The first clip is a nice goal and it shows tremendous ability. I don't think it goes far enough to refute my point, however. Also, freekicks are one area where Cristiano has displayed a shocking inability to adapt and innovate as he aged. His freekick taking really went off the rails at some point and he never changed his trademark technique. It got bad enough at Juventus that rival fans were hoping Cristiano would take freekicks because it would inevitably hit the wall or fly over. I'm actually not even sure how to explain this development, unless perhaps injury altered his kicking movement/technique and prevented him performing it like he did in his earlier years? But he never adapted to try something else, like curlers for example.
I think it is astonishing, but is also congruent with the direction the modern game towards athleticism. Mbappe or Haaland don't have this "genius" quality either, though you could say Haaland has a special instinct specifically for space in the penalty box and finishing goals. I would even say Messi, though I do think he has it, is less creatively inspired than Pele or Maradona, and probably a fair few other lesser players from times past as well. Messi does not have the quite the level of seemingly divine inspiration of Pele or Maradona, but he does have it compared to his contemporaries in the modern game. I think its just a testament to the way the sport has changed. Its similar in ice hockey with Wayne Gretzky, who put up unfathomable numbers in the '80s because of his playmaking instincts (guy seriously had eyes in the back of his head), quick thinking, and game IQ, but whose athleticism pales to modern players. In pure understanding and mastery of the game, he is better than the modern greats, though someone might surpass him some day in "total effectiveness", with less mastery of the art but higher objective performance ability due to athleticism. Because I think in relative terms, I would still consider Gretzky as the better hockey player in that case. Does it matter how one skins the cat? Maybe not. Its maybe just preference and what we value in football at this point, but I know my feelings on this have always been clear. People who value objective outputs and titles won may think differently, but at the very least, I do think players who astonish with creative genius while accomplishing all-time great careers show a higher level of football, and inspire more love, fans, expression, and innovation. (I'm foreseeing this one might get me into trouble)
I think it matters because players, especially in NT, face a different set of problems than they are used to. It is in those situation that inspiration, courageous action is necessary. I believe this is why Messi, and Ronaldo to a much lesser extent, struggled at a NT level as compared to other greats like those you mentioned. Unstoppable club form. If we closed our eyes to that, and just looked at their NT, you would never mention them on the pantheon (I am talking pre- 2022 WC. Obviously, Messi found something new in himself there).
Surely you should rethink your arguments/conclusions when events contradict them? You admit here that the 2022 WC contradicts your point with regards to Messi, but you just ignore it and make the argument anyways. Messi would absolutely be a pantheon player just looking at NT play. He has a World Cup win, a Copa America win, a World Cup runner up, and two Copa America runners up. He has two World Cup golden balls, two Copa American best player awards, and a Copa America best young player award as a 20 year old. He doesn’t have a tournament as good as Maradona in 1986 (as discussed in this thread—finally back on topic!), but his overall body of NT work is amongst the very best ever. In any event, it’s by no means clear to me that any particular style of play is inherently better or worse at dealing with “a different set of problems” at NT level. I guess your theory is that one needs to be adaptable to also be good at NT level. But it’s not so clear that those who do more spontaneous, unexpected, flashy stuff are actually more adaptable in terms of adapting into the NT environment. Indeed, given that it’s a team game, doing really unexpected stuff could very easily be worse in a NT environment, because your teammates won’t have played with you long enough to be able to anticipate and capitalize on what you do as much. Fairly simple set plays (like the play Messi does with the lofted ball from the right wing) are actually arguably much easier to coordinate with limited time together than trying to coordinate with a much more chaotic playstyle. And to the extent you’re talking less about adapting with teammates in limited time together, and more about dealing with new situations they’ve not seen before, football is ultimately a pretty simple game—it’s not like Messi or Ronaldo are somehow facing a bunch of things at a moment-to-moment micro-level in their NT that they’ve never seen anything like before in the hundreds and hundreds of hours of club play they’ve been in.
No, before the 2022 WC, Messi had zero knockout goals. That is an indictment on his performances in 4 WCs. How many greats played 4 WCs? If you read my analysis of Messi's WC performance, I said that I was delighted to see that this was a new Messi - perhaps slower, but more character and determination. In fact, it was even sweeter given the successive failures. That's what made it more beautiful. His resume without it, would not be all-time great level, and his COPA win left me disappointed especially his terrible showing in the final.
And yet, despite zero KO stage goals prior to the 2022 WC, Messi had already won a World Cup golden ball award. Yet more evidence that there’s way more to his game than just goalscoring. Obviously his NT resume would not be nearly as good without his World Cup win, but that’s true of pretty much any NT resume if you take out a WC win + golden ball. What would Maradona’s NT resume look like without 1986? The fact that you can take out Messi’s World Cup win and he still has a major tournament win, a World Cup runner up, three Copa America runners up, a World Cup golden ball, two Copa America best player awards, and a best young player award in the Copa America is pretty stunning actually. There’s virtually no one in history for whom you can take out their best NT tournament and be left with a NT resume anywhere near that. And you can say that’s partly because he played in so many tournaments, but that’s what happens when you’re an elite player both as a teenager and as a 35 year old and every year in between—your longevity allows you to contribute to more tournaments for your country. And that’s part of being an all-time great NT player.
That's not correct. If you took out Brazilian Ronaldo's 1 World Cup win, he would still have a far better NT resume than Messi: 1 more World Cup + 1 World Cup runner up medal (World Cup Golden Ball and Golden Boot), 2 Copa Americas + 1 Copa America runners up (Copa America MVP as well), 1 Fifa Confederations Cup. He reached the final of every major tournament he played in (except the 2006 World Cup), performed brilliantly in most tournaments (in contrast with Messi), and won over 60% of the tournaments he contested (compared to Messi's less than 20%). R9 dwarfs Messi's NT resume actually.
Yeah, I'm not sure we can credibly argue Messi was an all-time performer for NT prior to WC 22. To his credit, he has turned disappointment into triumph.
In terms of proportions and percentages, it would still be difficult to argue Messi being an all-time top performer for NT. This World Cup win does embellish his NT resume though.
Well well.. then would you put ronaldo's NT career at par with that of Pele? Or would you go a step further and give Ronaldo even more credit as Pele played in arguably the greatest teams ever in 1958,1970?if you say r9 also played in ATG teams between 1995-2002 then you've already got your counterpoint when comparing him to messi.
In general, Brazil only cared about the World Cup; they couldn't care less about Copa America and the like. That's why Pele only played 1 Copa America. Brazil took the Copa America seriously in 1989 when they hosted it; thereafter, they have been sending teams to the tournament regularly (although often B or C teams). That is why R9, Cafu etc. have several Copa America wins and older players don't. But since the World Cup carries far more weight than the Copa America (or the Confed Cup), one has to put Pele's 3 World Cups as the pinnacle of NT achievement (Pele also won 7 other international trophies, but those are minor ones). With regard to Pele playing in arguably the greatest teams ever, I'll say that in 1958, Brazil were struggling with him out injured, and started dominating only after he and Garrincha started playing. No doubt, Garrincha had a fantastic NT career, losing only 1 match (his last one) and lifting 2 World Cups. However, the 1966 and 1974 sides were shambles without Pele. That shows his importance to that Brazil side and the fact that it was he who was responsible for making them the greatest team ever (1962 wasn't close to that level without him). With 5 no. 10s in the team, 1970 was not supposed to work out, but it did flawlessly (and Pele changing his playing style to suit the team's needs is generally credited for this success). Similarly, R9's importance to his Brazil NT side is easily demonstrated by the struggles they had when he was out injured. They had ignominious defeats in the Copa America (vs Honduras for example) and struggled to qualify for the 2002 World Cup without him (it came down to the last match); however, they became champions as soon as he returned (immediate transformation). They also easily qualified for the next World Cup with him around (he was the top scorer in the qualification as well). R9 has had one of the best NT careers of all time, but I'll rank it slightly below Pele and Garrincha in the Brazilian context. The fact that these guys performed in every tournament they played in and Messi more often than not didn't, make their NT careers superior (notwithstanding the higher trophy counts, goal ratios, and winning percentages).
Reasonable points. Firstly you're saying(quite rightly) that Brazil have been sending B and C sides to CA and even then r9 won it multiple times.so it should surely be considered a fantastic achievement on his part that can't be undervalued.coming to world cup, 1962 Brazil was not the same side without pele of course but still the best in the world and they proved it.four years later it wasn't the same side without vava,didi,zagallo,santos brothers etc and depending heavily on Pele and mane(past his prime).guys like jairzinho and tostao were young and still maturing.even gerson was not a regular then I suppose.different story in 1970.most will agree it was the greatest side ever with tostao, jairzinho, rivellino,gerson,carlos Alberto all at their peak along with Pele.pele had a great tournament sure but they were most likely to win without him and i fail to see what different role he played than that of a classic no 10.perhaps few more defensive acts(more fouls too) across the tournament.not a whole lot significant. 1974 Brazil again the core was different and inferior without tostao, gerson, Pele, Alberto, clodoaldo.they expected too much from paulo Caesar I think.
It's not true The FK vs Spain in the 2018 world cup wasn't a curler? His 100th international goal vs Sweden wasn't a curler He scored a curler freekick vs prime peter cech BTW The one Messi couldn't even score a tapin against when cech was in his peak
I’m not sure what your point is, and am certainly not sure what I’m supposed to be “not correct” about. I said there’s “virtually no one in history” for whom you can take out their best NT tournament and be left with a NT resume anywhere near Messi’s without WC 2022. “Virtually no one” obviously suggests that there are nevertheless a small number of people. I was thinking about Pele when I said that, but if you want to say R9 falls into that category too, then I have no issue with that. The point is that Messi’s NT resume without WC 2022 is something that almost no one matches if you take out their best NT tournament. Talking about one player (R9) doesn’t make that incorrect.
If we are counting Messi as having 3 CL then we should count Pele as having 2 WC and Ronaldo Nazario as having 1 WC. Just saying...
Pele and Messi contributed 100% more to the 1962 world cup and 2005/06 CL respectively then Ronaldo nazario did to the 1994 world cup Ronaldo nazario did not even play 1 second at the 1994 world cup Its a gift A fake legacy booster
Let’s not act like Cristiano Ronaldo didn’t massively decline as a free kick taker. He scored just 5 free kicks in the last 5 years of his career (i.e. 2018-2022), despite being his team’s primary free kick taker that whole time. He obviously declined a lot as a FK taker in that timeframe, such that it was a liability to his team to have him take them. And you can’t really deny that. Indeed, you are the same person who has said in another context relating to Barcelona in the 1990’s: “Even pure common sense dictates that a team like Barcelona wouldn’t stick with using someone as a number 1 set piece taker who scores 6 FKs across 6 league campaigns LOL.” Cristiano Ronaldo scored 5 FK’s across 5 whole years (across all competitions, not just league campaign), and, despite him being a liability, his teams did stick with him (presumably in order to keep him happy). And even in the 2014-2017 period, he was markedly less effective than he had been before—though not yet in the “the team is actively hurting themselves quite a lot by letting him be the primary taker” category yet.
Okay, perhaps "never" is not true in a strictly literal sense, but the idea that he rarely deviated from his technique of hitting a really powerful knuckle ball, even when his conversion rates were horrible, is 100% true. This video conveniently illustrates my point. Of his 100 freekick attempts in this time, looks like probably around 90 of them were his trademark power-knuckle technique. He scored only 3 FKs out of 100, and only 1 of those was actually using his trademark technique. Cristiano was not being clever, creative, or innovative with his freekicks here. He stubbornly did the same thing over and over even when it wasn't working. Juventini were calling for Pjanic and Dybala to be taking freekicks, because of course they were better at freekicks in during this portion of Ronaldo's career.
I went to look at the numbers and was surprised by Cruijff's average goals per game. In fact, he has already achieved Ronaldo's 1 non penalty goals per game (although Ronaldo has done it more often). I also noticed that Cruijff's highest eredivisie average was 1.18 g+a-pk p90 in the 67/68 season (I'm assuming he didn't take any penalties). Cristiano Ronaldo already had a higher LaLiga average in 5 different seasons. CR7 Goals + Assists - penalties per 90 minutes played: 10/11 1.27 11/12 1.24 12/13 1.26 13/14 1.21 14/15 1.57!!!! Cruijff's Ajax have already scored 122 goals in 34 games. This puts Real Madrid's 121 goals in 38 games into perspective and yet Ronaldo averaged a higher G+A-PK p90 than Cruijff. You're making it as if winning individual awards in modern age is easy when in reality many football legends of recent times struggled to win even one Ballon D'Or because, guess what, both Ronaldo and Messi dominated it for years.
As far as ratings are concerned, it's a very close call: Argentina's ratings in the int'l press in the 1986 World Cup: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2020/10/argentina-ratings-in-1986-world-cup.html And Argentina's matches in the 2022 World Cup: vs Saudi Arabia: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2022/11/player-ratings-argentina-1-2-saudi.html vs Mexico: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2022/11/player-ratings-argentina-2-0-mexico.html vs Poland: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2022/12/player-ratings-poland-0-2-argentina.html vs Australia: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2022/12/player-ratings-argentina-2-1-australia.html vs Holland: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2022/12/player-ratings-netherlands-2-2.html vs Croatia: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2022/12/player-ratings-argentina-3-0-croatia.html and in the final vs France: https://football-ratings.blogspot.com/2022/12/player-ratings-argentina-3-3-france-4-2.html
I think that in addition to his teammates and the role he played (he was a classic winger at United and at Juventus he was asked to participate more in the creation of moves because there was a lack of creativity in Juventus's midfield) the increase and decrease in numbers moving in and out of Real Madrid also has to do with the league. In the time that Ronaldo was in the Premier League and at Juventus, no champion team scored more than 83 goals. This average was much higher in Spain in the Messi/Ronaldo era. The teams always won the championships scoring 90+ goals on average. I think the contribution % didn't drop that much. In his last season at Real Madrid Ronaldo scored 28% of Real Madrid's goals. In his first season at Juve he scored 30%In the next two he scored 41% and 39% respectively (not counting assists)
I don’t think that’s right. Looking at Trachta’s data on the first page of his goal contribution thread (which I note is all competitions, not Eredivisie only), Cruyff had the following G+A per 90 at Ajax: 1965-1966: 1.483 1966-1967: 1.460 1967-1968: 1.220 1968-1969: 1.389 1969-1970: 1.515 1970-1971: 1.223 1971-1972: 1.400 1972-1973: 1.269 1973-1974: 1.429 And I think those numbers might be missing some assists Trachta later found, since Trachta’s data for three-year spans for Cruyff more recently in the thread have slightly higher assist numbers for Cruyff. Moreover, Cruyff’s goals + assists per 90 for his NT was 1.239. Cruyff’s goals + assists output in his prime years is competitive with anyone. And this is because his goalscoring rate in those years was only a little bit behind the top goalscorers ever, and he had a freakishly high number of assists. It’s not easier or harder in general to win the award across different eras—after all, one person a year wins an award each year no matter what. What gets easier or harder is winning it as a top-tier all-time great. In this era, such a player is basically assured of having a platform from which they can definitely be a major contender for the award every year. In the past, that wasn’t always the case, since those players (including Maradona and Cruyff) often spent large portions of their prime on teams that were not major teams that would actually get attention (this is compounded by the fact that not-major teams in these eras weren’t even very easy to watch if you wanted to, since their matches weren’t often televised). That made it harder for top-tier all-time great players to dominate awards throughout their career like they can now. Your mention of great players struggling to win a Ballon D’or in this era actually goes to my point. In an era where it’s easier for the top-tier all-time greats to consistently win the award (because they consistently have a platform to do it every year), the flip side is that it is harder for other players to win it. After all, only one person wins it a year, so if the very best players of the era always have a platform to win it, then it becomes harder for the next tier of player to get one.
The reason the average goals scored by top teams in Spain in the Messi/Ronaldo era were higher than the scoring of top teams in the EPL and Serie A was precisely because those top teams in Spain were even bigger super teams! You’re just making my argument, basically! And yes, his contribution % didn’t really change much. He just didn’t play for a team that could score as much, so his scoring went down. That’s my point! This isn’t a controversial point. Ronaldo scored more because he was on a Real Madrid super team. Messi scored more because he was on a Barcelona super team. Cruyff scored more because Ajax had a big talent gap with its opposition. Pele scored more because Santos had a big talent gap with its opposition. Puskas scored more because he was on super high-scoring teams. I could go on. It’s easier to score on a really talented, high-scoring team. This is all just pretty obvious/logical and not something people would ever generally disagree with, and yet I find that people try to fight this point a lot when it is pointed out with regards to their favorite player. We should just all agree that this obvious point applies across the board. _______________ As a sidenote, saying that Ronaldo scored less at Juventus because “he was asked to participate more in the creation of moves” is basically you making the same point about Ronaldo that I kept making about Messi. Not to beat a dead horse, but the more you are asked to participate in build up, the harder it is to score a lot. You acknowledge that here. And there’s no question that Messi has been asked to participate in build up more than Ronaldo.