In NT career, Romario is definitely superior to Ronaldinho who really failed in legend standard in the 2006 World Cup. In contrary, Ronaldinho should have more superb domestic seasons than Romario and even possesses a higher profile in international club. In overall, they could be equally rated and Ronaldinho is preferable in higher peak performance. Rivaldo is one of the best players in twice World Cup and one best player of Copa America even none of which is as good as Romario in the 1994 World Cup. As of NT comparison, Rivaldo is still preferable. Rivaldo > Romario in int.club. For Domestic club, Romario > Rivaldo for his more consistency but not far better. In overall comparison of three players, My view saw Romario proved himself in top standard competition significantly less than Rivaldo and Ronaldinho but Romario is surely by far a better player in consistency of his performance in lower standard (Dutch League, Brazilian League, FIFA Confederation Cup).
The Memorial of Football History is recorded in http:// xtravictory.blogspot.com It is the historical rankings of club and national team. An important update is additional profile of "Double and Triple Champions" in several categories such as Domestic Double Chamopions, UEFA Double Champions, European Double Chamopions, South American Triple Champions, etc. This much help to judge which one is better among equal historical result of clubs and NTs. The Greatest Rest of the World clubs of all-time (Addition) I created this by my desire to propose greatness of clubs in other corner of the World (Asia, Africa and Northern Americas). The League Standard (Addition) It shows ranking of the greatest leagues of all-time and ranking of the league in each era. Definition of League Standard means average of all teams’ quality in the league. That means standard cannot be determined by only continental coefficient especially UEFA in which can determine standard of only top teams of the league. The method to determine standard of the league is to set standard of top teams by continental coefficient and then compare difference gap between top teams and bottom teams in the league. The shorter gap means the higher standard. Historical Rivalry (Addition) It shows historical rivalry in both club and NT teams. The ranking is based on level of rivalry (Longevity and Equity in Prestige and all-time result) Moreover, the greatest seasonal club and the greatest era teams ever are still included (I add the 1960s Penarol and the late 70s to early 80s Juventus in the ranking and the 1st half 30s Juventus that was not successful in Mitropa Cup is moved to the last place)
Its your personal list, you can applied the logic you want. However, I have to ask you: Win WC and Copa América alongside Ronaldo and Ronaldinho upfront has the same value of win a WC and Copa America playing alongside Bebeto and Mazinho upfront? Now, follow your logic, I think Batistuta should make the top 20 and Zico should be out. I mean, Batigol proved himself for many years in Serie A and also was great in 2 Copa América, which you believe had the same status of Euro. So, according to you, it doesn´t matter if Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Colombia, etc played play Copa América many times with Squad B or C in the 90s, its still Copa América, right?
There could have been better examples but surely you can see what he's getting at. Are Baros, Gerrard, Djimi Traore better than Sheva, Pirlo Maldini? The very fact 1950 was an enormous upset tells you the real answer. There were expectations of holland and brazil in 74 and 98 and impressions made as they went through the tournament, so you can see the point. Your best argument is his years in Italy, where he proved himself away from home with a good record. But so did Altafini while Pele was comfortable at Santos. I'm sure Zizinho could have done the same. Bear in mind Zizinho is a few years older and much of Europe was still recovering while he was at his peak (I know there were south americans in serie a but mainly Argentines after the 1949 strike). It always boils down to the definition of greatness. I think this is why we use this particular term, it's one of those typical English words that was imported all the way across Europe and ended up in language's dumping ground. It's considered a highly malleable term. Suffice to say Zizinho was the more talented player but his achievements don't show it. For me, the Cruyff-Müller comparison is still a valid analogy. Romario vs Ronaldinho or Rivaldo doesn't quite add up the same because there are specific talents in each of them but for me Romario found that extra zenith and briefly seemed unstoppable. He was just more lethal to the opponent.
Everyone have their own logic and criteria (Some keep it in mind and some try to consider it more obviously) If you read my posts correctly, I've said none of Rivaldo major tournament is better than Romario in the 1994 WC but Rivaldo is advantage in number of great major tournaments. All of what you have said is just standard of competition and no apply level of performance into competition (Rating is performance against standard of competition). Players played well in different level in each competition so it is useless to compare Zico versus Batigoal just by standard of competition. Surely Copa America with many squad B teams is lower standard than Copa America that is filled by squad A. I'm not take advantage of Rivaldo to Romario by establish overrated standard of Copa America.
Why do you think Zizinho was the more talented player? Who saw it in that way? Just a question. Schiaffino transferred for a world record to Italy. Remarkable is as well how his scoring record in Italy was similar as the one in Uruguay (and indeed, Uruguay was curiously seen as a quite tough league; for some reason). It makes one wonder whether Zizinho could do the same, at least 95% of the Brazilians who moved to Italy couldn't.
I've surely not seen as much footage as many on here but everything I've read marks him out as possibly the finest south american footballer of his time after di stéfano. I'm sure Schiaffino would be more than comfortably in a top 5 of that age as well. Sources are beyond me at this moment though. I'm prepared to be persuaded otherwise, it may just be a stubborn opinion I formed after reading a couple of partizan stories years ago, but I'd need videos and testimony rather than just a career breakdown.
Surely. So, you have to take in count that Copa America 97 had many Squads B. Copa America 99 was a bit better and agree that Rivaldo was great there. Copa America 89 had all squads A, and Romario was crucial for Brazil victory. Bebeto was the best player in overall tournament, but Romario was decisive against Argentina (Maradona, Burruchaga, Ruggeri, Cannigia) and in the final game against Uruguay( Francescoli, Paz, Sosa) Now, Copa America 79 also was good level and Zico failed there. Does it hurt his legacy? Not for brazilian people, who only remember his great performance on WC82. I think south americans even gave more value to WC qualifiers than for Copa America for many years. Only in recent times this have been changed.
Zico did not play in semi-finalist, being suspended from red card. I'd not called this disappearance as failure. Zico is considered to be lacking of tangible achievement in NT major tournaments but I think the team result should not be too much link to one player even his leading role is more impact than any other. Even Zico has never won the best player of any tournament, he is believed to reach phenomenon-class in significantly more games in overall career than Platini and Garrincha since Zico was very consistency in his superb playing (He was superb in several matches in major tournaments as well but the important point is that he had no occasion to play in semi-finalist and finalist in 1979 Copa America and 1982 World Cup. As of this point, I try to more judge players base on quality-consistency than team result. Anyway, Zico-Platini-Puskas is totally in equal level. When players are rated in one tournaments, all games are taken into account and deeper round more coefficient of match. Romario impressively scored in the last three games but how about first round which he had no goal in all three easier games ? first round games were lower standard is true but you can't forgot player would be poor if they could not score in such a standard. I still rate Rivaldo in 1999 ahead of Romario in 1989 undoubtedly. Btw, I actually don't believe Ronaldinho and Rivaldo is better than Romario by sure. They are in the equal level. The reason I rank Romario lower than the two is that he has more flaws in career than other two.
Don't necessarily disagree with any of your points, however, there is this tendency in this forum to dismiss a result simply as "it could happen on any given day". For sure, a WC tournament is the dream of most footballers to play well in it, and hopefully to win the Cup, the most precious trophy in the entire sports universe. Schiaffino digged deep down within him to win the one match that mattered, even against overwhelming odds, over Zizinho, who we are comparing with. This occasion should not be dismissed so rapidly, and all things being roughly equal, to me it decides it in favor of Schiaffino.
It´s the same situation of Baggio94 and you rate that performance as outstanding (which I agree). For the comparison between brazilians, in terms of reading the game, Rivaldo is clearly below Romário. Im a Rivaldo fan, but he often was very selfish on the pitch and this is a terrible flaw for a player of his position. Anyway, you gave your view and arguments and I respect that. Just for curiosity, I think you know that the brazilian view on this subject its very different. Last month, the newspaper Folha de São Paulo asked for their sport journalists to select the best XI of Brazil NT history (only WC winners were eligible). Rivaldo was not mentioned. Take a look: Juca Kfouri: Gilmar (58 e 62); Djalma Santos (58 e 62), Aldair (94), Márcio Santos (94) e Nilton Santos (58 e 62); Zito (58 e 62), Didi (58 e 62) e Rivelino (70); Pelé (58. 62 e 70), Garrincha (58 e 62) e Tostão (70). Técnico: Aymoré Moreira (62) PVC: Gilmar (58 e 62); Carlos Alberto Torres (70), Mauro (58 e 62), Aldair (94), Nilton Santos (58 e 62); Didi (58 e 62), Gérson (70); Pelé (58,62 e 70), Garrincha (58 e 62), Romário (94) e Ronaldo (94 e 2002). Técnico: Zagallo (70) Tostão (former player): Gilmar (58 e 62); Carlos Alberto Torres (70), Aldair (94), Orlando (58), Nilton Santos (58 e 62); Zito (58 e 62), Didi (58 e 62), Gérson (70); Pelé (58,62 e 70), Garrincha (58 e 62), Romário (94) Técnico: Zagallo (70) Xico Sá: Gilmar (58 e 62); Carlos Alberto Torres (70), Mauro (58 e 62), Márcio Santos (94), Nilton Santos (58 e 62); Zito (58 e 62), Didi (58 e 62), Rivelino (70); Pelé (58,62 e 70), Garrincha (58 e 62), Romário (94) Técnico: Zagallo (70) http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/treina...a-selecao-brasileira-de-todos-os-tempos.shtml
Thanks for your usual lucid and meaningful contribution....unlike a poster like Jaweirdo, you were born in a nation with a footballing tradition, you have no excuse for being such a glib nincompoop.
Rivaldo played the same position as Pele. How would any possibility for him to be named ? In My Brazil All-Time XI, I'm also not include Rivaldo. and this rating is probably judged base on only performance for Brazil NT. Marcio Santos is named in twice lists, is the best example to be cited.
So you mentioned you were willing to adjust your list, but everyone has told you Romario should be above Rivaldo and certainly Ronaldinho yet you insist on keeping it the same way. Anyways, it's your list but it's flawed.
OK, when people complaint to my list by some interesting opinions, I would always revise it (I can't be always true as I work on a large number of legends and looking for some useful suggestion to help). In this case, I have spent more time to compare these three in my own deeper consideration than previous time. I admit to omit some point and finally overrated Rivaldo in int.club and just by this point of update, the list was actually updated yesterday and was ranked by Romario > Rivaldo > Ronaldinho (It is incident that all three Brazilian are ranked in row).
Ok, fair enough. I think of the Brazilian attacking greats since the mid-70s, Zico, Ronaldo and Romario receive the highest stature, closely followed by Rivaldo, Falcao, Socrates and Ronaldinho, afterwards come Bebeto, Careca, Leonardo, Rai, Alex de Souza, Dirceu, Elber and Kaka.
If we were to look at who had more flaws in career overall, then we should take into account Ronaldinho's quick fall from grace right after his peak. So this cancels out Ronaldinho of the debate, leaving Romario vs Rivaldo, which takes us the the next: Romario vs Rivaldo (career wise) Who had more consistency? National Team Romario: Copa America 89, 97, - World Cup 1994, - Confederation Cup 1997 Rivaldo: COpa America 99, - World Cup finalist 98, World Cup 02, - Confederation Cup 1997 Club leagues Romario: Serie-A(Brasileirao) 2000, - Dutch Eredivisie 89, 91, 92, - La Liga 1994, Champions league finalist 1994 Rivaldo: Serie-A(Brasileirao) 1994, - La Liga 98,99, - Greek superleague 05, 06, 07, Now looking at these two's above records I can't deny they seem to be pretty much the same. I would say Romario = Rivaldo>Ronaldinho in terms of consistency. In terms of peak Ronaldinho=>Rivaldo=Romario since reaching final is like winning it for me. But all three have reached the same success with NT and Club. But the only thing that cuts if for me, is that Romario's WC94 is regarded as a better WC then Rivaldo's and Ronaldinho.
I agree but Zico failed to bring trophies in both WC and Copa America throughout the entire 80's. I would slightly alter your order. And since Romario's WC94>Ronaldo WC02 it places him after Pele and Garrincha. So, my order, would look like this. Post>1970's: 1.Romario 2.Rivaldo=Ronaldo 3.Bebeto 4.Roberto Carlos 5.Ronaldinho then the rest. Why I won't place socrates, falcao etc in the top 5? Because they failed to bring in trophies. Socrates, Falcao are among the finest player ever to come out of Brazil, but lets be honest. NT with Zico, Socrates, Falcao etc was too a great side to have not bring in trophies. Just like WC06(Ronaldo, Rinaldinho, Adriano, Lucio, Robinho etc) the side of Zico's NT in 80's are, in my opinion the greatest waist of talent in any WC.
At least you are receptive and honest with you're methods. Some people here are harder than stone and won't give in not even with concrete evidence. They will debate you till exhausting every bit of argument and in the end still stand firm stubbornly on their position. I like your list by the way.
So the team with Romario, Stoitchkov, Laudrup, Koeman, Bakero, ... FAILED to with UCL94 was also a BIG waste of talent in UCL history? And do NOT forget Romario won WC94 with the HELP of Baggio's miskick ... OK?? PLEEEEZZZZ Romario won copa 89 thanks to Bebeto, and his copa97 thanks to Ronaldo Pele > Zico > ... > Romario (see Placar a BRAZILIAN MAGAZINE latest 2010 survey, I brought in)
[So the team with Romario, Stoitchkov, Laudrup, Koeman, Bakero, ... FAILED to with UCL94 was also a BIG waste of talent in UCL history?] Of course Not, because UCL & domestic league championship are a full year event and reaching the final of a tournament is as good as winning it, so your argument doesn't make sense. UCL vs WC are two different things! Apples vs Oranges? [And do NOT forget Romario won WC94 with the HELP of Baggio's miskick ... OK?? PLEEEEZZZZ] You are just jealous that Romario dragged his averaged NT to glory in WC94 and not Ronaldo. You're the only soul on this planet who doesn't appreciate what Romario did in WC94. [Romario won copa 89 thanks to Bebeto, and his copa97 thanks to Ronaldo] Romario won Copa 89 thanks to his heading in the final, which was with the assist of winger Silas. And Ronaldo won WC02 thanks to the great contributions of a strong all star NT. Rivaldo and Ronaldinho had a great part in the victory too. [Pele > Zico > ... > Romario (see Placar a BRAZILIAN MAGAZINE latest 2010 survey, I brought in)] Any one who ignores a FIFA international voting poll with the participation of football managers of Clubs, and instead praises a local magazine opinion in Brazil like PLACAR must be delusional. FIFA is the ultimate and absolute football authority in the world. PLACAR is just a local magazine with no authority at all. You always seem to bring in polls and opinions in that support your debate for Ronaldo, while ignoring others who don't. And for your record the only legacy Zico has in is career is with Flamengo. People talk about Zico for his legacy with Flamengo and not NT. Pele>Romario>Garrincha>Ronaldo=Rivaldo>Ronaldinho>Zico And by the way, apart from NT, what other great titles has Ronaldo win with Clubs??? 16 years with the BIGGEST clubs on the planet, yet NOTHING!!!! (only one single La Liga 2003 in 16 years, is too poor for a guy with his status) For someone who's regarded by many as the greatest striker and Pele's Heir, he should have won more then a single league title with Clubs. Blame it on SUP PART clubs? Yeah, shit me not! It looks more like a NORM and a HABIT to have not won anything with Clubs. Ronaldo, Zidane, Beckham are nothing but the marketing beauty queens of football.