Cristiano Ronaldo ~ Your Favorite Player Is So Much Better!! Thread

CR7 for Portugal in 2025:

Scored 1 goal vs Denmark in the Nations League quarterfinals. Portugal had lost the first leg 1–0 but won the return leg 5–2. Ronaldo’s goal came when it was 1–1 — he made it 2–1, tying the aggregate 2–2 at that point.

Scored 1 goal vs Germany in the Nations League semis — the winner in a 2–1 victory.

Scored 1 goal vs Spain in the Nations League final. Portugal was down 2–1 before he equalized 2–2. The game went to penalties, and Portugal won it — he scored his.

Scored 2 goals vs Armenia in a 5–0 win.

Scored 1 goal vs Hungary — made it 2–1 and Portugal ended up winning 3–2.

Scored 2 goals vs Hungary again — that one ended in a 2–2 draw.

He played 8 games this year and scored 8 goals.

 

.... yes... Top-10 .... easily on my view . "!

 

Huh I thought he did not take pens vs Spain? Did I dream

 

My fault

 

Great goal

⚽️ BUUUTTT ! Cristiano Ronaldo 🐐

MAIS IL EST FOUUUUUUU ????? 😭😭😭😭😭

61’ | Al Nassr 2 - 1 Al Fateh pic.twitter.com/yeQeXRxCf3

— SPL 🇸🇦 (@ActuSPL) October 18, 2025

 

An elite quarterback can make a decent wide receiver look great, but a top-tier wide receiver can also elevate a quarterback's performance.

The same is true on the football pitch between a brilliant playmaker and a clinical striker.

A world-class playmaker, with their vision and distribution, can turn a simple run into a golden scoring opportunity. They make their striker's job easier by putting the ball on a plate.

But a clinical, agile striker can make an average playmaker look amazing. They can make the perfect run to open up space, finish a half-chance, or draw defenders away to create room for others.

The greatest attacks in football history happen when both are elite. They elevate each other and together, they are unstoppable. Just like a great quarterback-receiver duo, they are a partnership that is greater than the sum of its parts

 

yes .. that's it man for sure !

better vision ..yes

you have remembered me on my mind

Of a Beckenbauer's Pass against France in 1973 ..was a great friendly Match

...

insane Long Range Ball at all ..
...

beckenbauer ...
gave Nutmegs and Sombreros ..also ..on this Match ...


I guess Uli Hoeness .... lost the Goal ... 1 vs 1 .. against the french goalkeeper ... "!

 

Beckenbauer-Gerd Muller !

 

...
...

 

....
When the Attacker is one E*T like Gerd Muller was ....

i mean

from being Out Of this World .... or Planet ...... the super Level ....


...

even Gerd Muller ;;; also surprised me A Lot ...

with amazing Passing skills and vision of the whole game ....


like against Leeds ...1975 ..

Gerd Muller

gave .;; one nice LOng-Range-Balls ..with left Foot ..

one -Pre-assist ....direct ... in the Final .... "!

 

So which players Cristiano elavated into great playmakers?

Was it Ozil? Di Maria? Scholes? Rooney? Kaka? Kroos? Modrić? Marcelo? Dybala? Bruno Fernandes? Renato Sanches?

Goalscorers benefit way more from great playmakers than other way around.

 

Why did Messi not help elevate the goalscorers of Argentina in the WC (2010,14,18)

 

He wasnt good enough in those moments to do it under those conditions. Obviously.

 

Cheers, I appreciate your honesty.

 

Ronaldo scored 50+ goals per year regardless of who comes and goes in the midfield and his playmakers seems to have their highest average of assists provided when playing with him. He is the constant, not his teammates. I'm not saying he turned Özil or Modrić into great playmakers but he directly affected their number of assists by turning half chances into goals. As I said, when a great striker encounter a great playmaker it becomes unstoppable. They already were great playmakers but Ronaldo maximized their output

 

Assists have nothing to do with you are trying to say. Playmaking leads to assists and many other things, but assists do no equate to playmaking.and "recieving passes".

Ozil can find Cristiano and Morata with the same pass, but Cristiano will finish it and Morata won't. Outcome of play (goal or no goal) has nothing to do with mechanism and game dynamics of passing and recieving. (Nor is it true the thing about 50+ goals by Cristiano and record number of assists by particular players when they play with Cristiano but that is not relevant)

What you are actually claiming is that recieving (aka off the ball movement) enables making passes as much as passing utilizes off the ball movement.

You are sayig that when a pass is completed that credit is distributed 50-50 to passer and reciever. That is much more nuanced argument that is ridiculously false.

There is no such thing as the perfect run either.

 

Kylian Mbappe box presence/runs vs Rayo Vallecano pic.twitter.com/HhRU2xh6mD

— 𝘼𝙣𝙣𝙭𝙨 (@annxsprods) November 9, 2025

A player can make a lot of perfect passes but if there isn't someone to receive unmarked and non offsided it will not become an assist. It's not coincidence that KDB best assisting season were when he played with Haaland. Also, a player can only make a 5 meter pass out of box and the receiver score from there or dribble into the box and score. It's 50/50 when a great playmaker creates for a great striker. When it's an average playmaker the goalscorer will inflate his number of assists and vice versa

 

Assists are not measure of passing quality nor is goal measure of off the ball movement quality. You are mixing up outcomes such as goals and assists with passing-recieving mechanics.

Great finisher can score a lot of goals with average off the ball movement and player elite at off the ball movement can be average finisher and score a lot of goals. Whether pass eventually becomes assist or not, does not tell you anything about quality and role of off the ball movement in that assist.

Player registering a lot of assists because he plays with a great goalscorer doesnt mean that off the ball movement is as important as passing.

Kdb having a lot of assists to Haaland doesnt mean off the ball movement was key to that.

 

Ideally, a great striker should excel in off-the-ball movement and finishing ability. In any case, these were just examples.My point stands. Over a longer sample size, a player consistently scoring 50 goals per season is a strong indication that he is good at both. And here I'm not talking about a random player. I'm talking about Cristiano Ronaldo. We all know about his ability to convert half chances thanks to his finishing skills and off-the-ball movement. And we know the quality of the opportunities he was given. He scored several tap-ins, of course, but he also scored many low-percentage goals, and often he created the tap-in himself through his off-the-ball movement.

 

It's 2025, man is the greatest goalscorer of all time - and if you disagree - at least of the modern era... and we are still debating if he is a good player, finisher, goalscorer, etc.?

Absurd and disrespectful.

 

Like what half chances?

The whole point of off the ball movement is to put you in more than half chances. If off the ball movement put you in a low percantage chance, then it was not a great off the ball movement.

Elite finishing (and on the ball skills) turns half chances into goals. So when you say teammates have better assists stats when they play with Cristiano, it is because of Cristiano's finishing ability of converting half chances, not because of off the ball movement.

If player scores a lot of goals, i.e. 50+, there are few things that contribute to that to various degrees:

1. Team's relative attacking stremgth compared to oppositions (chance creation, domination in final third)
2. Individual quality of a player (finishing/shoting, off the ball movement, on the ball skills to create chances for himself)
3. Role within the team
4. Luck

You are extracting one variable (off the ball movement) out of many and blurring the line between level of impact it has.

Then falsely equating creating with assisting.

 

You purposely çut the part where I said finishing ability. It's dishonest from your part. I also said Ronaldo created a lot of his tap ins via his off the ball movement.

Ronaldo making a run is using his vision to read the game, timing to create the opportunity and skills to control the pass. Why is the passer automatically doing more? Without creative and skillful off the ball movement there would be no pass to begin with.

And this is where my analogy of the QB and the WR applies

 

"And" is a conjunction that connects phrases in affirmitive way. In this context it means that both finishing and off the ball movement, respectively, are reason for created chances being converted (per YOUR sentence). So it doesnt matter if I left out a bit of text in between, because the sentence is not changing its meaning. It is fairthfully quoted.

I even put three dots ("...") to indicate to everyone that there was a text left out. Quote is clickable and everyone can quickly follow the source.

None of this is in a bad faith or changes meaning.

Editting quotes with added, transparent symbols and brackets is a standard practise in all domains of life. It is done purely for clarity and emphasis.

The fact that you are pointing that out and defending your original quote, while no meaning has been changed, it is an evidence that even you dont actually believe in meaning behind that sentence.

The reason is because it is simply false. Off the ball movement DOES NOT convert chances into goals. I am not saying anything controversial and this has nothing to do with Cristiano good or bad.

I understand that English might not be your first language and that is okay, but then I dont see a point in explaining more nuanced topics that require precise phrasing and understanding of meaning behind words. You are fighting over a conjunction.

So I will politely excuse myself from this specific topic.

Regarding this

Because player on the ball has much more options and decisions to make, much more variables to consider, and the cost of failing at them has much greater consequences on his team then mistiming a single run.

 

Off the ball movement is a local problem to be solved with no real consequences. The most important aspects of off the ball movement are volume and consistency. It is not characterized by one single great run per game, but by persistence in trying again and again and again. Elite off the ball movers do not change games by single runs, they add value by having an elite movement that yields more threat on average. That is also why there is no such thing as a perfect run.

Playmaking is the opposite. It is a global problem that has a wide spectrum of levels of mastery and game-changing potential. That also needs to be juggled with other facets of football such as dribbling and goalscoring AT ALL TIMES, while having significant consequences on game if player fails.

 

The most important and valuable object on the pitch is ball. Those who have ball in their possession dictate what happens on the pitch. That is why "passers" have more value - they have more responsibility and potential for impact.