inventive tricks that take the game to the next level. None!!! because the point of the game at the professional level is be effective, score goals, and do it the fastest and quickest way possible. it`s not street football. where players get points for entertainment. and this part of the game would take neymar to another level if he would cut down on it (not entirely though). PSG was critizised heavily after losing against real madrid in the champions league because they were more focused on doing tricks and entertainment than winning the game.

    3) there are also advantages to being raised around the 20s and 30s compared to today. i am currently reading a book on di stefano`s life and career and as a child growing up he often had to play with balls that were so worn out that they would often lose the round shape and would bounce strangely on an already poor field. playing under these conditions allowed the players to develop quick reactions because of the unexpected bounce of the ball and resourcefullness of having to bring a ball under control. something that is not gained playing with 100 euro balls on grass that looks like carpet in several professional academies today

    why are you changing the topic of conversation!!! you just said that modern day teams were more advanced in doing skills that were not done in the 50s. the `best control dribblers`and `possession/penetrating passers`as you quoted is nothing that was not done in the 50s and 60s!!!!! and the world did not catch up to barcelona. there is not a single team since barcelona that comes even close to what they did. the only other team that is trying to replicate it is manchester city, and that has to do with Pep Guardiola as coach. yet, you have coaches like jose mourinho, and deschamps who are now being highly valued for playing in a way that not only opposite to barcelona but is being viewed as ANTI-FOOTBALL!!!

    please tell me that the french team that just won the world cup and the portugal team that won the euro 2016 is some how catching up to barcelona and or spain from 08-12???!!! Please tell me???!! barcelona and spain at this time are outliers and continue to do so. in addition, there style of play was something that helped them to achieve success for several months and years not a one month tournament.

    Football is simple!!! and barcelona from 08-12 played more simple than any other team in the world. if you are trying to debate with me that barcelona at this time period and that the game of football is not a simple game then i truly question if youjust starting understanding and watching football a couple of years ago or if you are just being defensive. Iniesta said, ``the hardest thing is to make it easy and thats exactly what i try to do.``


    at the end of the day... and remember that i said this!!!! i am not saying that the game today is not played at a faster pace or that players in general are not faster than 50 yers ago!! i heard alex ferguson make a quote an i have the same stance, he said ``great players could play in any era``. and that is because i am a firm believer that football is first about understanding of the game (decision making) and technique. everything else is a bonus. if you have these 2 things then you will be a great player regardless of what era you played. if you want to disagree then that`s fine. i see that you believe speed and athleticism plays a much larger part in being a great player than i do. i merely think that speed can add to a players game. it`s not something that will make him a good or great player if he already isn`t.

    in any case, i`m glad you took the time to present your point of view @IronWright. your posts are appreciated.
     
    JoCryuff98 and Gregoriak repped this.
  2. JoCryuff98

    JoCryuff98 Member+

    Barcelona
    Netherlands
    Jan 3, 2018
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    Apparently I’ve heard Pele could play any positions including as a GK.
     
  3. PuckVanHeel

    PuckVanHeel Member+

    Oct 4, 2011
    Club:
    Feyenoord
    Yes exactly. I made a post some time ago on how the various (implicit) usages of the term 'complete'. Di Stefano was arguably quite complete within his own mode of play, to which (most of) his team-mates deferred. He was athletic and he could tackle, though as far as I know not a practitioner of the sliding tackle.

    Cruijff played in a different era (the 1970s are more comparable to the 1980s than to the first half of the 1960s or the 1950s) but he got that tag because he really played multiple positions at a high level, even sweeper. Gazzetta dello Sport also labelled him as a "chameleon" because he alternated in style of play, and it had a purpose because his involvement had visibly a big effect on the results. The Cruijff that Modric admires is the one that plays against England in 1977 (two pre-assists); in many other matches he played very different, with a very different style although maybe not 100% intentional (for example his dribble fluidity and some strange alterations in dribble technique).

    His post-playing career and overall persona also helped a great deal for maintaining the 'complete' tag. I think that speaks for itself (but if necessary I can elaborate).
     
    JoCryuff98 repped this.
  4. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    As forwards, there were others too, like Arsenio Erico, not to mention Moreno, roughly 20 years apart, guys that were regarded in South America as the premier players of their generation.

    In terms of function, Antonio Sastre was renowned for operating in all different positions at a high level, a polyfunctional player that took his game from Argentinian football to Brazil and incorporated new ideas of how to evolve into the modern player. It is said he was a key architect that opened new concepts to Brazilian football.

    Pelé and ADS are generally associated with being the best in their roles because of their worldwide fame, as ambassadors to the sport, they are/were easy political choices to pick, but before them, I think there were equally others just as qualified, but with less fame and reputation that transcended across eras.
     
    ko242 repped this.
  5. poetgooner

    poetgooner Member+

    Arsenal
    Nov 20, 2014
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Of course Lampard didn't score as many as ADS. Lampard wasn't a forward. Point being, a player like Lampard, who technically wasn't the most complete was correctly billed as a 'complete' player because he was heavily involved in every phase of the game for Chelsea, at his peak.
     
  6. poetgooner

    poetgooner Member+

    Arsenal
    Nov 20, 2014
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I sometimes wonder where Cruyff would end up playing in today's modern tactics? Would he be a complete forward, sort of a false 9, in a front three, as he was for Netherlands? Or take up one of the wide-forward positions, which has become the default 'best player in the team' position, as we've seen for Messi, CR7, Hazard, Neymar, Robben, etc? Personally, I would love to see what he can do as one of these modern playmaking box-to-box players we see in Modric or KDB.
     
    ko242 repped this.
  7. ko242

    ko242 Member+

    Jul 9, 2015
    Very interesting question, especially because specialization in one position is preferred today. I personally think he would be out wide (or a false 9 for a team that revolved around him) just because his ability to score, pass, and dribble players would be limited by playing a box to box role such as the one that modric plays. Cruyff playing in an advanced role would allow him to always participate in the attack while other players in the midfield have to be more cautious of going forward and create a balance between Defence and offense for the good of team balance. I could also seeing playing as a number 10 in a 4-2-3-1 formation as well although teams today are not embracing that position as they did before Zidane retired. Even a player like Ronaldinho went from a number 10 to a wide left player when rijkaard came into the picture in the 05-06 season. In any case, I think cruyff would excel as a box to box player nevertheless.
     
    leadleader repped this.
  8. JoCryuff98

    JoCryuff98 Member+

    Barcelona
    Netherlands
    Jan 3, 2018
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    Crazy how Modric resembles Cruyff.
     
  9. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Lampard is the highest scoring midfielder in the history of the premier league.scoring 20+ goals a season multiple times.he is also the highest scorer in chelseas history (200+ goals in addition to being a top 3 assister in premier league history)
    Technically though I concur they are worlds apart
     
  10. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    #86 carlito86, Oct 6, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2018

    This comp probably has the best quality footage of Alfredo Di stefano and is pretty lengthy for a player of his time
    He certainly lives up to his reputation as a player who contributed all over the field (defending like a full back,finishing like a world class CF,playmaking box to box and showing adequate playmaking capabilities(there is also a brief segment of Di stefano doing stepovers in the 50s lol)

    In terms of ball skills I would say he is the weakest out of all the so called 5 kings of football (Messi,Pele,Diego and cruyff)
    I’m assuming most of this footage is from the early 60s (when he was well into his 30s)so it would be unfair to say this reflective of his physical prime.
    It would be a bit like judging CR7s dribbling from post 2015(he would look mediocre compared to the majority of greats)
     
  11. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011

    He was never a virtuoso and what you see at Madrid was very different from when he operated in Argentina.
     
  12. celito

    celito Moderator
    Staff Member

    Palmeiras
    Brazil
    Feb 28, 2005
    USA
    Club:
    Palmeiras Sao Paulo
    Nat'l Team:
    Brazil
    On the field I don't doubt Ronaldo was greater. I haven't watched any of Di Stefano highlights mind you. But as a player that symbolizes the club I think Di Stefano is greater given CR7s tumultuous relationship with club and the way he ended up leaving.
     
  13. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Do you have any match comps you could refer me to?
    I have read that in his younger days he was more agile and explosive (more of a goal oriented forward as well)
     
  14. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    Unfortunately really little or none of footage ever was captured on film in his days in Argentina.

    You’ll just have to go by the previous post where you can read what type of player he was like.

     
    carlito86 repped this.
  15. ko242

    ko242 Member+

    Jul 9, 2015
    #91 ko242, Oct 7, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2018
    From the games I've seen in the 50s, i was very impressed with Di Stefano.
    I also disagree with your assessment of his skills. I think Maradona was probably the only one clearly above him. Probably Messi also. But you might be right. Maybe he is the last of the 4 players you mentioned. To be fair players in his day and Pele's day were playing on some terrible fields. When di Stefano was becoming a professional, he was warned about not playing with a wrap, protection, for his ankle. The ground was that bad. It was pretty much standard quo to wear ankle protection.

    i find it remarkable how Pele and Di Stefano were able to be super star players amid terrible pitches compared to today.

    @carlito86
    I read a book no di stefano. His days in argentina we're not that great. He was still young and was overshadowed by other star players but he slowly made his name. He left Argentina to go to Columbi and play. It was an upcoming and promisingly league and many players from South America were moving there. He played very well there. Not very long as energy was actually on loan. His team in columbia and his team in Argentina didn't agree on the terms. He didn't want to go to Argentina and Real Madrid ended up coming to terms to buy Di Stefano. His best years were in Madrid. He almost went barcelona actually. Di Stefano played with some incredible players so it's not like he was doing all the work. But he ran the team. Even puskas had a great fear/respects for Di Stefano. Di Stefano would often insult his teammates and he expected a lot from the them. He actually helped Madrid Pick players for the team. He had a huge role in the team and I think a clearly bigger role than Ronaldo. His best years were in the 50s at Madrid
     
    carlito86 repped this.
  16. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    #92 carlito86, Oct 7, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2018
    Di Stefano was never known as a elite technical specialist and this is according to his own teammates

    Adolfo pedernera(played with him in Colombia and is said to if had a great influence in his career)
    “He is not a great ball handler or dribbler. It’s possible, that if he would have been, he would have never become what he was.Perhaps he would have triumphed, but in another function, in another style, and he wouldn’t be Di Stefano.”

    Rogelio Dominguez(Played 5 seasons with Di Stefano at Real Madrid)
    “...he is not a skilled player in the manner of that insider Zambrano of Independiente, or those of River Plate: Zazzini and Cerione. He is not a virtuoso like Menendez or dribbler like Coco Rossi. His technique is based on simplicity which is used based on his natural resources: velocity, strength, encouragement, and touch. He has a good touch. Not excellent or extraordinary. But good. He can place a ball with precision, short or long, and he hits the ball hard with both legs”
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/alfredo-di-stéfano-career-match-reports.1994303/page-3

    This is of course very different from how Cristiano was viewed during his peak (especially in the early stages)
    Alfredo Di Stefano maybe omnipresent on the field,helping out in defence linking up with the attackers,scoring goals but this doesn’t mean his function is necessarily more important than ronaldo
    Prime ronaldo dominated the final third of the pitch,was himself a very able creator of goals (and not just assists)

    In terms of technique a huge advantage goes to ronaldo
    His ball control technique is amongst the very best(Ronaldinho level-yes ko242 I’m not kidding)

    Vs real sociedad 2010/11

    Vs benfica 2006/07
    (extravagant examples but there are plenty more subtle examples i could show you)

    Ronaldo is as technician grossly underrated (he isn’t ranked by armchair experts here as being amongst the best of his era let alone all time)
    Prime cronaldo is a complete forward
    Strong in the air (Di Stefano was weak in heading),equally footed,can cross,can dribble,power,skill full.
    He has no weakness in his game.di stefano had a few that he successfully covered with his work rate and mythical status as a untouchable legend.

    If you made a poll asking big soccer users if Di Stefano was a technical genius,great dribbler at least 90% would concur despite having never watched game of his (or hardly)
    It is no surprise that when experts compile lists of the greatest technical players he is nowhere to be found
    From his own country (let alone the world)Omar sivori,Diego maradona,Lionel Messi,José Manuel Moreno (maybe even Riquelme but that could perhaps be pushing it)are better technical players,from Italy baggio,meazza,Valentino mazzola from Holland cruyff and bergkamp,from France Zinedine Zidane etc we could list a whole page of better technical players from Brazil(let alone the Slavic countries)

    Btw Di Stefano also played a bigger role than maradona in his teams did this make him better (or was it only a 7 game tournament that ranked maradona above)
     
  17. ko242

    ko242 Member+

    Jul 9, 2015
    Hahaaa. Ok. Yeah I'll admit, CR7 was better technically. Definitely one of the best ever. even as good as Ronaldinho. But Ronaldinho was a better play maker than CR7, so was Di Stefano. And when I say playmaker I mean creating plays while involving his other teammates.
    I'm not saying CR7 was not great, but that he was not as good at that as Di Stefano and Ronaldinho.

    To be clear, I don't doubt that CR7 is as good as Ronaldinho technically. I'm talking about playmaking.

    Speaking of Maradona, I don't think Maradona was that great career wise. Maradona's consistency is no where near the likes of Di Stefano, Cruyff, Messi, and Ronaldo.
    BUT!!
    When Maradona did perform, I don't know if anyone did it better. Obviously his 86 performance was God like in my opinion. But at club level, Di Stefano was clearly greater than Maradona. I've really only paid attention to him at Napoli. And I was not that impressed in terms of his involvement in the game and his consistency, if we are talking about the greatest players ever. But in some games at club level, Maradona was unreal.

    Speaking of intelligence and all round game, I think Di Stefano was one of the best ever. Definitely top 5.
     
  18. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    I don’t think it’s necessarily true maradona never have the consistency of cruyff at club level (what is this based on)
    Maradona was consistent from 79-82 and than reasonably consistent from 84-90 (after italia 90 he was a disaster)

    I don’t know much about 1960s cruyff but I know he wasn’t during this period viewed as a top 2 player in the world (in the way Diego was in 1980-82)
    I would agree that what cruyff achieved with Ajax is superior to what maradona achieved with Napoli
    Cruyff made a club with hardly any pedigree into one of the best in football history,maradona made Napoli into briefly one of the best teams in serie a.(apples and oranges really)
    Maradonas World Cup performance maybe the best but it isn’t at least in my estimation in a different world compared to cruyff 74

    And when cruyff played a crucial part in leading feyenoord to the eredivisie at 37 years old maradona (At 35)was a overweight coke addict fighting allegations of corruption and ties to the mafia
    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....ia-links-to-maradonas-napoli-1568036.html?amp
     
    ko242 repped this.
  19. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    Take it as it is but he was in the podium in the South American awards of El Mundo and El Pais well into his 30s.

    El Mundo 1992 winner
    El Pais 1995 second

    Also made top 10 in 1993 for El Pais.
     
  20. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    The thing is with these types of players a lot is in the dark. We shouldn’t make conjectures based just on their famous names and give them a free pass. People like to sensationalize thinking that they were always good or better than they really were based on the legacy that grew stronger with the passing of time.

    But there are hints though. We know based on what was being said in Argentina and how Alfredo was reviewed years later that he wasn’t the best player (not even sure that term existed in those days) in Argentina in the beginning to his professional career. Not by any stretch other than his 1947 season which was deemed as a “revelation” by El Gráfico. Just like Maradona in 1978. The following years in Argentina and Colombia is virtually obscure and not much is known. It’s once he arrives and settles in Madrid where he’s considered one of the best in Europe particularly from 1956 onwards.

    So here we have a situation where at the age of 28-29 he’s really making a name for himself in the eyes of world pundits. His standings in the Ballon d’Or remain strong up until he’s aged 35. But before then, he’s not really a world renowned player, not by a long shot. In Argentina he’s clearly not highly valued since there are others more established in the eyes of witnesses.

    With Cruijff it’s also not very clear. His standings in the Ballon d’Or are not generally favorable in his career. Only 4 years at the top podium finishes. Another 5 years in the top 10. Once he’s out of contention prior to moving to the United States North American Soccer league, he no longer enters the conversation as one of Europe’s best (at least not in the voting of Ballon d’Or).
     
    carlito86 and ko242 repped this.
  21. ko242

    ko242 Member+

    Jul 9, 2015
    You and @Vegan10 make good points. Given that we ourselves can't watch the vast majority of games each player played each season. And much is relied on what other players or acquaintances say. Or as usual, statistics.

    I disagree with you in one area. I put Maradona's World Cup 86 far above Cruyff's. I also put Eusebio 66, Garrincha 62 above Cruyff. I am also curious, @carlito86, where do you rate Kempes 78 and Jairzinho 70 in relation to Cruyff?? I feel like even though Cruyff played well in 74, his team collectively was so good. I suppose you could also make the same case for Jairzinho in 70.
    I only saw two games in 58 of Brazil but Didi's WC in 58 may have been better than Cruyff's 74. I also think Didi in 52 was really good but not above Cruyff 74.
     
  22. carlito86

    carlito86 Member+

    Jan 11, 2016
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    #98 carlito86, Oct 7, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2018
    Jairzinho was great in wc 70 but part of a collective group of great players.
    He scored a lot of goals and was his teams biggest dribbling threat but my personal favourite from Brazil 70 has always been the elusive tostao.
    A player who was invariably involved.he was elusive but also an incisive dribbler,the brain(along with gerson)behind the team.
    Pele was imo nothing more than a luxury player in this tournament with solid stats but not by any stretch the playmaker of this team.

    Cruyff 74 did not reach the heights of maradona 86(that goal against England,the SF performance vs Belgium,the assist for the winning goal vs West Germany)but he was a total footballer (like Di Stefano)but with all time technique.
    Maradona excelled more from an individualistic perspective but cruyff 74 was a more cerebral player a better creator of chances,better defensively.
    I think they are also two of the 3 greatest captains in World Cup history along with Franz Beckenbauer.their leadership qualities I think are a bit underrated when assessing how influential they were in the World Cup.

    I would like to see a heat map of cruyff in this tournament.the above is what in my opinion separates cruyff from CR7 when determining who is the best European player in history.it was a performance for the ages


    God
     
    ko242 repped this.
  23. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    In the case of Di Stefano and Cruijff it’s possible to read every game they played for Spanish clubs online in Spanish newspaper archives. There is also player ratings that have surfaced to have a decent idea even if it’s subjective criteria. In addition the Ballon d’Or standings.

    But yes, it’s hard to assess them properly; even with someone like Maradona, where there exists more footage, there’s still a large chunk of footage missing.
     
    ko242 repped this.
  24. Vegan10

    Vegan10 Member+

    Aug 4, 2011
    Btw, I had started that Di Stéfano thread reading his performances throughout a season (will continue eventually if time permits; been busy with Serie A of the 1980s and how players rated).

    Also years ago had jumped along to summarize every game of Cruijff in Spanish football in Puckvanheel’s thread of Johan Cruijff. You can read it here:
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/johan-cruyff-matches-and-goals-scored.1865250/page-66#post-27178757

    One of the things I remember is how Cruijff played most of the time in physical limitations when in Spain. In that era it had a rough edge La Liga and expensive foreigners were not always well welcomed.

    Cruijff produced mixed reviews over the course of his Spanish career. It wasn’t always great and played through large stretches as a centre-back and libero.

    The aftermath of WC74 brought a certain change; he no longer was exactly the same as in his first season at Barcelona. He rivaled it once several seasons later but not the same force as previously. Once he moved to North America he no longer was viewed the same in his return to Europe.
     

Share This Page